Agenda Profile: Ando Kiviberg
Draft Resolution of the Riigikogu "Making a Proposal to the Government of the Republic to Urgently Develop the Suspension of E-voting" (679 OE), First Reading
2025-11-06
XV Riigikogu, VI Session, Plenary Sitting
Political Position
The political focus centers on the reliability and continuation of e-voting, which is examined through the lens of the institutional and legal framework. The speaker supports the retention of both voting methods (electronic and in-person/at the polling station), viewing this as a convenient option. The stance is moderately supportive, highlighting previous Supreme Court rulings and current legislation. The approach is policy-driven, concentrating on adherence to the law and the actions of relevant institutions.
5 Speeches Analyzed
Topic Expertise
The speaker demonstrates authority regarding the work of the Constitutional Committee and the procedural matters of the Riigikogu, detailing the requirement for a majority of the full membership for proposals directed at the government. He/She possesses information concerning the content of the ODIHR report, the results of the Electoral Service audits, and the verifiability of e-voting. Although the speaker admits not considering himself/herself an expert in constitutional law, he/she bases his/her positions on institutional assessments and legal analysis.
5 Speeches Analyzed
Rhetorical Style
The style is formal, procedural, and explanatory, fitting the role of the committee rapporteur. The speaker uses logical arguments and refers to the positions of institutions (the Supreme Court, the Electoral Service, and the Legal and Analysis Department). The tone is serious, especially when defending the committee’s activities against criticism, but the speaker also notes a question presented with humor to enliven the discussion.
5 Speeches Analyzed
Activity Patterns
The main activity is the presentation to the Riigikogu of the discussion and procedural decisions stemming from the Constitutional Committee session held on October 21. The speaker also referenced the committee’s earlier activities, such as organizing a public hearing on the ODIHR report and submitting a written address to the Ministry of Justice.
5 Speeches Analyzed
Opposition Stance
Avoiding direct confrontation, the speaker responds to criticism concerning the trustworthiness of e-voting by referencing official audits and the positions taken by the Supreme Court. The speaker contrasts the arguments regarding lack of confidence put forth by the bill's initiators (the Centre Party) with the Electoral Service's assurances about the system's verifiability. Mrs. Helme is also the target of the criticism; in responding to her questions, the authority of the institutions is emphasized.
5 Speeches Analyzed
Collaboration Style
The speaker emphasizes the need for consensus when the committee makes procedural decisions, such as setting the date for the final vote and appointing a representative. Cooperation with government institutions is demonstrated through a written appeal to the Ministry of Justice and Digital Affairs to ensure that ODIHR recommendations are considered and the necessary amendments are prepared.
5 Speeches Analyzed
Regional Focus
No data available.
5 Speeches Analyzed
Economic Views
No data available.
5 Speeches Analyzed
Social Issues
Among the social topics addressed, the issue of trust in institutions is touched upon, but it is framed more in the context of a procedural discussion. The speaker expresses personal satisfaction that voters have the option of both electronic and in-booth voting, considering it a convenient choice.
5 Speeches Analyzed
Legislative Focus
The primary legislative focus is on Riigikogu Draft Resolution 679 OE, which concerns the suspension of e-voting. The speaker concentrates on procedural requirements and explains that the committee has initiated steps to address the recommendations outlined in the ODIHR report. This involves approaching the Ministry of Justice to prepare the necessary legislative amendments.
5 Speeches Analyzed