Session Profile: Ando Kiviberg
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary session
2025-06-18
Political Position
The political position focuses strongly on the principles of the rule of law and the elimination of constitutional deficiencies in visa and residence permit procedures. The speaker supports establishing the right to judicial review of procedural errors, emphasizing that this is necessary to streamline the Estonian legal framework and align it with the practices of civilized nations. This is a strongly policy-driven stance that emphasizes the elimination of a deficiency that is contrary to the constitution.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Topic Expertise
The speaker exhibits expertise in administrative and constitutional law, particularly regarding visa procedures and the contesting of residence permits. They specifically cite decisions of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Estonia which highlight deficiencies, and draw comparisons between the situation in Estonia and that of other European Union member states. They precisely differentiate between the state's sovereign right to make substantive decisions and the right to challenge procedural flaws.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Rhetorical Style
The rhetorical style is corrective and argumentative, aimed at refuting inaccurate information disseminated by opponents. The tone is predominantly logical and legalistic, focusing on facts and the necessity of bringing order to the legal framework. Figurative language is also employed, admonishing opponents not to conjure up a bogeyman where not even the scent of one can be detected.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Activity Patterns
The speaker's pattern of activity is reactive, as they took the floor in response to inaccurate information heard in the chamber, even though it was not planned. Furthermore, they intervened in the proceedings with a procedural remark, demanding uninterrupted speaking time for the respondent and ensuring order in the hall.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Opposition Stance
Opponents are criticized for disseminating untrue information, particularly regarding the alleged loss of sovereignty and the admission of dangerous individuals into Estonia. The criticism targets the fundamental misinterpretation of the bill's content, emphasizing that one can only challenge errors made during the procedure, not the substantive reasoning itself.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Collaboration Style
The speaker calls for improvements to the legal framework, citing the necessity of putting things in order, which points to a desire to reach a solution and move forward within a better-regulated legal environment. Simultaneously, he/she demands strict adherence to the session rules to ensure that the presenters have the opportunity to respond without interruption.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Regional Focus
The focus is on the national legal framework and its compliance with European Union standards, noting that Estonia is the last country in the EU where this right of challenge is absent. There are no specific regional or local issues involved.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Economic Views
There is not enough data.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Social Issues
The social aspect related to immigration procedures is being addressed, emphasizing the need to guarantee civil rights and procedural justice. The speaker stresses that the bill does not jeopardize national security (specifically, by allowing the entry of war criminals), but rather improves adherence to the principles of the rule of law.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Legislative Focus
The main legislative focus is on establishing the right to judicial review for procedural errors concerning visa decisions and the extension of residence permits. The speaker is a strong proponent and defender of this draft bill, emphasizing that it will significantly improve the legal framework and remedy a constitutional deficiency.
2 Speeches Analyzed