Agenda Profile: Anastassia Kovalenko-Kõlvart

The speaker presents strong opposition to the current approach taken by the SDPs and the government regarding the amendment of the Competition Law, emphasizing that the directive should be transposed via misdemeanor proceedings, thereby avoiding separate administrative proceedings. He views the creation of administrative proceedings and the subsequent imposition of large fines through them as dangerous (the expansion of Pandora's Box), and stresses the protection of fundamental rights and the separation of powers between the judiciary and the regulatory agencies. He frames this as seeking accountability from the SDPs and, instead of utopian promises, demands strict oversight of the legislative process. The overall tone emphasizes robust legal protection and sound procedural logic, which he considers both a priority and critical.

The presenter demonstrates a thorough understanding of administrative offense proceedings versus administrative proceedings, fundamental rights, and issues of institutional accountability, referencing the Chancellor of Justice and the Supreme Court's Olerex decision. He explains why the imposition of fines should take the form of administrative offense proceedings and why a separately distinguished procedure may be constitutionally problematic. The text displays technical knowledge regarding the semantic impact of the draft legislation and the standards associated with the Chancellor of Justice and judicial dialogue.

Rhetoric containing numerous questions and veiled warnings, constructed emotionally yet incisively. It employs the "Pandora's Box" metaphor in a combative tone, and specifically references the Chancellor of Justice and fundamental principles established by the Supreme Court. It combines fact-based discussion with hypothetical scenarios to underscore the dangers and the necessity for further improvements.

Two speeches delivered on the same day, May 5, 2025, alongside documented participation in committee debates and within the context of Riigikogu proceedings. The text clearly indicates active involvement in parliament, including references to earlier discussions and procedural decisions.

The main opponent is the Social Democratic Party (SDP) and their approach, which the speaker deems contradictory and detrimental to both entrepreneurship and the rule of law. He accuses the SDP of obstructing the process and calls for accountability; this includes a negative view towards specific government decisions that reduce support for business and increase the state's punitive reach.

However, he also notes that a significant portion of the proposed amendments to the bill have been taken into account, and he is prepared to improve it further. He demonstrates a willingness to cooperate and share information with the special anti-corruption commission. While remaining critical of the matter, he maintains a constructive approach, stressing the necessity of compromise and improved legislation.

Not enough data

It supports the protection of the economy and entrepreneurship in a pre-crisis context, emphasizing that the economy needs genuine assistance, not strengthening through bureaucratic tick-box compliance or punitive fines. It criticizes the government's discussion of raising the budget and taxes, suggesting that the directive could instead be transposed through administrative offense proceedings. Furthermore, it highlights the Supreme Court's stance regarding the existence of large fines and their necessary connection to due process, arguing that this is fundamentally in the interest of the economy.

Not enough data

The main topic is the first reading of 609 SE and its proceedings. The speaker emphasizes that the directive must be transposed into the administrative offense procedure and notes that the amendments within the draft bill have been largely taken into account, and the creation of a separate administrative procedure must be avoided. He refers to the possibility of improving the draft bill and emphasizes the need for continued discussion and better procedural solutions.