Agenda Profile: Anastassia Kovalenko-Kõlvart
First Reading of the Draft Act on the Amendment of the Competition Act and the Amendment of Other Associated Acts (384 SE)
2024-04-10
15th Estonian Parliament, 3rd session, plenary session
Political Position
The Representative is strongly opposed to Bill 384 SE: he argues that the bill creates a new body for sanctions and administrative fines within the Competition Authority and increases the government's regulatory powers. He emphasizes that during a crisis, the economy should be supported, not the mechanism of penalties strengthened, and demands a comparative analysis and the utilization of existing misdemeanor procedures. He considers the coalition's political choice dangerous and views the creation of a parallel legal system as a threat to fundamental constitutional due process.
3 Speeches Analyzed
Topic Expertise
He/She demonstrates knowledge of competition law and administrative law: referencing a European Union directive that recommends member states choose a suitable form instead of simple transposition, rather than compelling action through administrative procedure; highlighting criticism from the Chancellor of Justice and other legal experts, and stressing that the necessary analysis required to justify a new special procedure is absent.
3 Speeches Analyzed
Rhetorical Style
The nature of the speech is combative and direct, utilizing powerful, attention-grabbing language and rhetorical questions. It is delivered with an urgent and emphasized tone, reflecting the danger and the lack of available solutions. The speaker employs strong judgments and emotionally charged rhetoric concerning the parallel legal system and the increase of penalties during this time of crisis.
3 Speeches Analyzed
Activity Patterns
Three speeches delivered during the Riigikogu debate on Draft Act 384 SE on the same day; references the Centre Faction and repeats the same critical points across multiple addresses; this demonstrates high tension and continuous involvement with the same topic.
3 Speeches Analyzed
Opposition Stance
All speeches express strong opposition to the draft bill: the criticism primarily focuses on ignoring the positions of the Chancellor of Justice and experts, and the creation of a parallel legal system; it also emphasizes that the bill is aimed at punishing businesses and runs counter to real economic needs.
3 Speeches Analyzed
Collaboration Style
Insufficient data
3 Speeches Analyzed
Regional Focus
The focus is at the national level, and there is a specific lack of regional focus; the discussion is aimed at the Estonian legal and economic system as a whole.
3 Speeches Analyzed
Economic Views
Strongly pro-business from an economic standpoint; during the crisis, the need to support entrepreneurship is emphasized, and the increase in fines and parallel regulation is contrasted with economic revitalization. It is argued that promoting entrepreneurship is a priority; increasing penalties is contrary to economic recovery.
3 Speeches Analyzed
Social Issues
Insufficient data
3 Speeches Analyzed
Legislative Focus
During the first reading of the draft bill, the speaker seeks its rejection, stressing the need to utilize existing procedures (such as misdemeanor proceedings) and to clarify the analysis. The speaker focuses on protecting procedural solutions and constitutional principles, making it clear that the initial amendments must not undermine the foundations of the rule of law.
3 Speeches Analyzed