Agenda Profile: Anastassia Kovalenko-Kõlvart

The representative of the Centre Party faction emphasizes that the proposed e-voting bill is highly controversial and fundamentally threatens the core principles of democracy. They believe the bill fails to resolve existing security and transparency issues inherent in e-voting and could significantly increase the risks of third-party interference. Furthermore, they argue that the coalition is attempting to ram through unpopular changes while simultaneously restricting the opposition, and therefore urges a vote "against" the measure. This represents a strong political position rooted in core values and principles, centered on defending democracy and ensuring procedural fairness.

The representative demonstrates specific expertise regarding the security and transparency of e-elections. Issues mentioned include facial recognition, redundant servers, application reliability, independent voting centers, and the necessity of verifying votes. The e-notary is cited as an example of positive practice, and the importance of both technical and regulatory solutions is emphasized.

The focus is on a combative and critical tone, employing rhetorical questions, characteristic irony, and an emotional style. The text is maintained within a formal parliamentary register, yet the content reveals sharp defiance and a lyrical exemplary strictness (e.g., the Ossinovski case).

In the context of the local parliament's debates, two speeches emphasized the final phase of the third reading and earlier cases (Ossinovski), as well as interpellations directed to the Chancellor of Justice. The text maintains a strong focus on the themes of opposition and procedural obstruction, demonstrating consistent involvement and attention to the protection of constitutional principles.

The prevailing narrative is distinctly oppositional: the bill and its handling are facing loud criticism, emphasizing the protection of democratic principles and the legal framework, and urging a 'no' vote. This stance stems from the conviction that the coalition is restricting the opposition and that the proposed amendments are ill-conceived and unpopular.

Not enough data

The Tallinn example is brought up in the context of Ossinovski’s elections, with reference also being made to general state governance. Overall, attention is focused on both the national and regional levels, but the main focus remains on Estonia’s broader electoral system issues.

Not enough data

Linked to crucial social issues: the privacy of individuals and the protection of ballot secrecy, and potential risks if election security relies on third parties. Emphasis is placed on safe and fair voting, including for those in care facilities and the elderly, and concern regarding third-party interference.

The primary objective is to prevent the passage of the draft legislation and to protect democratic procedures and legal principles. Emphasis is placed on the necessity of improving e-voting regulations to guarantee transparency, security, and public confidence. Furthermore, reference is made to the problems associated with previous procedural measures (such as obstruction and the limitation of parliamentary recesses).