Agenda Profile: Katrin Kuusemäe
Draft law amending the Act of the Chancellor of Justice and the Prosecutor's Office Act (524 SE) – first reading
2025-01-14
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary session
Political Position
The political focus is on the issue of transparency and regulation of the representation expenses of state officials (the Chancellor of Justice and the Prosecutor General), framed by the goal of preventing corruption. The speaker conveys the position of the leading committee, which was aimed at rejecting the draft bill, citing the government's view that the topic should be addressed comprehensively across all relevant legislation. This position is rather procedural and policy-based, emphasizing the need for legislative integrity.
6 Speeches Analyzed
Topic Expertise
The speaker demonstrates expertise in the legislative procedure and the work of the Constitutional Committee, presenting detailed overviews of the committee's discussions, voting results, and procedural actions. He/She accurately quotes the positions and justifications of the Government of the Republic regarding its non-support for the draft bill, including references to the absence of an implementing act. The expertise is strictly procedural, rather than a substantive discussion on the necessity of representation expenses.
6 Speeches Analyzed
Rhetorical Style
The rhetorical style is formal, neutral, and rigorous, fitting the role of the committee rapporteur. The speaker employs a logical approach, presenting fact-based summaries of the discussions, voting results, and official positions. He/She refrains from expressing personal opinions, offering to discuss them separately in the hallway, which emphasizes his/her role as an impartial conveyor of information.
6 Speeches Analyzed
Activity Patterns
The speaker's pattern of activity is connected to the legislative process, as he served as the rapporteur for the Constitutional Committee during the first reading of the draft bill. He participated in the committee session on December 3rd and conveyed the positions stemming from the Government of the Republic's decision of November 14th. His work has been focused on reporting the results of the committee's proceedings and responding to questions.
6 Speeches Analyzed
Opposition Stance
The speaker conveys the opposition of the Government of the Republic and the majority of the committee to the bill initiated by the EKRE faction, which was aimed at increasing the transparency of the expenses of the Chancellor of Justice and the Prosecutor General. The opposition is primarily procedural and policy-based, citing the necessity of amending all laws comprehensively and the lack of an implementing act.
6 Speeches Analyzed
Collaboration Style
The collaborative style is professional and procedural; he emphasizes that the commission's decision regarding the inclusion of the draft bill on the agenda was reached by consensus. However, the voting result (5 for, 4 against) indicates a narrow disagreement within the commission regarding the rejection of the draft bill. He clearly distinguishes his role as a representative of the commission from his personal views.
6 Speeches Analyzed
Regional Focus
Insufficient data.
6 Speeches Analyzed
Economic Views
Economic views concern the transparency of how state funds are used and the prevention of corruption through the regulation of representation expenses. The speaker conveys the commission's opinion that the use of representation expenses is not transparent, and in some cases, there is a lack of knowledge regarding what the money is actually spent on.
6 Speeches Analyzed
Social Issues
Insufficient data.
6 Speeches Analyzed
Legislative Focus
The legislative focus is on the draft bill (524 SE) amending the Chancellor of Justice Act and the Prosecutor's Office Act, which aimed to regulate the reimbursement of representation expenses and increase transparency. The speaker is the rapporteur for the leading committee, who is presenting the committee's proposal to reject the bill. He emphasizes that the Riigikogu Member Status Act is the only law that mandates the submission of expense documents.
6 Speeches Analyzed