By Plenary Sessions: Kalle Laanet

Total Sessions: 10

Fully Profiled: 10

2025-05-22
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary session
The main criticism is aimed at the Prosecutor's Office and its leadership, accusing them of employing an unfair and costly procedural format and suggesting that the proceedings were initiated in retaliation for previous criticism. Separately, criticism is directed at the prosecutors' individual right to appeal, which ought to be a collegial decision. The criticism is procedural and institutional.
2025-05-21
Fifteenth Riigikogu, Fifth Session, Plenary Session.
Lack of data
2025-04-09
15th Estonian Parliament, 5th session, plenary session
The criticism is aimed both at the substance of the policy and at the security risks involved. Eduard Odinets criticizes the strictness of the DNA expertise requirement and proposes alternatives (naturalization), highlighting the appeals made by the Chancellor of Justice. Anti Poolamets attacks the e-residency program, framing it as a threat of international money laundering and terrorism financing, citing the Council of Europe report.
2025-03-10
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary session
The opposition is focused on the current fragmented handling of the Nordica case and the political accountability of the government. Lauri Laats directly criticizes the Prime Minister’s conduct regarding the Nordica funding issue, referencing "obfuscation" and stating that "something is seriously wrong." Supporters of the investigative committee reject the notion that politicians should distance themselves from addressing the matter, stressing the legislature’s duty to identify systemic failures.
2025-02-19
15th Estonian Parliament, 5th session, plenary sitting
Opponents are not criticized; instead, the positive attitude and praise of the opposition regarding the bill under discussion are highlighted. This indicates that a rare consensus has been achieved on the security issue, which the speaker emphasizes as confirmation of the bill's merit.
2024-11-11
15th Riigikogu, 4th session, plenary session
The opposition is aimed at the initiators of the draft bill, criticizing the explanatory memorandum for its inadequacy in analyzing the impacts, particularly regarding economic costs and lost revenue. The criticism is procedural and political-analytical, not personal, and reflects the position of the government and the majority of the commission.
2024-11-07
15th Parliament, 4th sitting, plenary session
The speaker is criticizing the opposition (the proponents of the draft bill) for their desire to establish an investigative commission, viewing it as a duplication of existing work. They suggest the real aim might be simply to gain "more screen time" or to acquire information that legal channels do not actually allow. The criticism targets procedural inefficiency and the lack of added value, with the speaker recommending that if the opposition has genuine concerns, they should go directly to law enforcement.
2024-06-13
Fifteenth Riigikogu, Third Session, Plenary Session
Insufficient data.
2024-06-12
15th Estonian Parliament, 3rd session, plenary session.
The criticism is primarily aimed at systemic problems, such as rigid procedural rules and the ambiguity of legislation, which permits "legal equilibristics." Also noted is the State Prosecutor General's critical stance toward the court regarding the speed and volume of issuing surveillance warrants. Indirect criticism is also leveled at the excessive control exercised by the Ministry of Justice, which allows the courts to use the phrase, "We would certainly do it, if the Ministry would just allow us."
2024-05-13
15th Estonian Parliament, 3rd session, plenary session
The criticism is aimed at the activities of financial institutions (banks) that refuse to provide justification for their decisions, deeming this inappropriate and disruptive. It is stressed that banks exploit the absence of a duty to justify their actions in order to conceal their decisions. Political opponents are not subject to criticism.