Agenda Profile: Arvo Aller
Second Reading of the Draft Act (344 SE) on the Amendment of the Riigikogu Election Act and Related Amendment of Other Acts
2024-04-17
15th Riigikogu, 3rd session, plenary sitting
Political Position
The political position is strongly negative regarding the amendments to the Riigikogu Election Act (344 SE) concerning the introduction of mobile voting (m-voting). The primary emphasis is placed on ensuring the reliability and security of elections, citing declining public trust (40% do not trust e-elections) and the threat of the system being controlled internally. This stance is strongly value-based, focusing on protecting democratic procedures and transparency.
3 Speeches Analyzed
Topic Expertise
The speaker demonstrates thorough knowledge of the technical and legal aspects of e-voting, particularly regarding identity verification (checking certificate validity) and data protection (the European Union General Data Protection Regulation). Direct quotes are provided from the coordination tables of the National Electoral Committee, along with concerns about security risks related to app stores and third parties.
3 Speeches Analyzed
Rhetorical Style
The rhetorical style is sharply critical and combative, emphasizing logical arguments, statistics (a drop in credibility to 60%), and the citation of official documents (warnings from the Electoral Commission). Rhetorical questions and irony are used to criticize deficiencies in the legislative process, for example, by referencing the proverb, "First there should be an egg, and only then can one cackle."
3 Speeches Analyzed
Activity Patterns
The records show active participation in the Riigikogu sitting on April 17, 2024, where repeated questions were posed and speeches were given during the second reading of Draft Act 344 SE.
3 Speeches Analyzed
Opposition Stance
The standoff is aimed at the government coalition and the Constitutional Committee, who are criticized for imposing an insecure system, disregarding expert warnings, and ignoring public opinion. The Constitutional Committee is also criticized for its subjective decision regarding the bundling of amendment proposals, a move which is labeled as obstructionist.
3 Speeches Analyzed
Collaboration Style
There is insufficient information regarding the style of cooperation, apart from references to the concerns of other opposition speakers and the act of speaking on behalf of the voters.
3 Speeches Analyzed
Regional Focus
The focus is primarily on national issues (amendments to the electoral law) and international topics (the example set by democratic states, OSCE). However, there is also mention of representing the voters of the Estonian Conservative People's Party in their own electoral district.
3 Speeches Analyzed
Economic Views
There is insufficient information.
3 Speeches Analyzed
Social Issues
There is insufficient information.
3 Speeches Analyzed
Legislative Focus
The legislative focus is on opposing the Riigikogu Election Act (Bill 344 SE) and criticizing its amendments, especially concerning the security and identity verification regulations related to mobile voting (m-voting). The speaker is an active opponent of adopting the bill in its current form and is demanding a comprehensive review of the electoral information systems.
3 Speeches Analyzed