Session Profile: Mart Maastik
XV Riigikogu, VI Session, Plenary Sitting
2025-11-10
Political Position
The political focus is heavily centered on the cornerstones of democracy and the reliability of elections. The speaker forcefully opposes the current e-voting system, deeming it insecure and detrimental to public trust. This stance is value-driven, stressing that election security is the bedrock of democracy, and also results-oriented, citing the declining trend in the number of e-voters. They criticize the continued use of the system when security deficiencies are known and have not been rectified.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Topic Expertise
The speaker demonstrates in-depth knowledge of e-voting security risks and international comparisons. They utilize specific data and references, such as the composition of the Finnish government’s 2016 working group, the name of its leader (Johanna Suurpää), and the group’s three main arguments against e-voting. Furthermore, they reference the observations made by OSCE monitors concerning security risks, demonstrating both a technical and international grasp of the subject matter.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Rhetorical Style
The rhetorical style is formal and argumentative, employing logical appeals and factual comparisons, particularly drawing on the example of Finland. The tone is one of concern and persuasion, stressing the fundamental pillars of democracy and the importance of trust. The speaker utilizes a rhetorical question (why doesn't Finland use it?) and irony, referencing "democratic" nations like Venezuela and Russia that use e-voting, alongside Estonia.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Activity Patterns
The records indicate two consecutive interventions during the same plenary session, both focusing on the topic of e-voting. The first intervention takes the form of a question directed to the Chairman of the Constitutional Committee, while the second is a longer, substantiated debate speech.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Opposition Stance
The main opponents are the defenders of the e-voting system and those who disregard the system's security risks. The criticism is policy and procedural, focusing on security deficiencies that have been highlighted by both Finnish specialists and OSCE observers. The speaker opposes the notion that abandoning e-voting would mean "going back to the Stone Age."
2 Speeches Analyzed
Collaboration Style
The speech does not reveal any direct cooperation with other Riigikogu members, but the speaker relies heavily on external expertise and research to support their arguments. They cite the findings of a Finnish working group and the positions of cybersecurity specialists in order to strengthen their stance.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Regional Focus
The focus is international, with particular emphasis placed on the example and decisions of our close neighbor, Finland, concerning e-voting. Finland is viewed as a country that is digitally on the same level, or even better, whose example ought to be considered. Other countries (Venezuela, Russia) and international observers (OSCE) are also mentioned.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Economic Views
Insufficient data.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Social Issues
Insufficient data
2 Speeches Analyzed
Legislative Focus
The legislative focus is on either reforming the e-voting system or abandoning it entirely until it can be made completely secure. The speaker opposes the system and demands that its flaws be addressed, citing previous shortcomings that have yet to be rectified.
2 Speeches Analyzed