Session Profile: Siim Pohlak
15th Riigikogu, 3rd session, plenary sitting
2024-04-17
Political Position
The political position is strongly oppositional, focusing on the lack of credibility and transparency in e-voting, which is viewed as a threat to Estonian democracy. The proposed bills are dismissed as mere cosmetic changes that fail to address the underlying issues. Furthermore, the position is deeply value-based, stressing the critical importance of public trust in the electoral system. The speaker demands the immediate cessation of e-elections, citing the absence of a societal consensus and the distrust expressed by 40% of the population.
14 Speeches Analyzed
Topic Expertise
The speaker demonstrates expertise regarding election procedures (specifically, the confirmation of polling station committees) and the security of e-voting, drawing attention to the risks associated with outsourcing identification and registration services. These arguments are backed up by references to the research article by American professor Drew Springall, which provides a security analysis of the Estonian internet voting system. Recent failures in Estonian e-systems (such as income tax declarations and entrance exams) are also cited to underscore the insecurity of e-voting.
14 Speeches Analyzed
Rhetorical Style
The rhetorical style is combative, aggressive, and often accusatory, employing strong political language (e.g., "a crazy idea," "you pushed the limits way too far"). It utilizes both logical arguments (referencing studies and systemic failures) and emotional appeals, linking the Reform Party and United Russia through the issue of trust in e-elections. Formal procedural protests and questions also arise, aimed at challenging the actions of the session chair.
14 Speeches Analyzed
Activity Patterns
The pattern of activity shows active participation in the plenary session, repeatedly posing questions to the bill's rapporteur and challenging procedural decisions. The speaker aggressively utilizes parliamentary mechanisms, submitting several strong protests and requesting recesses before votes.
14 Speeches Analyzed
Opposition Stance
The main opponents are the Reform Party and the government, who stand accused of maintaining power through e-elections and undermining public trust in democracy. The criticism is intense, encompassing both political accusations and challenges to procedural rules, specifically accusing the board of exceeding its mandate. The speaker draws a controversial parallel between Estonia and Russia, noting that both countries make extensive use of internet voting.
14 Speeches Analyzed
Collaboration Style
The style of cooperation is evident in the defense of the faction's interests, specifically through requesting recesses for the faction to convene and deliberate. When procedural protests are lodged, similar demands made by other opposition members (Ms. Kõlvart) are also cited, suggesting coordinated intra-opposition activities. There are no indications of a readiness to compromise with the governing parties regarding the issue of e-voting.
14 Speeches Analyzed
Regional Focus
The focus is strictly on national and legislative topics, particularly the reliability of the electoral system and the operational procedures of the Riigikogu (Estonian Parliament). There is no regional focus, although examples are cited concerning the work of local government election commissions within the context of paper-based elections.
14 Speeches Analyzed
Economic Views
Not enough data
14 Speeches Analyzed
Social Issues
Not enough data
14 Speeches Analyzed
Legislative Focus
The legislative focus is on opposing the e-voting bill, particularly concerning the possibility of outsourcing identification, signing, and registration services. The speaker is acting as a strong opponent of the bill, attempting to influence the legislative process through procedural means (protests, recesses) and ultimately aiming to terminate the e-voting system.
14 Speeches Analyzed