Session Profile: Anti Poolamets
15th Riigikogu, 3rd session, plenary sitting
2024-04-17
Political Position
The political position is strongly opposed to e-voting and mobile voting, viewing them as undermining democracy and the credibility of elections because they facilitate corruption and the buying of votes. He/She also opposes procedural restrictions on the Riigikogu, accusing the government of limiting political freedoms. His/Her views are primarily value-based, focusing on trust and democratic oversight.
5 Speeches Analyzed
Topic Expertise
The speaker demonstrates expertise on the subjects of election management and IT security, highlighting the system's opacity ("black box") and the absence of oversight. They support their arguments by citing international examples (USA, Hungary, Russia) and cybersecurity experts (Dr. Barbara Simons, Prof. Alex Halderman). Furthermore, they use an analogy involving scientific criticism and the climate issue to stress the necessity of critical thinking.
5 Speeches Analyzed
Rhetorical Style
The rhetorical style is sharply critical and polemical, employing strong emotional appeals, such as the example of Estonia ending up in "very bad company" with Putin's Russia. It emphasizes the logical necessity of criticism and transparency, contrasting this approach with the blind faith associated with the "black box." The address includes both personal experiences (as an election observer) and concrete examples (the corruption in Rakvere).
5 Speeches Analyzed
Activity Patterns
The speaker is active in plenary sessions, participating intensively in debates concerning election procedure and the organization of the Riigikogu's work. He/She refers to previous attempts to initiate police investigations into the Rakvere vote-buying cases and to the submitted amendments.
5 Speeches Analyzed
Opposition Stance
Strong opposition is aimed at the governing coalition, particularly the Reform Party (Mr. Kivimägi), accusing them of hypocritical conduct and restricting political freedoms. Criticism is also leveled at the Constitutional Committee, which rejected proposals aimed at improving electoral procedures in social welfare institutions. He accuses his opponents of establishing restrictions that could eventually be used against them.
5 Speeches Analyzed
Collaboration Style
The cooperation style is primarily oppositional, though it indicates a continuation of the positions held by other critical colleagues (Leo Kunnas). He emphasizes the opposition's role in restoring trust in the electoral process. There are no indications of seeking compromises or broad, cross-party cooperation on the issues discussed.
5 Speeches Analyzed
Regional Focus
The regional focus is on Rakvere, which is used as a specific example of widespread and organized electoral corruption (buying votes for 40 euros). This local problem has been highlighted as an illustrative example of the systemic threat posed to the e-voting system.
5 Speeches Analyzed
Economic Views
There is not enough data.
5 Speeches Analyzed
Social Issues
In the social sector, he focuses on the vulnerability of residents of social welfare institutions during elections, emphasizing the danger of their ID cards being misused. Furthermore, he notes with concern the upcoming hate speech law, viewing it as a restriction on political freedoms.
5 Speeches Analyzed
Legislative Focus
The primary legislative focus is on reforming the electoral system, opposing e-voting and proposing regulations for voting procedures in social welfare institutions. Furthermore, it addresses issues related to the Riigikogu's internal procedures, defending the opposition's right to critical debate and to call for recesses.
5 Speeches Analyzed