Agenda Profile: Vadim Belobrovtsev
Draft law amending the Church and Religious Communities Act (570 UA) – second reading
2025-06-11
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary sitting
Political Position
The political position is strongly opposed to the draft bill amending the Law on Churches and Congregations, deeming it unconstitutional and unnecessary. This stance is based on values, emphasizing that the true objective of the law is to compel the Estonian Orthodox Church to break its canonical ties with the Moscow Patriarchate or face mandatory dissolution. They stress that existing legislation is sufficient to combat the incitement of hatred, and that the bill belongs in the dustbin.
5 Speeches Analyzed
Topic Expertise
The speaker demonstrates expertise in the field of amending the Churches and Congregations Act and constitutional law, citing canonical ties and the justifications for the presidential veto. They are knowledgeable about the Riigikogu procedure, referencing committee votes, the substance of the proposed amendments, and historical events (1923 and the 1940s) related to changes in the churches' lines of subordination.
5 Speeches Analyzed
Rhetorical Style
The rhetorical style is critical and assertive, frequently employing rhetorical questions to expose inconsistencies and cast doubt on the motives of opponents. The speaker relies on logical arguments concerning constitutionality and the necessity of the law, but also utilizes strong emotional language, labeling the draft bill as unjust and the proposed changes as merely cosmetic. He refers to his previous statements as "prophetic," thereby underscoring the validity of his stance.
5 Speeches Analyzed
Activity Patterns
The speaker is highly active on this particular issue, noting that they have given perhaps 100 or more interviews since the president initially declined to promulgate the law. They are heavily involved in the work of the committee (the Constitutional Committee) and in the debates held on the Riigikogu floor, putting forward specific procedural motions, such as suspending the second reading.
5 Speeches Analyzed
Opposition Stance
The main opponents are the initiators of the bill and the committee, who are being criticized for deliberately sending a bill to the floor that conflicts with the constitution. The criticism targets both procedural failure (the rejection of the Centre Party’s proposals) and substantive inadequacy, since the amendments that were made are considered merely cosmetic. The opposition is intense, and compromise is essentially ruled out because the bill as a whole is unjust.
5 Speeches Analyzed
Collaboration Style
The cooperation is clearly intra-factional, urging support for the Center Party's amendments and referencing the positions of colleagues. The speaker emphasizes that their constructive proposals—which would have brought the bill into compliance with the constitution and secured the President’s support—were repeatedly rejected by the committee. There was an openness to compromise regarding improvements to the bill, but this failed to gain support.
5 Speeches Analyzed
Regional Focus
The focus is maintained at the national level, concentrating specifically on the legislation of the Republic of Estonia, the constitutional order, and the relationships between state institutions (the President and the Supreme Court). There is no regional focus.
5 Speeches Analyzed
Economic Views
Not enough data
5 Speeches Analyzed
Social Issues
The primary social issue is religious freedom and the legal status of churches, particularly the question of the canonical ties of the Estonian Apostolic Orthodox Church. The speaker strongly defends the rights of the church, opposing state interference that would compel the church to sever these ties or lead to its forced dissolution, emphasizing that the bill in question is unjust.
5 Speeches Analyzed
Legislative Focus
The legislative focus centers on opposing the draft amendment (Bill 570 UA) to the Churches and Congregations Act, given that it continues to violate the Constitution. The speaker is an active opponent who put forward specific amendments aimed at achieving constitutional compliance, and ultimately proposed suspending the second reading.
5 Speeches Analyzed