Agenda Profile: Valdo Randpere
First Reading of the Draft Act amending the Penal Code (411 SE)
2024-05-30
15th Riigikogu, 3rd session, plenary session
Political Position
Randpere strongly supports the respect for the principle of the presumption of innocence (Article 22 of the Constitution) in society and the media, deeming it a topic worthy of debate. He is critical of the specific sentencing guidelines outlined in draft bill 411 SE, arguing that they unduly restrict freedom of speech. He supported the consensus decision by the Legal Affairs Committee to reject the bill, even though he acknowledged that the underlying problem exists.
1 Speeches Analyzed
Topic Expertise
He demonstrates expertise in the field of constitutional rights and criminal procedure, citing Article 22 of the Constitution. Randpere is aware of issues concerning media ethics and journalistic practices, drawing comparisons to Sweden’s more civilized practices regarding the treatment of suspects. He has previously addressed the same topic as a member of the ERR Council.
1 Speeches Analyzed
Rhetorical Style
The speech is candid, at times ironic, and personal, especially in the introduction, where the speaker refers to their desire to give the presentation and indirectly criticizes the previous topics raised by the bill's initiator. They employ both logical appeals (citing the constitution) and anecdotal comparisons (the blurring of the faces of Swedish and Estonian police officers). The tone is procedurally correct, yet conducive to debate.
1 Speeches Analyzed
Activity Patterns
He/She actively serves as the rapporteur for the Riigikogu Committee on Legal Affairs, emphasizing his/her personal initiative and desire to clarify this specific topic before the parliament. He/She also references previous work on the ERR Council concerning the raising of media ethics issues.
1 Speeches Analyzed
Opposition Stance
The direct criticism is aimed at Kalle Grünthal, the initiator of the bill, for his overly harsh penalty requirements and previous irrelevant initiatives. He also broadly criticizes Estonian social and media practices where people are branded as guilty before a court decision has even become final.
1 Speeches Analyzed
Collaboration Style
He provides a detailed account of the discussion within the Legal Affairs Committee, highlighting the lively debate and the positions taken by various colleagues (Vilja Toomast, Varro Vooglaid). He stresses that the decision to reject the draft bill was unanimous, demonstrating the ability to achieve cross-party agreement on procedural issues.
1 Speeches Analyzed
Regional Focus
He focuses on domestic legal and media issues in Estonia, especially concerning the application of the presumption of innocence. He uses the practices of Sweden (including Central Sweden) as a benchmark of more civilized conduct to illustrate the Estonian situation.
1 Speeches Analyzed
Economic Views
Not enough data.
1 Speeches Analyzed
Social Issues
He focuses heavily on civil rights, particularly the protection of the presumption of innocence and the boundaries of free speech. He sees a positive development in Estonian society concerning the blurring of suspects' faces in the media. He also raises the issue of legal costs in civil proceedings when defending one's reputation.
1 Speeches Analyzed
Legislative Focus
His/Her main focus was the processing and rejection of the Draft Act amending the Penal Code (411 SE), which he/she finalized as the representative of the lead committee. He/She promises that the Legal Affairs Committee will subsequently discuss the issue of legal aid costs in civil proceedings, which emerged as a side effect of the 411 SE debate.
1 Speeches Analyzed