Session Profile: Helir-Valdor Seeder
15th Riigikogu, 3rd session, plenary sitting
2024-04-17
Political Position
The political position is strongly opposed to the draft election law, particularly the provisions concerning voting via smart devices, emphasizing the risks to public trust and security. This stance is deeply procedural, criticizing the unlawful bundling of amendments and the violation of the fundamental rights of Riigikogu members. The Isamaa faction demands the interruption of the second reading of the bill in order to take expert comments into account and ensure the integrity of the elections. This position is rooted in core values (democratic elections, the rule of law) and adherence to proper procedure.
18 Speeches Analyzed
Topic Expertise
The speaker exhibits detailed knowledge of the Riigikogu Rules of Procedure and Internal Rules Act and the handling of proposed amendments, referencing established practice and precedents. Professional competence is clearly demonstrated in the field of electoral technology and law, citing the Electoral Commission's comments regarding the risks associated with voting via smart devices (secrecy, transparency, app stores, authentication). The discussion also covers issues concerning the proportionality of electoral districts and the uniformity of voting procedures.
18 Speeches Analyzed
Rhetorical Style
The rhetorical style is critical, forceful, and legally precise, focusing on the presentation of both procedural and substantive arguments. Strong language is employed (e.g., "forcibly linked," "unlawful activity"), with references made to statutes and Supreme Court case law. The speaker also employs irony, contrasting the opponents' digital enthusiasm with a slogan from the Perestroika era, to underscore the paramount importance of election reliability.
18 Speeches Analyzed
Activity Patterns
The speaker was highly active during the session, repeatedly posing questions to the board and the committee chairman, and requesting procedural breaks and votes on amendments. The presenter delivered two consecutive speeches (on his own behalf and on behalf of the faction), criticizing the necessity of interrupting and resuming the speech, citing the need to streamline parliamentary work.
18 Speeches Analyzed
Opposition Stance
The main opponents are the Riigikogu Board and the leading committee (the Constitutional Committee), who are primarily criticized for procedural violations (the bundling of amendments) and for choosing a path of lawbreaking. The criticism is intense, accusing the Board of violating the fundamental rights of Riigikogu members and of the "malicious and criminal" use of a Supreme Court decision to limit obstruction. No willingness to compromise is expressed; instead, the immediate cessation of the illegal activity is demanded.
18 Speeches Analyzed
Collaboration Style
The current style of cooperation is confrontational, focusing on defending the rights of Riigikogu members and factions against the actions of the leading committee. Cooperation is emphasized by the need to consider the proposals put forth by experts from the Republic's Electoral Committee and the Electoral Service—proposals which the coalition has allegedly acknowledged but for which no solutions have been offered. The speaker requests that the Presidium be flexible and streamline parliamentary work, promising to deliver their speech in one continuous statement.
18 Speeches Analyzed
Regional Focus
The focus is predominantly national and international, addressing Estonian election laws, the principle of proportionality (districts with five and 16 mandates), and international requirements for good electoral practice. It is emphasized that malicious voter applications may be uploaded outside Estonia, which presents an additional security risk. The regional focus is limited to one factual clarification concerning the Soontaga state farm (sovhoz).
18 Speeches Analyzed
Economic Views
Insufficient data
18 Speeches Analyzed
Social Issues
Insufficient data.
18 Speeches Analyzed
Legislative Focus
The legislative focus is on opposing the draft election law (voting via smart devices) and halting its proceedings. The priority is increasing the reliability of elections and strictly adhering to the Riigikogu Rules of Procedure and Internal Rules Act when processing amendments. The speaker is an active opponent, requesting the interruption of the second reading in order to take into account the security risks highlighted by experts.
18 Speeches Analyzed