Agenda Profile: Priit Sibul

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 stance is firmly opposed to the draft bill, arguing that it is disproportionate and fails to address the core issue: the positions held by Patriarch Kirill. The criticism centers on the unpredictable consequences of passing the law. Furthermore, this is a value-based opposition that underscores the limits of parliamentary competence regarding matters of church canonical law. The speaker believes that these measures merely substitute the resolution of actual problems with formal documentation.

2 Speeches Analyzed
Topic Expertise
The speaker demonstrates authority and knowledge of the canonical law and history of the Orthodox Church, asserting that such questions are for the Church Council to resolve. He draws upon personal experience, having represented his congregation at the Church Council of the Estonian Apostolic Orthodox Church, which is linked to Constantinople. Furthermore, historical context is provided regarding the use of the name Constantinople within the Orthodox Church.

2 Speeches Analyzed
Rhetorical Style
The style is formal, analytical, and critical, focusing on highlighting the logical and procedural shortcomings of the bill (ambiguity, unpredictability). A cautionary tone is employed, suggesting that the bill could potentially discredit the state and state power. A philosophical appeal is included, stressing that faith and religious life are matters of the heart rather than the mind, and that it is impossible to compel the heart through legislation.

2 Speeches Analyzed
Activity Patterns
The speaker is actively participating in the second reading of the bill, putting forward both questions to the rapporteur regarding the next steps for the Ministry of the Interior, and a longer, substantiated position. Reference is made to previous discussions and research that was conducted jointly with a colleague.

2 Speeches Analyzed
Opposition Stance
Criticism is directed at the Ministry of the Interior due to the lack of clarity regarding the consequences of the law, and at the drafters of the bill, who are proposing disproportionate and merely formal measures. The opposition is also aimed at the manner in which the bill returned by the president was amended, as the changes are formal rather than substantive. The speaker criticizes the state authority's attempt to resolve issues of ecclesiastical law, which fall outside the parliament's competence.

2 Speeches Analyzed
Collaboration Style
The speaker mentioned collaborating with colleague Valdo Randpere, with whom they jointly investigated the subsequent substantive stages of the Ministry of the Interior's work. There was also a reference to the discussions held by the Constitutional Committee and the Legal Affairs Committee, but the implication was that these failed to produce a substantive solution.

2 Speeches Analyzed
Regional Focus
The focus is on national legislation (laws of the Republic of Estonia) and international/historical canon law, referencing the broader history of the Orthodox Church and Constantinople. There are no references to specific Estonian regional problems or communities.

2 Speeches Analyzed
Economic Views
Insufficient data.

2 Speeches Analyzed
Social Issues
The speaker focuses on the issue of state-church relations, emphasizing the inviolability of the church's canonical law and the deeply personal, heart-centered nature of religious life. They oppose state interference in the church's governance, even if the goal is to resolve a security problem stemming from the positions held by Patriarch Kirill.

2 Speeches Analyzed
Legislative Focus
The primary legislative focus is opposing the draft bill (570 UA) amending the Churches and Congregations Act during its second reading. The speaker is a staunch opponent of the bill, arguing that it attempts to resolve a matter of canon law, which falls outside the jurisdiction of the parliament.

2 Speeches Analyzed