Session Profile: Riina Sikkut
15th Riigikogu, 6th sitting, plenary sitting.
2025-09-17
Political Position
The political position is strongly focused on ensuring trust in data usage and e-governance, while opposing the adoption of the current bill in its present form. The speaker (Social Democrats) stresses the necessity of establishing a legal framework that would allow law enforcement agencies to utilize new technologies to combat crime, while simultaneously safeguarding individual privacy and constitutional principles. This stance is rooted in values and policy, emphasizing the need to strike a balance between security and civil liberties.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Topic Expertise
The speaker demonstrates expertise on topics such as e-governance, data utilization, privacy, and IT security, referencing audit mechanisms, the necessity of oversight, and the operational capacities of the Financial Intelligence Unit (FIU) and the Tax and Customs Board. Technical terminology is employed concerning data querying and automated decision-making, while stressing the critical nature of human judgment and supervision.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Rhetorical Style
The rhetorical style is formal and analytical, focusing on substantive discussion and emphasizing responsibility, while calling on colleagues to set aside emotions. Logical arguments and contrasts are employed (e.g., pencil and binoculars vs. new technology), and reference is made to the positions of the Chancellor of Justice. The tone is concerned, yet constructive, stressing the need for thoroughness.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Activity Patterns
The speaker is actively participating in the plenary session debate regarding the draft bill, using their address within the context of budget talks to highlight the necessity of IT investments. Furthermore, they speak immediately after the debate to correct a mistaken position attributed to them by Kalle Grünthal. There is insufficient data concerning the frequency or rhythm of their appearances outside of this specific session.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Opposition Stance
The opposition is directed at the current form of the draft law and its inadequate privacy safeguards. Furthermore, criticism is leveled against the wrongful attribution of Kalle Grünthal’s positions (a procedural and personal correction), and concern is expressed regarding the privacy-infringing nature of the Estonia 200 concept of the "personal state."
2 Speeches Analyzed
Collaboration Style
The speaker noted the complete consensus in the chamber regarding the necessity of amending the law, signaling a readiness to cooperate on making substantive improvements to the legislation. He/She emphasized the need for thorough and meaningful discussions to find the balance point between data usage and privacy, which indicates an openness to compromise concerning the law's specific content.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Regional Focus
The focus is on national legislation, the operation of the e-government, and the mandates of state agencies (RAB, MTA). Specific regional or local issues are not mentioned.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Economic Views
The necessity of continuous investment in IT security and data utilization is emphasized, particularly during budget negotiations. The speaker warns against achieving cost savings at the expense of IT investments, as this could materialize security risks. This points to support for strategic investments rather than strict fiscal discipline.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Social Issues
The main social issue is maintaining data privacy and trust in the e-state versus the state’s capacity to utilize new technologies in the fight against crime. The speaker is strongly opposed to solutions that heavily infringe on privacy, such as the "personal state," prioritizing civil liberties and oversight.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Legislative Focus
The main focus is on amending the bill concerning the rights of the Financial Intelligence Unit to ensure constitutional conformity and public trust. The broader goal is to establish a legal basis for the use of data with new technologies across all sectors and to ensure sufficient internal and parliamentary oversight.
2 Speeches Analyzed