Agenda Profile: Riina Solman

Suffrage

2024-12-11

Fifteenth Riigikogu, Fourth session, press briefing.

Political Position
The central theme is the restriction of voting rights for citizens of aggressor states in local government and indirect presidential elections, driven by robust security considerations. The speaker endorses the Isamaa party's proposal to reserve voting rights in the constitution exclusively for Estonian and European Union citizens. This stance is deeply rooted in policy and values, highlighting both constitutionality and national security. Furthermore, procedural integrity is crucial when amending the constitution.

2 Speeches Analyzed
Topic Expertise
The speaker demonstrates a profound knowledge of the process for amending the constitution, international law, and the specifics of legislation, particularly regarding the explanatory memorandum and lower-tier acts. Technical language is employed, differentiating between the granting of voting rights and the establishment of conditions for creating supplementary lists. The speaker also shows awareness of the minister's prior statements and officially recorded positions.

2 Speeches Analyzed
Rhetorical Style
The style is formal and parliamentary, addressing the Speaker of the Riigikogu and the Minister. The tone is analytical and pointed, particularly when raising procedural questions regarding the content of the explanatory memorandum. Logical argumentation is employed, emphasizing the requirement for constitutionality and referencing the Minister's prior press conference statements.

2 Speeches Analyzed
Activity Patterns
The action plan involves active participation in parliamentary debates (Riigikogu), specifically by posing concrete questions to the Minister of Justice and Digital Affairs concerning the draft constitutional amendment. It also shows close tracking of statements made during government press conferences and the subsequent utilization of these statements in parliamentary proceedings. All public appearances are focused on clarifying the specific details and procedures of the legislative process.

2 Speeches Analyzed
Opposition Stance
The opposition's stance is directed at procedural errors and illegal attempts to add unconstitutional provisions concerning the creation of separate electoral lists to the explanatory memorandum. The criticism is aimed at those "fiery politicians" who tend to rewrite the law for their own benefit. Clarity is demanded regarding who is pushing this controversial aspect into the explanatory memorandum and why.

2 Speeches Analyzed
Collaboration Style
The collaborative approach is evident in the clear support shown for Isamaa’s proposal to restrict voting rights, signaling a willingness to work toward a shared objective. However, the minister is simultaneously required to take a clear stance and assume responsibility, highlighting the necessity of reaching a consensus on the specifics of the constitutional amendment.

2 Speeches Analyzed
Regional Focus
The focus is on the national and international level, addressing constitutional amendments and security considerations related to aggressor states. There is no regional or local focus, apart from the mention of local government elections as the target of the legislative amendment.

2 Speeches Analyzed
Economic Views
There is not enough data.

2 Speeches Analyzed
Social Issues
The primary social topic is voting rights and citizenship, which are strictly addressed within the framework of security and constitutionality. Support is given to restricting the voting rights of third-country nationals on security grounds, while simultaneously retaining the rights of European Union citizens under international law.

2 Speeches Analyzed
Legislative Focus
The legislative focus is on the process of amending the constitution, the aim of which is to restrict voting rights in local government elections. The speaker supports the initiative but is critical of the content of the draft bill's explanatory memorandum regarding the conditions for creating supplementary lists, deeming it unconstitutional.

2 Speeches Analyzed