Agenda Profile: Riina Solman
Draft law amending the Child Protection Act and other laws (427 SE) – third reading
2024-12-11
15th Riigikogu, 4th session, plenary session
Political Position
The political position is one of strong opposition to the draft amendment of the Child Protection Act (427 SE), as it increases the risk of pedophiles gaining access to child institutions. The bill is opposed on value-based grounds, emphasizing the priority of child safety and the necessity of maintaining a lifetime ban for certain offenses. Criticism also centers on transferring the assessment authority from the independent judiciary to the level of the Social Insurance Board and the ministries.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Topic Expertise
The speaker demonstrates expertise in the field of criminal law and administrative procedure, addressing the deletion of criminal record data, the difference between a prohibition and a restriction, and the distribution of competence between justice and social institutions. Technical terms such as "administrative burden" and "reintegration" are used, and reference is made to the analysis by the law firm Ellex Raidla. It is emphasized that the legal competence for mitigating risks should remain with the justice system.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Rhetorical Style
The rhetorical style is serious and forceful, focusing on ensuring the safety of children and minimizing risks. The argumentation is primarily logical and procedural, criticizing the transfer of jurisdiction from the courts to administrative bodies and highlighting the practical shortcomings of the bill. Strong warnings are used regarding the danger of people with "security gaps" and "criminal habits" working with children.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Activity Patterns
Not enough data.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Opposition Stance
The main criticism is directed at the coalition, whose overwhelming majority of votes led to the rejection of Isamaa's amendments in the committee. The criticism is both policy-based and procedural, accusing the coalition of creating loopholes in the law and hiding the control mechanism from public scrutiny. The analysis provided by the law firm is also criticized for failing to address practical risks.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Collaboration Style
The style of cooperation is confrontational because Isamaa's "very reasonable amendment proposals" failed to gain coalition support and were rejected. There is no reference to successful cross-party cooperation, although an analysis commissioned by Eero Merilind, a member of the Social Affairs Committee, is mentioned, which is deemed insufficient.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Regional Focus
The focus is entirely on the national level, addressing the nationwide Child Protection Act and the competence of state institutions (courts, the Social Insurance Board). Regional or local focus is absent from the speeches.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Economic Views
Economic perspectives indirectly address the workforce issues facing educational institutions, noting that low wages and the shortage of teachers compel school administrators to hire unqualified personnel. This increases the employer's responsibility and administrative burden, as the state reduces its own burden of accountability.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Social Issues
The primary social issue is child safety and protection from pedophiles, demanding that a lifetime ban on working with children be maintained even after criminal records have been expunged. It is stressed that individuals who have committed offenses against children in the past must choose a different line of work, prioritizing safety over rehabilitation. Crimes against children, such as child trafficking and abduction, are also mentioned.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Legislative Focus
The legislative focus is on opposing the draft amendment to the Child Protection Act (Bill 427 SE) and attempting to amend it. Isamaa's priority was supplementing the list of crimes (including the selling of a child, crimes related to terrorism) for which the prohibition on working with children would remain in force even after the data is erased. They also wanted the jurisdiction to be transferred from the Social Insurance Board to the Prosecutor's Office.
2 Speeches Analyzed