Agenda Profile: Riina Solman

The Chancellor of Justice's report on the conformity of legislative acts with the Constitution and the performance of other duties assigned to the Chancellor by law.

2025-09-16

Fifteenth Riigikogu, sixth sitting, plenary sitting.

Political Position
The political focus is centered on balancing national security and civil liberties, criticizing the Minister of the Interior's recent draft bill—which seeks to criminalize the monitoring of terrorist propaganda—as "crude" and potentially leading to thought control. The speaker stresses the necessity of tackling radicalization through legislation in a manner that safeguards the interests of the Estonian state while simultaneously avoiding thought policing. This stance is value-based, underscoring the importance of adhering to the principles of the rule of law when implementing security measures.

3 Speeches Analyzed
Topic Expertise
The speaker positions himself as a media expert, highlighting worrying patterns in the media, particularly in the Russian-language Delfi and concerning the incitement of people related to the Song Festival. He demonstrates knowledge of legislative processes, noting the zeal of the security sector ministries and the immaturity of the draft bill. His expertise is focused on analyzing the media space and its impact on national security.

3 Speeches Analyzed
Rhetorical Style
The rhetorical style is formal and respectful toward the Deputy Speaker of the Riigikogu and the Chancellor of Justice, incorporating a humorous and personal note at the outset (the confusion with Riina Sikkut). The tone is concerned and analytical, focusing on legal balance and utilizing strong concepts such as "attitude control" and "obstruction." The speaker poses questions, seeking a logical and well-reasoned explanation from the Chancellor of Justice.

3 Speeches Analyzed
Activity Patterns
The speaker is attending the Riigikogu session during the Chancellor of Justice’s presentation, thanking them for introducing balance and substance into the chamber. This indicates active participation in debates regarding constitutional oversight. No other activity patterns were observed.

3 Speeches Analyzed
Opposition Stance
The criticism is directed at the Minister of the Interior and the security ministries, who put forward a "raw" draft bill intended to criminalize the tracking of terrorist propaganda. The opposition is based on both policy and procedural grounds, as the speaker assesses that the bill threatens freedom of expression and contradicts the protection of the interests of the Estonian state. The intensity of the criticism is moderate, while simultaneously acknowledging the ministry's goal of protecting the country.

3 Speeches Analyzed
Collaboration Style
The collaborative style is respectful, expressing gratitude to the Chancellor of Justice for their presentation and balancing role, which signals a readiness to listen to and involve constitutional institutions. There are no direct references to cross-party cooperation or compromises.

3 Speeches Analyzed
Regional Focus
The focus is on national security and legislative issues, emphasizing the protection of the Estonian state's interests and the prevention of obstruction/undermining. Domestic media problems are also mentioned, such as the Russian-language Delfi and incitement related to the Song Festival.

3 Speeches Analyzed
Economic Views
There is not enough data.

3 Speeches Analyzed
Social Issues
The primary social issue is anti-radicalization efforts and their impact on civil liberties, with the speaker expressing strong opposition to the threat of thought control. He is troubled by media narratives that work against the interests of the Estonian state and incite people, thereby pitting security against freedom of conscience.

3 Speeches Analyzed
Legislative Focus
The legislative focus is on opposing the draft bill presented by the Minister of the Interior, which concerns making the tracking of terrorist propaganda a punishable offense. The speaker is primarily an opponent and questioner, seeking clarification from the Chancellor of Justice on how to address radicalization at the legal level in a constitutionally compliant manner.

3 Speeches Analyzed