NordenBladet —
According to Chancellor of Justice Ülle Madise, the proposal was based on a request from the Prosecutor General which indicated that Grünthal may have committed a crime provided for in clause 3 of section 201 (2) of the Penal Code, i.e. embezzlement by an official. According to her, the embezzlement allegedly consisted in Grünthal having given his son the fuel company Alexela customer card entrusted to him by the Chancellery of the Riigikogu, so that his son could use the property entrusted to a member of the Riigikogu for the performance of duties related to the work of a member of the Riigikogu for his own personal purposes at his discretion.
“According to the suspicion, Mr. Grünthal’s son used the fuel company’s customer card himself to refuel his vehicle and gave the fuel company’s customer card to his former spouse for use. In addition, it appears from the suspicion that the refuelling of his car for personal purposes was also possible with a fuel company Olerex customer card which had been issued by the Chancellery of the Riigikogu,” Madise said. According to her it is apparent from the suspicion that Grünthal was aware that his son and son’s spouse purchased fuel which they did not use for activities related to his work of as a member of the Riigikogu.
Madise noted that, upon reviewing the materials of the criminal case, no circumstances had emerged that would have allowed for the request of the Prosecutor General not to be forwarded to the Riigikogu. “As explained earlier, the law prohibits the Chancellor of Justice from evaluating evidence and inquiring whether the acts were committed or how serious they were, or whether the person was guilty. It is clearly prohibited by law for the Chancellor of Justice to do this,” she said.
Madise underlined that only a court could administer justice and determine guilt. “Neither the submission of this application and proposal nor the potential removal of parliamentary immunity mean that Kalle Grünthal has committed a crime. Justice is administered by the court and if guilt is not proven the person is acquitted,” the Chancellor of Justice said.
Member of the Riigikogu Kalle Grünthal said before the Riigikogu that he was not afraid of legal proceedings but believed that, in the case under discussion, the Riigikogu should reject the proposal.
Martin Helme, Mart Helme and Rain Epler from the Estonian Conservative People’s Party Group, Madis Timpson from the Reform Party Group and Irja Lutsar from Estonia 200 Parliamentary Group took the floor during the debate.
58 members of the Riigikogu voted in favour of the proposal of the Chancellor of Justice and three were against it. Thus, the motion was supported.
The Riigikogu passed two Acts
The Riigikogu passed the Act on the Repeal of the Use of Privatisation Proceeds Act and Amendments to Other Associated Acts (693 SE), initiated by the Government. It repeals the Use of Privatisation Proceeds Act and liquidates the ownership reform reserve fund of the Government. The use of the proceeds from land privatization will be decided during the state budget procedure in the future.
The ownership reform reserve fund was established to cover the costs associated with reforms during the transition to a democratic state system after Estonia restored its independence. The proceeds from the privatisation of state land in the course of ownership reform are received into the reserve fund and they are used for covering the expenses related to the organisation of the return and privatisation of and compensation for assets and other expenses related to the land and ownership reform. Among other things, the maintenance and reconstruction of architectural monuments and expenses related to apartment ownership transferred to the state have been financed from the fund.
According to the explanatory memorandum, the activities for which the reserve fund was established are now coming to an end and the fund has mostly fulfilled its objectives.
58 members of the Riigikogu supported the passing of the Act.
The Riigikogu also passed the Act on Amendments to the State Fees Act (735 SE), initiated by the Government. It raises the rates of the state fees for public procurement contestation notices to bring them into line with actual costs.
According to the explanatory memorandum, disputes arising from the organization of public procurement are resolved by the Public Procurement Review Committee as a mandatory out-of-court body whose workload has increased significantly due to the increase in the number of disputes. While it was originally planned that the costs of the committee’s activities would be covered by state fees for contested cases, they currently only cover half of the labour costs. The relevant state fee rates have been in force since 2007 when the committee was established.
The Act doubles the state fee rates for contesting public procurement: from EUR 640 to EUR 1,280 where the estimated value of a public procurement is below the international threshold, and from EUR 1,280 to EUR 2,560 where the estimated value is greater than or equal to the threshold. According to the explanatory memorandum, the amendments will affect all public procurement disputes, as the state fee must be paid at the same rate in the administrative court and circuit court of appeal when appealing against a decision of the Review Committee.
Anastassia Kovalenko-Kõlvart from the Centre Party Group took the floor during the debate.
48 members of the Riigikogu were in favour of passing the Act and 20 voted against.
A Bill passed the first reading
The Bill on Amendments to the Penal Code (consent-based approach to sexual violence) (727 SE), initiated by the Government, passed the first reading in the Riigikogu. The Bill marks a shift from the force and coercion-based approach to a consent-based approach in the case of sexual crimes, and sexual intercourse without consent will be considered to be rape.
Currently, rape is only considered to take place if violence is used against the victim or if the victim is in a helpless state, i.e. unable to resist or understand what is happening. According to the bill, however, non-consensual intercourse will be punishable as rape even if no violence is used against the victim. According to the Bill, it must be clear to both parties that their partner consents to sexual activity. Consent will not have to be verbal, but it will have to be clearly expressed and voluntary.
The bill will also bring the Estonian Penal Code into line with the Council of Europe’s Istanbul Convention according to which it should be punishable to have sexual intercourse with someone without their consent. An independent expert group assessing the implementation of the Istanbul Convention has also strongly recommended that Estonia make the relevant legislative amendment.
According to the Bill, the amendments are planned to enter into force on 1 July next year.
Signe Riisalo from the Reform Party Group, Riina Solman from Isamaa Parliamentary Group and Varro Vooglaid from the Estonian Conservative People’s Party Parliamentary Group took the floor during the debate. Andre Hanimägi made a speech on behalf of the Social Democratic Party Group and Peeter Ernits took the of the floor on behalf of the Centre Party Parliamentary Group.
The Estonian Conservative People’s Party Group moved to reject the Bill at the first reading, but the plenary did not support the motion. 13 members of the Riigikogu supported rejection but 47 were against.
The first reading of the Bill on Amendments to the Code of Criminal Procedure (731 SE), initiated by the Environment Committee, is deferred to the agenda for tomorrow’s sitting due to the end of the working hours of Tuesday’s sitting.
Photos (Erik Peinar / Chancellery of the Riigikogu)
Verbatim record of the sitting (in Estonian)
Video recording will be available to watch later on the Riigikogu YouTube channel.
Riigikogu Press Service
Karin Kangro
+372 631 6356, +372 520 0323
karin.kangro@riigikogu.ee
Questions: press@riigikogu.ee
Link uudisele: The Riigikogu lifted the parliamentary immunity of Kalle Grünthal
Source: Parliament of Estonia