According to Kaljulaid, the question now for Estonia is how good the parliamentary oversight of the country's security services is. "We have a special committee in the Riigikogu for this. How in-depth does this committee actually look into the activities of the security services? I am a member of this committee, and I can say that I don't really take a very close look," Kaljulaid said on radio show "Välistund."

"In the same way, the National Defense Committee – because it is a separate committee that deals with the security agencies – does not deal very seriously with this issue of advance warning," Kaljulaid added.

Kaljulaid pointed out that in the U.S., a parliamentary-level investigation into the activities of the special services was launched after the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks.

Kaljulaid said that there is now a debate on whether the supervision of security agencies in Estonia ought to be stepped up

"I think it is important, and I am in favor of a stronger role for the Riigikogu and a stronger role for the National Defense Commission," Kaljulaid said. "However, we must remain within the limits set by the Constitution. In other words, the National Defense Commission cannot go and run the Ministry of Defense or the Defense Forces (EDF). It has its own chain of command, its own leadership and that must not be interfered with."

Kaljulaid: National Defense Committee could perform better role

According to Kaljulaid, the National Defense Committee could better fulfil its role of overseeing the implementation of Estonia's national defense policy.

He did specify however, that there is no suggestion of a problem or a specific issue in this area that needed to be better dealt with.

"I was simply pointing out that historically, when something has gone wrong, the parliament has taken an interest. For example, if we take the American example, the final report on 9/11 highlights a number of problems that were specifically related to the sharing of information between different services. In turn, the U.S. Congress responded to this by breaking down the walls that Congress itself had built between the services, so that they could share information better, giving them new rights, and providing them with significantly more additional funding," Kaljulaid said.

"I was simply pointing out that historically, when something has gone wrong, the parliament has taken an interest. For example, if we take the American example, the final report on 9/11 highlights a number of problems that were specifically related to the sharing of information between different services. In turn, the U.S. Congress responded to this by breaking down the walls that Congress itself had built between the services, so that they could share information better, giving them new rights, and providing them with significantly more additional funding," Kaljulaid said.

"The question is whether the U.S., Congress, if it had been more involved in this world, might have been proactive in doing so – perhaps then this terrorist attack would never have happened, because those walls would have been torn down, for example, in the wake of the terrorist attacks in the 1990s, both inside the U.S. and against U.S. embassies."

Kaljulaid stressed that advance warning from the intelligence services is critical.

"We need to begin our processes constitutionally and in a timely manner. If, for example, the Riigikogu somehow sleeps on its mobilization decisions or makes them at the wrong time, that is a bad thing and in that sense it is a very critical element," Kaljulaid said.

"The question is whether we are dealing with it enough today, whether we know enough today, especially in the Riigikogu. I would argue that more could probably be done here," Kaljulaid said.

Kaljulaid: Neither committees nor Riigikogu have enough advisers

Kaljulaid was asked what specific things he believes ought to be changed in this area.

Kaljulaid said that neither committees nor MPs have enough resources.

"At the moment, there are three officials working for the National Defense Committee, one of whom is more in a technical support and administration role, while two people who deal with substantive support for the National Defense Committee. As far as we know, Riigikogu MPs do not have their own teams either. When I meet my colleagues from practically all NATO parliaments, it is quite an extraordinary situation," Kaljulaid said.

"And now the thing is that when we talk about parliamentary oversight, in fact, what Meelis Kiili (Maj. Gen. Meelis Kiili, a Riigikogu National Defense Committee member– ed.) is saying is that, for example, the National Defense Committee could prepare reports in this area. Such a possibility exists today under the Riigikogu Rules of Procedure and Internal Rules Act, but I think that largely due to the same lack of resources, it has not been used very much in the Riigikogu at present," Kaljulaid said.

Kaljulaid: Riigikogu failing to fulfil its constitutional role

Kaljulaid noted that the view in Estonia is that investigative committees are not needed.

"On issues outside national defense – take the Covid crisis for instance. I'm a little surprised that the social and health people in the Riigikogu haven't raised the question of whether what was going on at the time, and all the restrictions that were put in place, and everything that was happening in Estonian society – didn't that deserve a parliamentary committee of inquiry? In my opinion, it would have," Kaljulaid said.

Kaljulaid added that the rupture of a gas pipeline in the Baltic Sea also deserved a committee of inquiry. "But it is caught up due in the fact that the parliament, contrary to what is believed in society, is actually underfunded, understaffed and at the moment is unable to fully fulfil its constitutional role."

--

Follow ERR News on Facebook and Twitter and never miss an update!