Ahead of local elections in 2021, Isamaa party candidates for the Elva municipal council, after reviewing the list of candidates running for the local council and finding several anomalies, had finally had enough.

"We looked at the list and – oh wow – there were a lot of people we didn't know, didn't recognize or did know, but were absolutely certain they were not permanent residents of Elva Municipality. So why were they running?" said Elva council candidate Vahur Jaakma.

The concerned candidates pointed to a clause in the law governing local government council elections, which explicitly states that a candidate must have a permanent residence in the municipality in question.

While it was undoubtedly part of the electoral battle, the case also underscored an important principle. The complainants combed through public interviews, social media and public document registries, compiling a list of candidates they suspected were not living in Elva. Initially, they turned to the National Electoral Committee. When they received no response, they took the matter to court before the 2021 elections. The legal process took three years, with the dispute even reaching the Supreme Court. Finally, in February of this year, the Tartu Circuit Court issued a decision that has now come into force.

"Based on the Supreme Court's guidelines, we found that the information the complainants provided to the National Electoral Committee, which was subsequently conveyed to Elva Municipality, was sufficient to create a reasonable doubt about whether the residence details of some candidates in the population register were accurate. Based on this reasonable doubt, the municipality should have initiated verification of these details. Since the municipality failed to do so, it acted unlawfully by remaining passive," explained Tanel Saar, head of the Tartu court's administrative review board.

In short, the court affirmed that municipalities must verify whether a council candidate or member genuinely resides at the address listed in the population register if a suspicion is raised. In recent years, Elva Municipality has allegedly experienced several questionable cases.

The most prominent example in this case is Reform Party member, multiple-time minister and MP Urmas Kruuse. Although he has a home in Tallinn, he also rents an apartment in his childhood home in Elva. Kruuse invited ERR's investigative TV magazine "Pealtnägija" to visit his residence to prove that he genuinely lives in the small two-room apartment.

"I've lived in this house for over 30 years, and I can't say that I don't feel like an Elva resident or that I shouldn't have a say in Elva matters. I find it completely incomprehensible why this issue has even been raised," said Kruuse.

"There's no such definition as a permanent resident, but there is an option to have multiple residences. And determining one's legal residence is up to the citizen's free will, where they feel they want to contribute most and where they are. Essentially, I'm here every weekend. We've agreed on our family model; we come here together, sometimes separately and it's part of our life. That's why Elva matters are very important to me. I feel connected to every corner and every tree here," Kruuse explained.

The Elva court case could significantly disrupt the dynamics of next autumn's local elections across Estonia, as there are dozens of similar examples in various regions among the 10,000 candidates.

For instance, Tallinn City Council members from the Center Party, former Tallinn Mayor Mihhail Kõlvart and his wife Anastassia Kovalenko-Kõlvart, who were visited by Pealtnägija in 2023, live in Maardu but are registered at an address in Tallinn.

Similarly, EKRE politicians from the Poolamets family have publicly stated they live in Kulina Manor in Vinni Municipality. However, during the last elections, they hedged their bets: Evelin Poolamets ran for the Vinni Municipality Council, while Anti Poolamets ran in a neighboring municipality, Rakvere, where he is supposed to reside.

A comparable situation applies to Martin and Eeva Helme. Both live and work in Tallinn, yet Martin ran for and secured a seat on the Tallinn City Council, while Eeva serves on the municipal council in Lääneranna, where their summer home is located.

In the Isamaa party itself, which initiated the legal dispute with Elva Municipality, the outcome likely sparks mixed feelings regarding members Jaanus Karilaid and Aivar Kokk. Karilaid belongs to the Haapsalu council and Kokk to the Jõgeva council, which ostensibly means they should reside in those areas. However, both work in the Riigikogu at Toompea and public records indicate that Kokk's home is actually in Tartu.

Recently, Minister of the Interior Lauri Läänemets, a member of the Social Democrats and under whose jurisdiction the Population Register falls, announced that, as in previous elections, he would run in Väätsa, located in Türi Municipality. Yet, for instance, his child attends kindergarten in Tallinn, where Läänemets spends most of his time due to work. The list goes on, but what should be done in light of the court's ruling?

"This means that local governments should ascertain individuals' permanent residence and then determine what actions they can take based on this information. In the worst-case scenario, this could indeed lead to changes in the residence data recorded in the Population Register, which, by law, would automatically result in the termination of the council member's mandate," explained Judge Tanel Saar.

The court interprets the law to mean that a candidate can only run in the region where the address listed in the Population Register is located and where they actually reside permanently. An additional address, such as a summer home that can also be recorded in the register, does not grant eligibility to run in that region. On the other hand, given today's diverse work and family arrangements, it is still challenging to define what constitutes a person's permanent residence, leaving the responsibility largely on the individual. However, providing false information is not allowed.

"Under current laws, there is only one permanent residence. I'd put it this way: your permanent residence is where your winter clothes are," said council candidate Vahur Jaakma.

As a result of this specific court ruling, Elva Municipality was compelled to investigate the dubious residency claims of four local council members. The process began with reviewing the Population Register, followed by asking the council members directly where they lived and even requesting utility bills. In cases of rental properties, landlords were asked whether the politician genuinely lived at the address. For example, council member Meelis Karro provided a fictionalized story about building several houses with different women but did not answer where he primarily resided. The municipality deemed such responses sufficient.

"What more can the municipality do if even some judges have said that if we start monitoring people's daily activities, it could lead to accusations of surveillance or something similar," said Sulev Kuus, chair of the Elva Municipality Council.

However, council candidate Mati Miil believes the municipality does have the means to verify residency. "If someone applies for support under the rural settlement program, for instance, it's processed very quickly to determine whether they actually live there or not."

The issue is politically sensitive and stakes are high in Elva and other regions, as the outcome could affect who will be eligible to stand in local elections a year from now.

Finally, presenting a false address could even lead to criminal charges for local politicians.

For example, former Elva municipal council chair and member Maano Koemets reportedly listed a farmhouse near Elva as his residence. In public interviews, he has admitted to living about an hour away in Peipsiääre Municipality. He is now the municipal mayor of Elva's neighbor, Nõo Municipality. Critics argue that by falsely listing the farmhouse as his permanent residence, Koemets earned over €100,000 as council chair and member. Recently, the prosecutor's office launched an investigation into the matter, though no charges have been filed.

Attorney Triin Kaurov emphasized that the requirement for the Population Register entry to reflect an actual and permanent residence applies to everyone, whether it's a local teacher or parent applying for support, or a council member. "If we want to live in a democratic state governed by the rule of law and follow laws, those laws must also be binding on council members."

For clarity, it should be noted that this issue pertains only to local elections. Political "tourism" is allowed and common in Riigikogu elections. Elva Municipality filed a constitutional review case with the Supreme Court a month ago, arguing that they lack the means to further verify addresses listed in the Population Register. The chancellor of justice, Ministry of the Interior and Riigikogu Constitutional Committee have already submitted opinions on the matter in the ongoing Supreme Court case.

--

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