Stripping Russian and Belarusian citizens of their voting rights is the toughest political challenge yet for Hendrik Terras (Eesti 200), chair of the Riigikogu Constitutional Committee. The situation is further complicated by opposition Isamaa's silence. More precisely, Isamaa members repeatedly state that, in their view, voting rights should also be revoked from stateless persons, or individuals holding so-called gray passports. However, they have yet to clarify how they would vote on the so-called minimum program.

A crucial vote will take place before the final decision — one determining whether the Constitution should be amended in expedited procedure. Changing the Constitution within a single Riigikogu term requires a four-fifths majority.

This means that to derail the process, 21 votes against the expedited amendment would be enough. At present, EKRE would contribute 12 votes against, while the Center Party would add another seven. If Isamaa's 11 MPs also vote against, the amendment would be dead in the water. The votes of independents Leo Kunnas, Jaak Valge, Enn Eesmaa, Kersti Sarapuu and Tõnis Mölder are also significant. However, the greatest concern for the coalition right now is the biggest variable — Isamaa.

Some coalition politicians believe that Isamaa will ultimately support the amendment, assuming that the party would not want to be blamed for preserving voting rights for Russian citizens. However, others think Isamaa is more likely to vote against it, reasoning that when a major political initiative fails, the ruling coalition ultimately takes the blame. There is concern that Isamaa's leader, Urmas Reinsalu, who currently enjoys high approval ratings, would have no trouble washing his hands of the entire affair.

Terras convinced bold action has a greater chance of success

Isamaa's deafening silence has shrouded the near future in uncertainty, prompting Hendrik Terras to seek a new agreement. Since last week, he has been collecting signatures for an amendment that would restrict voting rights to only Estonian and European Union citizens.

"Having listened to all parties, I am convinced that this wording has the broadest support in parliament. That means it is the most likely formulation to succeed," Terras said.

As of midday Monday, the amendment had been signed by nine EKRE MPs, seven Eesti 200 MPs and a few unaffiliated parliamentarians. Terras noted that as of Thursday, the proposal also included signatures from a couple of Reform Party members. However, Reform Party faction leader Õnne Pillak confirmed that these signatures were not visible in the Riigikogu's information system.

Ultimately, this may not matter much, as the necessary signatures to bring the amendment to the chamber are expected to be gathered by next Tuesday.

Terras believes that, in addition to Eesti 200, MPs from the Reform Party, Isamaa and EKRE could support restricting voting rights to Estonian and EU citizens. He emphasized that Eesti 200 has consistently maintained that individuals with gray passports should not retain voting rights.

"This amendment proposal already has the signatures of board members, as well as those of other faction members," Terras stated.

Social Democrats: Terras' move a regrettable surprise

However, the chair of the Social Democratic Party's parliamentary faction, Madis Kallas, recalled that the coalition had previously agreed on a different approach to amending the Constitution. (Where the voting rights of stateless persons would remain intact — ed.) He noted that the Social Democrats had engaged in lengthy internal debates before agreeing to the compromise of stripping Russian and Belarusian citizens of their voting rights.

For the Social Democrats, that was a firm boundary, and Kallas pointed out that until last week, the coalition partners had also respected that limit.

"We find it extremely regrettable and surprising that such a move was made without proper discussion, and we are concerned about where this will lead," Kallas said in response to the Constitutional Committee chair's initiative. "This week, we will take a calm approach, and on Monday, we already have meetings scheduled to discuss what this means going forward."

The future of the constitutional amendment will likely be determined at the coalition council meeting next Monday, as the key question remains — what happens if the Reform Party and Eesti 200 decide to vote over the heads of the Social Democrats?

Hendrik Terras does not see this as a dramatic issue. "When it comes to amending the Constitution, coalition boundaries should not apply," he said. "Every member of parliament should look within themselves, consider their own convictions on this matter and vote according to what they personally believe is right."

Laanet: Bypassing SDE would be the end of the coalition

Madis Kallas stated that breaking the existing agreement would inevitably make the situation more difficult. "Serious discussions would undoubtedly follow about how the coalition's stability and health would be affected in the future," said the leader of the Social Democrats' parliamentary faction.

Kalle Laanet, a member of the Constitutional Committee from the Reform Party, was more direct. He suggested that Reform Party members could also support the so-called maximum program, which includes revoking voting rights from individuals with gray passports. However, he emphasized that all potential consequences should be considered.

"If the Social Democratic Party does not support this amendment, then to some extent or another, it would mean the end of the current coalition," Laanet predicted.

The broader question of whether the collapse of the three-party coalition would be an acceptable price to pay for stripping a few tens of thousands of stateless persons of their voting rights was one that no one was willing to discuss in depth.

No one knows where common ground is greatest

Both Kalle Laanet and his fellow Reform Party member Õnne Pillak share the same view as Eesti 200 faction leader Toomas Uibo and Constitutional Committee chair Hendrik Terras: the process should move forward with the option that has the most supporters and the fewest opponents.

However, no coalition party is entirely united on the issue. Within the Social Democrats, some believe that, in the spirit of consensus, a sunset clause could be discussed — one that would strip gray passport holders of their voting rights in, for example, eight years. But since many in the party fundamentally oppose amending the Constitution, another push in that direction would be highly difficult for them to accept. The Social Democrats have also not made it clear what they would do if their coalition partners decided to override them.

Eesti 200 would like to go further, but its primary goal is to ensure that the constitutional amendment passes at all. There is also internal debate over whether securing the necessary votes should involve offering greater incentives to EKRE and Isamaa, even at the expense of sidelining the Social Democrats. Some in the party believe that if the Social Democrats feel betrayed, it could actually strengthen Eesti 200's position in the government.

Discussions within the party are ongoing. Toomas Uibo noted that the amendment proposed by Terras was the MP's personal initiative and not a decision made by the Eesti 200 faction. However, that does not mean the party will not support it — Uibo pointed out that the deadline for amendments is March 11.

As he put it, he, too, would back the version with the broadest support. "The truth will be revealed when people start pressing the buttons," Uibo said.

Pillak: SDE and Center have enough votes to sink the initiative

The Reform Party also considers the most important goal to be the removal of voting rights from Russian and Belarusian citizens. Ideally, they would prefer the maximum program, which includes stripping voting rights from gray passport holders as well.

At the same time, a direct clash with the Social Democrats would complicate governance for the prime minister's party. Together with Eesti 200, Reform holds only a razor-thin majority in the Riigikogu. While inviting Isamaa into the government could serve multiple political purposes — including weakening a rival party's support — such a move would require a fundamental renegotiation of the coalition agreement. And that path is even more uncertain than the fate of the constitutional amendment itself.

However, it may not be necessary to think that far ahead. Reform Party faction leader Õnne Pillak laid out a simple calculation: the Center Party faction has seven MPs and the Social Democrats have 14, meaning together they hold 21 votes. That puts a major obstacle in the way of the solution proposed by Hendrik Terras.

"This means that if the Social Democrats decide they do not support revoking voting rights from gray passport holders, then the first goal [removing voting rights from Russian and Belarusian citizens] will also fail," Pillak said.

In other words, this time, the decisive player may not be Isamaa but rather the Social Democratic Party, which has significantly expanded its parliamentary faction since the last election. That, of course, assumes the Social Democrats remain united. Within their ranks, too, there are politicians who believe the constitutional amendment should go even further.

What the president said

Even if a compromise is reached in the Riigikogu, it does not necessarily mean the matter will be settled by March 26. In his Independence Day speech, President Alar Karis warned that changing electoral rules right before an election could undermine trust in the electoral process.

"Restrictions on fundamental rights that lack convincing justification weaken our international standing as a rule-of-law state and, in turn, reduce our security," Karis added.

A few days later, in an interview on "Esimene stuudio," he reiterated that while the Riigikogu has the right to amend the Constitution, he expects clearer justifications and analyses.

"The question is always about timing — whether this is happening too fast. Parliament already knew in 2022 that [Russia] is an aggressor state. Perhaps action should have been taken sooner, as Latvia did in the context of the church. Now, this is happening very close to the elections, and that creates new problems," Karis said. He noted that he would be able to give a more definitive position once the parliament passes the law.

Riigikogu members themselves have speculated about whether the president would actually promulgate the constitutional amendments.

"I interpreted it as meaning that if further changes or alternative solutions are introduced into the bill, the president may not sign off on it," said Social Democratic faction leader Madis Kallas.

"I read it as the president carefully considering both the form in which the Riigikogu passes the law and the timing of when it reaches his desk," said Reform Party MP Kalle Laanet. However, he believes that if the current bill passes at the end of March, there should be no issue.

"For at least two years, there has been serious discussion about restricting the voting rights of Russian and Belarusian citizens. So the argument that this is a brand-new change doesn't seem very strong," Laanet added.

Constitutional Committee chair Hendrik Terras also pointed out that the bill had its first reading last fall and that more than six months will remain before the elections after the final vote.

"So, it's not happening right before an election, and the advance notice is long enough," Terras said, though he admitted that he could not predict the president's actions. "But I believe that, in the Riigikogu, it is important to pass a law with the broadest possible support and one that is in Estonia's best interest."

--

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