The law currently allows for the penalization of civic organizations in a free society for supporting candidates in a fair and open manner, which does not involve any corruption risks. Such a situation is also in violation of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), the Office of the Chancellor of Justice wrote.

The justice chancellor noted that in accordance with the "Guidelines on Political Party Regulation, Second Edition" jointly issued by the OSCE Office For Democratic Institutions and Human Rights (OSCE/ODIHR) and the Council of Europe's Venice Commission, "all individuals should have the right to freely express their support for a political party of their choice through financial and in-kind contributions" (paragraph 209).

She also highlighted that third parties, defined by the document as "both individuals and organizations who are not legally tied to, or acting in coordination with, any candidate or political party, but who nonetheless act with the aim of influencing the electoral result" must be allowed to make such expenditures, and that "such expenditures may not be banned" (paragraph 218).

"Civic organizations should be able to support candidates without fear of punishment in the 2025 local government elections already, provided that the origin of the support and the funds used is made public," Madise said.

She emphasized that supporters from all ideological backgrounds, independent of political parties, have already suffered, and removing the restriction currently in place would not increase the risk of corruption or grant any party an advantage.

"This is a change that is not too late to make even in light of the local elections," the chancellor of justice noted.

"Changing the electoral system less than a year before the elections with the aim of giving a political force an advantage would not be deemed to align with the principles of fair elections, but that is not the case here," she explained. "Instead, the amendment would legalize the de facto situation, and could hope to eliminate some of the tactics used to circumvent restrictions, because it would be possible to honestly disclose which legal entity supported which candidate and with what."

Under the current law, both financial donations and work or services provided without payment or on preferential terms are classified as donations supporting the political activities of a party, electoral alliance or candidate, and this ban also applies to civic organizations operating as legal entities.

A prohibited donation is punishable as a misdemeanor, but should a donation exceed €40,000 in size, it is considered a criminal offense.

"Banning the participation of legal entities in politics in this manner undermines public discourse on possible development directions for Estonia," Madise found.

"For example, candidates in local elections should be allowed to receive public support from neighborhood and village associations, but also, for example, from animal welfare or forest conservation organizations," she explained. "Currently, it even appears to be prohibited for a civic organization to distribute leaflets ahead of elections that not only highlight an issue that is important to members of the organization, but also list candidates who have pledged to resolve it."

She noted that in a democratic society, there is nothing dangerous in preferring one candidate, electoral alliance or political party over another, or working together with them, based on ideological grounds; on the contrary, this is a natural part of the functioning of a healthy and free society.

According to the justice chancellor, the transparency of such cooperation must simply be guaranteed, while excluding the influence of hostile foreign countries.

"It must be publicly disclosed and verified who, when and with what one has supported the political activity of a party, electoral alliance or candidate," Madise noted.

"To ensure the transparency of election campaign expenses and their sources, it must be possible to determine how much has actually been paid to media outlets, social media platforms, etc., for advertising," she said. "This is the only way to assess the source of a payment and whether the goods or services received were paid for in full. Moreover, information about the origin of the contribution makes it possible to investigate whether a contributor received any prohibited quid pro quo from a politician."

--

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