"The main focus of this bill is preventing domestic violence. It seems to me that the section on restricting presence in public spaces has been added artificially. To make things clearer, simpler and faster to process — with fewer questions arising — I would have drafted two separate bills," Madis Timpson (Reform Party), chair of the Riigikogu Legal Affairs Committee, told ERR.

According to Timpson, it's clear that the topic of banning public assemblies will inevitably spark broader public debate than the fight against domestic violence, which risks being overshadowed by the larger controversy.

"That's definitely the impression I get. I remember when the Law Enforcement Act was being drafted 15 years ago — I was working at the Ministry of Justice at the time. The debates about freedom of assembly were quite intense, both within the ministry and in the Riigikogu. We shouldn't underestimate the importance of protecting people's fundamental rights at public gatherings," Timpson said.

"Let's be honest — I don't think anyone opposes stronger measures against domestic violence. Whether the time limit is set at 72 hours or not, that's a matter of detail. But restricting presence at public events will certainly provoke discussion. I'm not even sure the proposed regulation is worded precisely enough. If we want to move faster with things, I'd say two separate drafts would make sense," he added.

Timpson did not say whether he would support the bill in its current form. "It's only just gone out for inter-ministerial review, so I don't know what other ministries will say. But if it dealt solely with domestic violence, I'd support it immediately. The other part probably needs more discussion — why it's necessary and how it would actually improve life in the Republic of Estonia. There's no simple answer," he said.

Timpson rejected the suggestion that easing the application of presence restrictions could endanger freedom of speech. However, he stressed that the issue must still be treated with full seriousness.

He also agreed that the current draft gives the impression that the ministry wants to make it easier to impose presence restrictions — effectively expanding police powers — under the guise of improving the fight against domestic violence.

"When I read the draft, the explanatory note focused overwhelmingly on domestic violence. And yes, it really does feel like the presence restriction issue has been tacked on — like a little Brezhnev-era package deal. That's my first impression," Timpson said.

A draft amendment to the Law Enforcement Act, authored by the Ministry of the Interior, would lower the threat threshold for the Police and Border Guard Board (PPA) to impose a public gathering ban. According to the explanatory memo, its main aim is to protect domestic violence victims by adjusting the risk level for a presence ban and introducing a "significant threat" category for preemptive action. However, the latter could also be applied to large gatherings if there's reason to believe a public order breach could occur, even without a heightened threat.

--

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