Document #2035820
Freedom House (Author)
Democracy Percentage | 84.52 / 100 |
Democracy Score | 6.07 / 7 |
By Liisa Talving
Estonia’s fundamental democratic institutions continued to work well in 2019. The governmental system is predominantly stable, electoral processes function efficiently, the media are largely free from political and corporate influences, and the rule of law is applied effectively. Large legislative initiatives, such as pension reform, were put forward during the year yet faced obstacles from governing coalition members as well as from the opposition. This conflict was emblematic of a reorientation of political power that bent—but did not break—Estonia’s strong institutions of national democratic governance and the judicial framework. The shift of political power was met with strong counter-reactions in other areas, such as civil society. Additionally, corruption continued to be a subject of concern in the country, in both the public and private sectors.
The most consequential political development in 2019 was the inclusion of the populist, far-right Conservative People’s Party of Estonia (EKRE) in the coalition government in March after the Estonian Reform Party, the winner of the general elections, failed to form a government. EKRE more than doubled its vote share compared to the previous general elections in 2015 (from 8.1 to 17.8 percent). While the party’s populist agenda is poorly represented in the coalition agreement—with assurances voiced by the two mainstream coalition partners that EKRE’s tendentious ideas would not be put into practice—its political rhetoric is heavily conservative, inward-looking, and nationalist, undercutting Estonia’s progressive and liberal reputation. The year witnessed a variety of scandals associated with EKRE, and the party’s leading figures frequently issued racist, sexist, and homophobic statements. EKRE verbally attacked the media, demanding that liberal journalists step down, and the junior partner attempted to undermine the independence of democratic institutions by seeking to dismiss public officials the party disliked.
While most of these endeavors proved fruitless, they did, however, help EKRE stay in the spotlight and consolidate its support, causing rifts within the government and sparking serious concerns both at home and abroad over democracy and rule of law in Estonia. Throughout the year, Prime Minister Jüri Ratas was forced to constantly apologize for EKRE’s actions and words, while being widely perceived as unable to control or discipline the junior partner. With the prime minister’s position depending on EKRE’s remaining in the coalition, the party exercised considerable leverage in the government. Despite an array of scandals, and with Estonian politics becoming significantly more polarized in 2019, the governing coalition managed to remain mostly homogenous in parliamentary voting. The party system remains institutionalized and stable, and there is no reason to expect a significant increase in electoral volatility in the near term.
Protests against EKRE, its radical views, and its status as government partner came in many forms during the year. The shaky start to the governing coalition’s electoral term led the opposition to put forward a vote of no confidence against the prime minister in August, which failed from insufficient support. Most prominently, President Kersti Kaljulaid was openly critical of EKRE and its controversial statements. Kaljulaid wore a sweater emblazoned with “Speech is Free” to the swearing-in of the new government to express her support for press freedom, and walked out of the oath-of-office ceremony for an EKRE politician who faced domestic violence allegations. In an interview with Foreign Policy, the head of state, who in Estonia has little executive power, said she “hates” EKRE for its behavior and apologized for the image of Estonia the party might give to the world.1 Public dissatisfaction was also expressed in the form of grassroots activism, from weekly demonstrations outside the government office to the launch of a social media movement, “Kõigi Eesti” (“My Estonia Too”), which quickly gained nearly 30,000 followers on Facebook and brought together 10,000 people for a concert promoting democratic values and freedoms on the historical Song Festival grounds.
In 2019, Estonia continued to recover from the reputational damage caused by massive money laundering in Estonian branches of Danske Bank and Swedbank that came to light in 2018. The investigations are still underway but have already led to Danske ceasing its operations in Estonia and Swedbank firing several top executives at its Tallinn branch. In the meantime, suspicions over money laundering emerged around SEB, another Nordic bank in Estonia. Corruption also continues to be an issue in the political sphere. In the largest political corruption trial of recent years, the Estonian Center Party was found guilty of using hidden financing schemes and received a large monetary punishment, a serious blow to a political party already under severe financial pressure. While former Center leader Edgar Savisaar was released from the trial in 2018 due to poor health, hearings continued for the party codefendants.
The governing coalition is likely to remain in office, although it will face challenges in pushing through controversial legislative proposals, such as the pension and pharmacy reforms. Societal debates will carry on in the fields of immigration, the environment, and social affairs. The current political culture seeks polarization and antagonism, rather than broad-based consensus, potentially reducing the quality of government decisions. The country’s largest political parties will face continued financial troubles, and tight monitoring of party finances will be required to prevent corruption. Media ownership remains concentrated and lobbying is unregulated, casting doubts on media transparency. At the same time, the quality of democracy in Estonia remains high, and ongoing political rifts are unlikely to drastically alter the fundamental structure of the country’s democratic governance.
Considers the democratic character of the governmental system; and the independence, effectiveness, and accountability of the legislative and executive branches. | 6.00 / 7.00 |
Examines national executive and legislative elections, the electoral framework, the functioning of multiparty systems, and popular participation in the political process. | 6.50 / 7.00 |
Assesses the organizational capacity and financial sustainability of the civic sector; the legal and political environment in which it operates; the functioning of trade unions; interest group participation in the policy process; and the threat posed by antidemocratic extremist groups. | 6.25 / 7.00 |
Examines the current state of press freedom, including libel laws, harassment of journalists, and editorial independence; the operation of a financially viable and independent private press; and the functioning of the public media. | 6.25 / 7.00 |
Considers the decentralization of power; the responsibilities, election, and capacity of local governmental bodies; and the transparency and accountability of local authorities. | 5.75 / 7.00 |
Assesses constitutional and human rights protections, judicial independence, the status of ethnic minority rights, guarantees of equality before the law, treatment of suspects and prisoners, and compliance with judicial decisions. | 6.50 / 7.00 |
Looks at public perceptions of corruption, the business interests of top policymakers, laws on financial disclosure and conflict of interest, and the efficacy of anticorruption initiatives. | 5.25 / 7.00 |
Author: Liisa Talving, PhD, is a Research Fellow in Comparative Politics at the Johan Skytte Institute of Political Studies, University of Tartu, Estonia. Her areas of research include electoral studies, voting behavior, and public opinion.
The ratings reflect the consensus of Freedom House, its academic advisers, and the author(s) of this report. The opinions expressed in this report are those of the author(s). The ratings are based on a scale of 1 to 7, with 7 representing the highest level of democratic progress and 1 the lowest. The Democracy Score is an average of ratings for the categories tracked in a given year. The Democracy Percentage, introduced in 2020, is a translation of the Democracy Score to the 0–100 scale, where 0 equals least democratic and 100 equals most democratic.
“Prime minister calls for Mart Järvik dismissal“ ERR News, 25 November 2019, https://news.err.ee/1006724/prime-minister-calls-for-mart-jarvik-dismis… ; “IT and foreign trade minister Kert Kingo submits resignation“ ERR News, October 23, 2019, https://news.err.ee/995118/it-and-foreign-trade-minister-kert-kingo-sub…