eesti keeles

Press Releases
Open in print mode

The President of the Republic did not promulgate the Act on the Repeal of § 7 (3) of the Republic of Estonia Principles of Ownership Reform Act
20.09.2006


The President of the Republic today at Kadriorg signed a resolution not to promulgate, pursuant to § 107 of the Constitution of the Republic of Estonia, the Act on the Repeal of § 7 (3) of the Republic of Estonia Principles of Ownership Reform Act, passed by the Riigikogu on September 14, 2006.

When making the said decision, President Rüütel noted that the Act passed by the Riigikogu did not conform to the constitutional principle of legal clarity and legal security. “In order that the local committees on the restitution and compensation of property set up at local governments could implement the will of legislators, it is necessary that the Government would establish necessary norms. The amendment to the Act does not delegate the executive power to fulfil that task. It is also necessary that prior to the adoption of the Act a thorough analysis would be carried out to find out what kind of financial obligations it would bring about to the state and local governments.

The Republic of Estonia Principles of Ownership Reform Act articulates a very clear principle that the ownership reform must not cause new injustices. In 2002 the Supreme Court resolved that § 7 (3) of the above-mentioned Act was unconstitutional, and in 2006 declared it invalid, and considered it necessary that the Riigikogu would draft a new appropriate legal regulation to resolve practical issues concerning the property that had belonged to the resettlers. The amendment to the Act in its present form does not solve the problem but creates new tension. It cannot preclude conflicts between commercial interests and interests of hundreds of households. Already while being a member of the Riigikogu I was of the opinion that amendments to the principles of ownership reform act must not leave neither owners nor tenants without state protection, but the above amendment will just create legally unbalanced situation,” President Rüütel said.

The following is an extract from the decision made by the President of the Republic:

“I shall not promulgate the Act on the Repeal of § 7 (3) of the Republic of Estonia Principles of Ownership Reform Act, passed by the Riigikogu on September 14, 2006.”

The Supreme Court en banc ruled by its judgement of October 28, 2002 (RT III 2002, 28, 308) the above provision of the Republic of Estonia Principles of Ownership Reform Act to be in conflict with Articles 13(2) and 14 of the Constitution in their conjunction, and obliged the legislators to bring that provision into conformity with the principle of legal clarity.

According to the judgement of the Supreme Court en blanc the general right to organisation and procedure, established by Article 14 of the Constitution, obligates the executive and legislative powers to achieve a political agreement and to give a clear message to the persons who resettled, whose property was expropriated, and to their successors, as well as to the lessees using the property, concerning the return or non-return of the property.

In its judgement of April 12, 2006 (RT III 2006, 13, 123) the Supreme Court en blanc reached the same conclusion for the second time resolving that there was no reason to change its judgement concerning unconstitutionality of § 7(3) of the Republic of Estonia Principles of Ownership Reform Act and declared it invalid. This part of the resolution shall enter in force on 12 October 2006 on the condition that an Act amending or invalidating § 7(3) of Republic of Estonia Principles of Ownership Reform Act has not entered into force.

In the same judgement the Supreme Court points out that the decision taken concerning the property that had been in the ownership of resettlers shall be a basis for drafting further legal acts necessary for the resolution of practical issues.

The Act on the Repeal of § 7 (3) of the Republic of Estonia Principles of Ownership Reform Act, passed by the Riigikogu on September 14, 2006 does not provide such basis. Neither does the passed Act allow delegating to the Government of the Republic authority to lay down necessary rules for implementation in a situation where legal acts that are still in force cannot be implemented.

I find that such regulation is in conflict with the principle of legal clarity and everyone’s right to the protection of the state established in § 10 and § 13 of the Constitution.

The Act on the Repeal of § 7 (3) of the Republic of Estonia Principles of Ownership Reform Act, passed by the Riigikogu, does not create sufficient legal basis for resolving specific situations arising from restitution or compensation of property. Pursuant to § 17(5) of the Republic of Estonia Principles of Ownership Reform Act a person who is an entitled subject of ownership reform is not entitled to claim return of unlawfully expropriated property or claim compensation for the portion of property which has already been returned or compensated for, except if it is established that the property has been returned to an unauthorised person or unauthorised person has been compensated for the property without legal basis.
In his resolution the President of the Republic noted that he considered it necessary that the Riigikogu would resume deliberations on the Act on the Repeal of § 7 (3) of the Republic of Estonia Principles of Ownership Reform Act and make a new decision when the Act has been brought into conformity with the Constitution of the Republic of Estonia.

The full text of the President of the Republic’s resolution is available at www.president.ee.


Public Relations Department of the Office of the President
Kadriorg, September 20, 2006


© 2006 Office of the President l tel: + 372 631 6202 l fax: + 372 631 6250 l sekretarvpk.ee