| |
 | Speeches | | |
President of the Republic at the Tenth Anniversary of the Constitution, 28 June 200228.06.2002
Excellencies!
Ladies and Gentlemen!
Today ten years ago the people of Estonia adopted the Constitution by a referendum. This was a legal framework for the social agreement to restore independent statehood. The ten years have been a period long enough to evaluate objectively the significance of the Constitution in the society, its capability to protect democratic values and to secure sustainable democratic development of Estonia in the changing world.
The Constitution is not only a legal fundamental act but in its broader sense also a cultural landmark. It reflects the diversity of material and intellectual culture passed from generation to generation as well as permanent forms of human relations and thought, socially cognised and adopted.
Such an attitude roots itself in the approach of statesman and recognised law professor Jüri Uluots in the National Assembly, where the 1938 Constitution was put together. Uluots said that it was only partly correct to see the beginning of the Constitution in the decree of Provisional Land Council on 28 November 1917 declaring that the supreme power in Estonia was vested in Land Council. According to Uluots we should look for the roots of our Constitution in the cultural heritage based on historic experience.
In 1930ies it was a novel approach to associate Constitution with culture. Today there are few of those not recognising facets of culture in the Constitution. Culture is older than legal issues. Therefore culture has been the nursery for developing and furnishing legal principles. The more viable the people and the richer its culture, the stronger are links between popular traditions and legal order.
Due to its geographical position Estonia has been in the draughts of East and West and in the zone of interest of larger countries. Despite threats we have defied Providence and according to Oskar Loorits we can be proud of belonging into the family of the oldest civilised nations in the world. Our historic mission is to prove that the existence of the mankind does not depend on the heroism of the few but rather on culture, created by the people and incessantly carried from generation to generation.
Evaluating the cultural heritage of our forefathers and attempting to exhaust cognitive support for daily issues we should single out evolutionary development and democratic way of life. Scarce natural resources and relatively low-density settlement made tribes and kinsmen co-operate with each other. We can only guess that agreements and joint decision-making were part of the ancient way of life.
A parish as an organisation was based on an agreement between its members (villages, rural communities, municipalities) and oath and vows made. Contractual relations existed also between rural communities and counties. The agreement excluded subordination between local government units, as the parties to the agreement were equal as subjects. Kärajad, which took place in Raikküla, former Harju County serves as an excellent example. Most probably kärajad was an oral agreement, sealed by mutual vows; such self-government was like a kind of fraternity.
Drawing parallels between the development of independent statehood in ancient Switzerland and ancient Estonia, professor Uluots admitted: "Old-Estonia undertook the path of political development of free nations quite early, centuries before Switzerland. For doing this, it had to be a politically talented people".
All four Constitutions of independent Estonia have reflected evolutionary cognition of life as a generally recognised value. This is conveyed in emphasising the continuity of the goals and functions of the state.
The Preamble of the Constitution emphasises the wish of the people of Estonia with unwavering faith and steadfast will to strengthen and develop the state, which shall protect internal and external peace. The state is a pledge to present and future generations for their social progress and welfare. The state shall guarantee the preservation of the Estonian nation and culture through the ages.
The continuity of the evolutionary development lies in the spirit of the Constitution, which has given birth to many values of our people. Cognitive values evolved, verified and crystallised during thousands of years of practice are in their abstract form in the Preamble and General Provisions of the Constitution and in a more specific form in other chapters of the Constitution. Their laconic and compact wording is highly generalising, both joining and executing oversight on the remaining provisions of the Constitution. Our task is to skilfully use this heritage.
Ladies and Gentlemen!
Allow me to say a few words about the treatment of the role of local governments in the Constitution.
This Constitution has not been able to find an ultimate solution to the problems of local governments. The rights and obligations of the local governments are one of the key issues in implementing democratic power. Quite recently there was talk about mandatory merger of local governments. We have to admit that the contractual base of the relations between the state and the local government and the local governments themselves still lacks adequate legal substance. Often local government units are treated as links of the executive power to implement annoying duties of the central power imposed by law but without proper budgetary allocations.
After the restoration of Estonia's independence long discussions about the levels of the local government have take place but no convincing reasons have been given why a small unitary state has a two level public administration system and an one-level local government. Traditionally we should have a two-level local government. This would also be expedient. Decentralised state power is a principle followed in local government organisation in Europe as well.
On one hand, fifty years away from West-European developments and on the other hand, a wish to get rid of the occupation heritage have made us hurry up to make up for the lost time. Inability or lack of will to analyse and evaluate the real situation and to warrant the reform agenda has retarded administrative policy development. Responsibility has dispersed. Such a situation indicates inadequate regulation of responsibility in our legal order.
Contemporaneously we have to admit that more than ten years of independent statehood have made us strong enough to complete the transition. It is time to treat the society as a system developing pursuant to principles of regulated state-of-art independent statehood. This system is seen in long-term, interrelated and balanced development schemes for different fields, substantiated by a social agreement.
Rapidly developing life keeps setting new tasks. We have been preparing for years our accession to the European Union and NATO. Today we face a question how to amend or improve the Constitution in order to secure our independence and allow accession to the European structures. The situation is even more complicating as vis-à-vis the upcoming enlargement the European Union itself is also drafting significant changes.
As future models of the European Union a union of states, also a federal state or a confederation with its own Constitution have been put forward. Considering such diversified opinions, the convention on the future of the European Union should agree upon an EU concept that complies with European principles and requirements of the twenty first century. First and foremost it should be established whether the Europeans expect rather a more homogeneous Europe, moved forward by harmonisation dynamics or would they prefer a Europe, which maintains its diversity and treasures historic and cultural identities. Naturally these two objectives determine different steps in shaping the European Union and regulating its Member States' relations.
74 members of the Riigikogu have motioned to hold a referendum on the draft Constitution of the Republic of Estonia Amendment Act. The draft embodies two important ideas. Firstly, the people would give an explicit mandate for Estonia to accede to the European Union. Secondly - to get an assent to apply upon the EU membership the Constitution of the Republic of Estonia, considering the rights and obligations arising from the Accession Agreement.
We should recognise the laconic and logic approach whereas several substantial and procedural issues remain unsolved. Primarily the timing of the referendum. It cannot take place before the European Union has determined its future as otherwise the people would not know what kind of development path the European Union has chosen and what kind of relations it will have with its Member States. Without reliable information the affirmative vote would mean an empty promise that the people in whom the supreme power of state is vested cannot afford. The changes that the accession would involve have not been analysed domestically.
We should also analyse how an amendment to the Constitution as a separate act would influence the interpretation of the Constitution. Such an analysis could answer the question whether to prefer a single text or a separate act. Homework in the harmonisation of legislation should be completed and we should refocus attention to increasing public awareness.
However, we should not remain outside the EU self-determination process. We have our representatives in the convention that can deliver our requests and proposals to Europe. Thereby we should not forget that our Constitution proceeds from the preservation of the Estonian nation and culture through the ages. We have to use all opportunities to support such a trend in the EU, which would respect historic and cultural identity of its Member States.
A major amendment of our Constitution will probably be postponed until we have first experience from the European Union and NATO. Specification of the competency of constitutional institutions, separation and balance of powers, direct elections of the President of the Republic, implementation of participatory democracy and other urgent issues should be solved more rapidly.
Ladies and Gentlemen!
Revisiting briefly the Constitution as a cultural landmark containing historic experience of the people and its association with the societal development allows confirming the following.
Looking for the intellectual setting of the Constitution in our forefathers' cultural heritage, we discover lasting values of the democratic way of life that is also in the Constitution of 1992. The permanent values are linked with modern constitutional law and legal practice, which have helped the Constitution to serve us for ten years unchanged.
We do not know how close to statehood the ancient Estonians were in the early thirteenth century. Our folk heritage has preserved the democratic way of life our ancestors have respected and followed. Centuries of foreign yoke on our territory have not erased but rather verified these convictions. This was the way to the national awakening and independent statehood.
22 years of independence have given our people such stock of democracy that even Soviet occupation could not destroy it. This stock helped the former Supreme Soviet and Estonian Congress to conclude a national pact to establish Constitutional Assembly. Already pre-constitutional acts passed in 1988 provided a historic-legal evaluation of the events of 1940ies in Estonia. Foreign policy and military actions taken by the Stalinist leaders of the Soviet Union against the Republic of Estonia were qualified as aggression, military occupation and annexation of the Republic of Estonia.
As early as before the adoption of the valid Constitution there were attempts to undo the injustice caused by the foreign occupation and repression was declared unlawful and an act against humanity, all innocently suffered persons were rehabilitated. Our responsibility is to recall grim historic sufferings and in this context to assess the statement made by the Riigikogu on the crimes of the Soviet communist regime in Estonia.
All the Estonian constitutions have provided the permanent values of the development and democratic way of life of the Estonian people. Separation and balance of powers are the crucial principles. The motion to amend the Constitution with the institution of the president directly elected by the people has not been linked sufficiently with the competence of other constitutional institutions. The balance of powers can lie on precisely defined competence of the constitutional institutions, independence in implementing the competence and mutual legally balanced relations.
Defining our future and giving legal substance to the organisation of state power the right of public initiative should be better valued and more precisely legally regulated as well as have a clearer output. If we would like to have a human-being-focused state organisation, the concept of people vested with the supreme power of state should have a real and legally defined substance. It is difficult but not impossible to combine strong EU membership with preservation of national identity. The unity of our nation in crucial moments of the history is a guarantee that we will be able to find our place in open Europe.
The people of Estonia have not made mistakes in the decisions made in the past. Let us believe in the people in setting our goals for the future as well.
In conclusions I would like to express our gratitude and acknowledge each one and everybody participating in drafting the Constitution, including foreign experts.
|
| |
|
vpk.ee
