Varro Vooglaid: Rahval peab olema õigus oma esindajad koju saata!

Summary

In this interview, Varro Vooglaid argues that Estonia’s democratic system is largely an illusion. Citizens can elect the Riigikogu every four years, he says, but have few ways to direct decisions or hold representatives accountable between elections. He argues that democracy should mean people exercise state power directly or through representatives who genuinely act in the public’s interests.

Vooglaid contrasts Estonia’s current constitution with the constitutions of 1920 and 1933, which he says gave citizens broader powers, including the ability to initiate referendums and propose legislation. He says the later constitution also allowed citizens to elect the head of state. In his account, most of these tools were removed, leaving citizens with little more than parliamentary elections.

Popular initiatives and referendums

Vooglaid emphasizes restoring the popular-initiative mechanism. As he describes it, citizens could gather a required number of signatures to propose a bill, which Parliament would have to consider. If Parliament rejected the proposal, it could go to a referendum; if voters supported it, the law would take effect. Voters could also reject a law passed by Parliament.

Under the historical arrangement he cites, either outcome would trigger new parliamentary elections within 75 days. Vooglaid argues that this would make representatives answerable to voters throughout their term, rather than only at election time.

Electoral system, voting, and media

Vooglaid criticizes Estonia’s electoral system. In his view, party rules restrict competition, individual candidates have little realistic chance of entering Parliament, and party lists can result in candidates with fewer votes winning seats over those with more.

He also questions internet voting, arguing that ordinary observers cannot independently verify that votes are secret and counted correctly. These are Vooglaid’s assessments, not independently established findings in the interview.

Vooglaid says media power helps sustain the appearance of democracy by shaping which political positions are treated as acceptable and influencing public opinion. He alleges that state and private media often reinforce official messaging. As an example of the resources devoted to state media, he cites ERR’s annual operating support of €41.5 million in 2026, arguing that its funding is unusually large compared with that of several constitutional institutions.

Prospects for reform and alternative models

Vooglaid sees little prospect of reform from within the political system because, he argues, the parties that would need to change the rules benefit from the existing arrangements. He also contends that power is constrained or exercised by unelected bureaucratic and supranational bodies, as well as by media and other influential networks. These claims are part of his broader critique of the system.

He says democracy is not the only possible form of government. He sketches a mixed model: democratic decision-making close to people’s everyday lives, authority in complex fields entrusted to competent officials, and a more centralized or monarchical element at the top. He suggests that most decisions—and potentially most public revenue—should remain local.

Vooglaid stresses that his central point is the need for honesty: if a state describes itself as democratic, it should operate according to democratic principles.

Proposed actions

Vooglaid urges citizens to think critically, stop repeating what he regards as false claims about the system, and publicly demand measures such as:

• Popular initiatives and referendums
• Direct presidential elections
• Verifiable elections

He presents his book, The Illusion of Democracy, as an attempt to prompt that debate.

Presenters and contributors

• Peeter — Host; surname not given in the subtitles
• Varro Vooglaid — Guest and author of The Illusion of Democracy