Last week marked the tenth anniversary of the right to submit collective petitions to the Riigikogu. While the Estonian Constitution allows anyone to address public institutions with petitions, it was previously unclear how the Riigikogu should process them.

In 2014, legislative amendments stipulated that petitions submitted to the parliament with at least one thousand signatures must be discussed by the relevant Riigikogu committee. By 2016, the Estonian Cooperation Assembly had launched the rahvaalgatus.ee portal, enabling the collection of signatures in support in a convenient and secure online environment.

The promotion of the public initiative tool and the creation of e-participation tools have exploded over more than a decade. Distrust of democratic institutions and the resulting erosion of the legitimacy of representative democracy have led to worldwide attempts to enhance the existing political process with elements of participatory democracy, ensuring that the public, especially those not organized in political parties, have a clear political outlet even between elections.

Our neighbors, the Latvians, established a similar right and portal in 2011, and the Finns in 2012. While in Latvia and Finland, the instrument of collective petitions has had strong political leadership and administrative support, many representatives of power in Estonia still remain somewhat aloof. There is little encouragement for the public to engage more in the political process. The follow-up on the implementation of submitted proposals often vanishes within the corridors of some public institutions.

Over the years, the public initiative portal has acted as a litmus test for societal dynamics. Not everything reflected in the portal is pleasant. There are instances of ranting and populism, incompetence and manipulation, resembling more demonstrations than serious proposals. However, there are also genuine suggestions aimed at improving societal life, many of which have been realized in parliament or various government agencies. Undoubtedly, the topics raised in the public initiative portal indicate what currently matters to people or what does not.

The portal primarily serves the purpose of collecting ideas and expressing support for them. A dialogue between proposals, weighing arguments against each other and seeking compromises has not developed. Unfortunately, the political culture, increasingly built on polarization and confrontation, does not promote the cultivation of deliberative democracy. Even the initiators themselves sometimes find it difficult to understand that the right to submit a proposal does not mean that the parliament should approve exactly such a proposal.

Democratic governance is seeking its new path everywhere, regrettably retreating in many places. For years, democracy indices compiled by various independent think tanks have consistently shown that the number of democratic countries is rapidly decreasing and the majority of people in the world live in autocracies.

The most recent report, published just a month ago by the Bertelsmann Stiftung Transformation Index (BTI 2024), concludes that the most significant decline in democratic governance is the ability to strive for a balanced consensus, manage divisions and conflicts. Globally, no other aspect of governance has declined so significantly in quality over the past two decades.

Governments find political benefit in the deepening polarization of society, as it mobilizes their supporters. The content of politics, the leadership capabilities of politicians and even the general goals of society become secondary, with political activity reduced to adhering to special interests against their political opponents. Politics as a zero-sum game where there are only friends or enemies is a dangerous strategy, and restoring social unity becomes increasingly complex.

The fresh annual report by the Internal Security Service also warns about societal polarization, as division fuels discontent and disillusionment, creating fertile ground for manipulation, conspiracy theorists and spreaders of misinformation. Ultimately, both internal and external security suffer, not to mention general well-being.

The legalization of collective petitions was led by a presidential initiative, the Jääkelder (Ice Cellar) roundtable, followed by the People's Assembly process, aimed at solving problems, easing tensions, neutralizing public dissatisfaction and refreshing the political process without discarding the existing constitutional order.

Perhaps Estonia, facing significant challenges and needing to discuss value issues, requires more such initiatives that would somehow compel listening to different arguments and seeking compromises.

First published on ERR