“In the act passed by the Riigikogu, § 1 (1) is legally ambiguous and therefore in contravention of § 13 (2) of the constitution,” President Karis explained.
Quoting from § 1 (1) of said act, “The publicly visible part of a building, as well as monuments, sculptures, memorials and other such structures on public display, must not incite hostility or support or justify an occupying regime or the committing of acts of aggression, genocide, crimes against humanity or war crimes.”
In his resolution, President Karis explains that according to the explanatory memorandum accompanying the act, the aim of the legislation is to outlaw and remove from public space such structures which offend society’s sense of justice or represent a threat to national security. “This is a legitimate aim, but the banned structures are defined in the act using an expression which cannot be unequivocally defined using ordinary methods of interpretation,” the head of state noted. “From the explanatory memorandum it appears that the term ‘banned structures’ primarily refers to those related to the actions of Soviet authorities. However, the ban itself is worded in much broader terms. In such a situation, the person or body implementing the act must make assumptions as to what precisely the act intends due to the deficiency of its wording.”
President Karis added that the principle of legal clarity requires acts to be clear and comprehensible enough so that everyone understands how the state will act and can modify their own actions accordingly. “Moreover, in order to avoid risk, a ban whose wording is unclear may lead to the removal of structures, or to structures not being erected in the first place, whose removal from public space is not the aim of the legislative authority,” he said.
Click here for the full text of President Karis’ resolution.
