Questions grow over secrecy of Datasel-related contracts

Estonian lawmakers disagree over whether information and documents linked to failed defence procurements, including a deal with Indian company Datasel, should be classified as state secrets, ERR reported. The State Defence Investment Centre (RKIK) was unable to comment on Tuesday on the extent or reasons for classifying documents related to the Datasel transaction.

Anastassia Kovalenko-Kõlvart, chair of the Riigikogu Anti-Corruption Select Committee, said the classification had not been sufficiently analysed.

“I get the impression that the state secret markings were added selectively and without analysis,” Kovalenko-Kõlvart said. She said it was understandable that information related to security or confidentiality restrictions could be classified, but questioned why sections analysing risks, proposals and decisions based on those proposals had also been covered.

In her view, classified information should remain protected while the rest of such documents should be made available to the public.

Last week, Kovalenko-Kõlvart commented on risks described in restricted documents concerning the decision to enter into the Datasel transaction. RKIK then reprimanded her for disclosing information covered by state secrecy. She said the centre had itself acknowledged that it had not sufficiently analysed which information should be classified.

“Director General Elmar Vaher has admitted that they did not have the opportunity to analyse what should and should not be covered,” Kovalenko-Kõlvart said. She added that this was not the first time an uncomfortable issue had emerged and documents had then suddenly been classified for 75 years. In her view, this was not a transparent or sound practice for oversight.

Peeter Tali, a Riigikogu member who has worked with state secrets for more than 20 years and who chairs the National Defence Committee, has also seen the documents. He said there was no reason to doubt officials’ competence in deciding how state secrets should be protected.

Under the law, Tali said, the author of a document decides its classification level and whether it should be designated for internal use. He said the classification of state secrets was strictly regulated by law and that it was difficult for him to believe an Estonian official had exceeded those limits or abused the law.

Tali added that a document’s classification could be removed for a valid reason if new circumstances emerged, but said no new circumstances had arisen in this case.

Attorney-at-law Karmen Turk said the law did not allow entire documents to be protected as state secrets, only specific information within them. She said information created by the state or public authorities was generally public, with access restrictions imposed in certain cases, such as to protect personal data or trade secrets. State secrecy, however, applies to information whose disclosure could harm Estonia’s security or foreign relations, and any classification must meet the criteria set by law.