Supreme Court rejects EKRE challenge to Madise presidential candidacy

Estonia’s Supreme Court has ruled that Chancellor of Justice Ülle Madise did not have to resign before running for president, rejecting a challenge filed by nine EKRE lawmakers, ERR reported Tuesday.

Seventy-five members of Parliament nominated Madise for the first round of the presidential election on August 24. The National Electoral Committee registered her as a candidate the following day. The first round is scheduled for September 2.

On August 27, nine members of EKRE’s parliamentary faction challenged the committee’s decision. They argued that Madise should have left her post because her candidacy conflicted with the separation and balance of powers and with the requirement that the Chancellor of Justice remain independent.

Independence principle protects the chancellor

The Supreme Court said that although the Presidential Election Act does not provide for challenging a candidate’s registration, the lawmakers had the right to appeal in this case.

The court said only candidates who meet constitutional and legal requirements and have been nominated in accordance with the law may be elected president. Any potential doubts or shortcomings should be resolved as quickly as possible, before voting takes place.

The court found that registering Madise as a presidential candidate did not violate the Constitution because the law does not require the Chancellor of Justice to resign when seeking the presidency. However, she must maintain her independence in her conduct and statements while campaigning. The court said it was not aware of any statements by Madise that conflicted with that requirement.

The Supreme Court added that under current law, the terms of people holding elected or appointed office end when they take office as president. If lawmakers want to impose additional candidacy restrictions on people in certain positions, including the Chancellor of Justice, those restrictions must be clearly set out in law.

According to the court, the constitutional principle of the Chancellor of Justice’s independence primarily means that lawmakers may not impose excessive restrictions on the officeholder or require the officeholder to perform duties incompatible with the role. The principle is intended to ensure that the Chancellor of Justice can effectively perform the substantive duties assigned by the Constitution and law.

Political statements must be avoided

The court said the president’s main role in Estonia is to unite society, ensure the stability of state power and balance constitutional institutions. Although the president is involved to some extent in policymaking through powers such as vetoing laws, making appointments and representing Estonia in foreign policy, this is not comparable to the clearly political role of Parliament or local councils.

Madise would not perform those presidential duties while serving as Chancellor of Justice. She would take them on only after being elected president and taking the oath of office.

However, the Supreme Court said Madise must avoid expressing political views during her candidacy that could damage the position of the Chancellor of Justice.