The case involved former Police and Border Guard Board (PPA) director general Elmar Vaher and senior officials Eerik Heldna and Aivar Alavere, centering on Heldna's police pension.

Prosecutors alleged that Heldna, aided by Vaher and Alavere, submitted false information to the Social Insurance Board (SKA) establishing police service dating back to April 2019. At the time, Heldna was formally a police officer, but working in the Estonian Defense Forces (EDF) and later at the Estonian Tax and Customs Board (MTA).

A longtime police and Internal Security Service officer with more than 20 years of service, Heldna moved in 2018 to a senior post at the EDF Military Intelligence Center. To qualify for Estonia's special police pension, he needed to be serving in the police as of the end of 2019, as well as accrue a couple more years of qualifying service to apply for the pension before age 50.

In early 2019, Heldna was taken into police service under an arrangement with then-PPA chief Elmar Vaher and Central Criminal Police chief Aivar Alavere. He was then immediately placed on rotation back to the EDF, and a year later transferred to the MTA, where he headed the Customs Department.

Heldna applied for a police pension in May 2022.

The Supreme Court declined to rule on whether Heldna's appointment to police service was fully lawful but found no criminal conduct. It said the PPA made no error grave enough to turn applying for a pension based on service accrued since 2019 into a crime.

Estonia's top court agreed with the lower-tier courts that the law does not prohibit police officers from being translated or placed on rotation to other institutions starting from their first day of service.

Legal, but ethically questionable

During his assignments, Heldna also held posts in which qualifying police service continued to accrue. As a result, the court said, Heldna provided legitimate service to the state in return for the pension.

The ruling said earning a police pension largely guided Heldna's career choices at the time, noting that if Vaher and Alaver hadn't agreed to the rotation, Heldna likely would have taken a police post instead.

It also rejected claims of harm to the state, finding no reason to view Heldna's senior roles in the EDF and MTA as less valuable than a routine police assignment.

Estonia's top court further held that Heldna lacked criminal intent, as he believed the service data submitted to the Social Insurance Board (SKA) was lawful and knew at the time of his pension application already that the Internal Security Service suspected a possible crime.

If he had believed the information was false, the court said, he likely would not have applied for the pension.

While finding no crime, the Supreme Court did raise ethical concerns about Vaher's conduct.

The court said Vaher's role in appointing Heldna and arranging his secondments was not clearly ethical or transparent, giving a personal acquaintance an opportunity to qualify for a police pension not available to all former officers in similar circumstances.

That, the court said, may amount to unequal treatment.

The ruling also highlighted inconsistencies in police pension law, noting that some former officers are denied pensions on formal grounds despite contributions equal to or greater than those who qualified.

Vaher defends hiring decision, rejects ethics question

Responding to the Supreme Court's ethical criticism of his actions as former PPA chief, Vaher said he hired Heldna based solely on his professional qualifications, not personal ties. He argued that Friday's Supreme Court ruling confirms his decisions were justified.

"I know what I did in 2019 and why I did it," he told ERR, adding that recruiting experienced intelligence and security officials back into police service was "the right and necessary" thing to do for both the state and the PPA.

Vaher said he doesn't understand why a criminal case was even brought against him.

"I'm still wanted by Russia's Interior Ministry, and I understand very well why the Russian state still wants me and has me under criminal investigation," the ex-police chief said. "But in all these two and a half years I haven't understood — nor will I ever understand — why the Republic of Estonia has done so at every level of the courts."

He said then-prosecutor general Andres Parmas and former Internal Security Service director general Arnold Sinisalu would have to be asked why.

Vaher emphasized that the first-tier district court had already addressed the ethical question involved in the case and concluded that the decision fell within the director general's authority. He said the broader recruitment effort initially focused on intelligence officials and that Heldna was hired later, nearly a year afterward.

He also highlighted Heldna's unique credentials, citing his leadership roles in the Central Criminal Police, narcotics enforcement and the Internal Security Service.

"I didn't [hire] Eerik Heldna as a friend or former colleague," Vaher said. "It was purely about his qualifications."

Ex-ISS chief: Investigation was our duty

Arnold Sinisalu, who was director general of the Internal Security Service (ISS) during the investigation, noted that the Supreme Court's ruling brought finality to the case.

"We all have to accept the court's decision," he told ERR.

Sinisalu described the judicial process of determining the truth as complex, "not like math, where 2 + 2 is always 4."

He dismissed claims that the case was driven by personal ties, saying the defense strategy was predictable, and as a result, the launch of the investigation and the filing of the respective notice went through the Prosecutor's Office as expected.

"The ISS could have launched the investigation right away," Sinisalu noted, adding that the agency deliberately avoided going that route to maintain objectivity. "The Prosecutor's Office served as a filter, reviewing the case thoroughly given its sensitive nature."

The ex-chief added that he never saw or heard of any ISS staff happy about the investigation.

"What's more, launching a criminal investigation against colleagues is an extremely unpleasant duty," Siisalu said. "I've seen both as an observer and as director how painful it is for the agency as a whole when one of 'our own' turns out to be a traitor."

He said much of ISS' work in 2022–2023 focused on pre-investigative activity to avoid a full criminal investigation.

"Whether anything could have been done differently, or better, is 20/20 hindsight and inappropriate speculation," Sinisalu said.

"I regret that we had to carry out this investigation," he acknowledged. "But the investigation was the ISS' duty, not a privilege."

--

Follow ERR News on Facebook and X and never miss an update!