Kaljulaid, a former president of Estonia, conceded in hindsight she had not been as present on the ground at all times as might have been hoped. The motion of no-confidence passed with 61 votes in favor and 50 against, with three spoiled ballots, at a special EOK general assembly held Monday afternoon.

Did you cease to be EOK president the very moment the votes were counted?

Yes, that's exactly how it was. The executive committee, which also decided — at least so far as I understand it — to step down, had to make that decision. I didn't have to make that decision. So I put my door entry card on the table and went off to do other work. Fortunately, I had a longer meeting scheduled, so I went to that.

If I compare the mood during the day, when speeches were held and questions answered, to seeing you here now, there's quite a broad smile on your face [now]. Has it come as a relief that things turned out this way?

No, no. I was focused, because I didn't know the questions in advance and couldn't prepare a speech since I spoke second. I just concentrated on the issues. Now that tension of having to answer questions from the sports community is no longer there. Of course, I would very much like to thank all those people who supported me — those 50. And also the EOK team, and wish them success. The things we accomplished together will stay. It's a good place to move forward from. In a way, it feels like [former prime minister] Mart Laar in 1994: They removed him, yes, but let's be honest — important things had already changed, irreversibly.

What are those things that have changed? Your opponents have also pointed out that financial matters are not transparent—unclear, hard to understand. Your counterargument is that everything has been broken down in detail and cannot be made any more transparent.

Today, even the ordinary citizen, not just board members, should be able to see on the EOK website an overview of where the money is spent. This should start updating monthly. It is true that previously financial management at the EOK was not transparent. Whether money was just a pretext for a vote of no confidence, or — as many have said — a serious conflict of values, is another matter. What triggered the explosion was the single medal from the [Winter] Olympic Games.

That certainly wasn't the only conflict of values. We also have disagreements related to sports safety. Without a doubt, we had value conflicts, but I think it might be better to ask those who expressed no confidence what their real reasons were. They spoke about them today. I can't explain them better than they can.

Nevertheless, what is this other side of values? What do those 61 people think differently, demand, or expect?

I don't know — we heard that out today. I understand you also got the chance to hear it. Three media outlets broadcast it. People are free to draw their own conclusions. I wouldn't want to sum up their positions for them.

What conclusions have you drawn for yourself?

One is that we had rather complicated issues with financial management. If we wanted [biathlete] Johanna Talihärm to become a member of the IOC, so that an Estonian would be represented there, our visibility in the Olympic movement needed to increase significantly. Supporting Johanna on that path also required a fair amount of work on my part — being visible, attending events like the European Sports Evening, speaking alongside the presidents of the Belgian and French Olympic committees. I didn't have enough time to be physically present as much as needed. You could say I managed things, but wasn't a leader. That was definitely an issue. I also underestimated my own ceremonial value. It seemed to me that if I had Vice President Tiit Pekk, whose role was to support county sports associations and attend their conferences, then the job was done. But I underestimated my own value as a figurehead. Those were certainly issues we had.

But coming back to the Sildaru case and the Olympic Games: What is the core divergence in how you and your opponents understand this issue? Reading comments, statements, and articles, there seem to be people who don't understand why not everyone can feel the same joy, then on the other hand, people asking how anyone can feel joy at all.

I don't have any tools to resolve that contradiction. It is exactly as you outlined.

Is it possible to draw any conclusions or make decisions going forward on this matter?

We have EADSE [the Estonian Anti-Doping and Sports Ethics Foundation], whose main task is sports safety. We've now realized that we need to move this foundation a bit further away from the general EOK system so that it feels fully free and independent to operate. These changes are definitely planned — especially regarding doping, but also in other areas.

Will the plans your team initiated, implemented, and financially carried out fade away, now that a new leader with their own plans or ambitions is to take over?

If we had continued in 2024 as we did before, by the end of the year we would have had an overspend of over €700,000. What actually happened was just over €300,000. A financial catastrophe has clearly been avoided, and that gives breathing room to the new leadership as well. This has involved cuts that did not directly affect sports funding. Funding for elite sports has actually increased, by 9 percent. That has been done. Proper financial management is, in my view, the foundation. You can't find sponsors if it's unclear where the money comes from and where it goes. The financial audit was clean before as well — every expense was backed by invoices. But accounting lacked a connection to the budget. In practice, neither the board nor the executive committee had ongoing control. There was no way to do so. This isn't a reproach — it's a technical issue related to management accounting. That has now been resolved.

You chose not to publicly dissect this earlier to avoid reputational damage to the Olympic Committee. Could there still be accusations, blame, or even a criminal investigation coming out of it?

I don't think so. We have gone through this issue, documented the situation in the audit committee, and made a joint decision that the EOK has nothing to gain from pursuing it further. So we decided not to. We didn't have problems with the financial audit; the issues were about compliance.

So who will be the new president of the Estonian Olympic Committee? We saw [former Olympic decathlete] Erki Nool on the podium today. He has been recommended by [former Olympic cyclist] Erika Salumäe.

I assume those who expressed no confidence have a plan. I don't know what it is. I haven't been running a campaign behind the scenes. The campaign was two years ago. What I have done is visible in my work results. Unfortunately, I am not a politician. I haven't managed to maneuver my way out of this, nor to throw the secretary general or vice president under the bus. None of that has happened. But at least no one can accuse me of scheming in the back corridors. I think the other side has to speak for itself.

What are you going to do now?

I have quite a few other things I'm involved in. I'd like to keep back some free time for myself too.

--

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