Proposed amendment would allow authorities to restrict media during wartime
Under current rules in Estonia, the right to restrict the media during a state of war rests with decisions made by the parliament. However, a bill currently under consideration would extend that authority to the Consumer Protection and Technical Regulatory Authority (TTJA), the Police and Border Guard Board (PPA), the Internal Security Service, and the Defense Forces.
The existing National Defense Act states that, during a state of war, measures restricting individuals' fundamental rights and freedoms may include bans — imposed by the government, the Prime Minister, or the minister responsible for internal security — on the dissemination of certain types of information via mass media if publication could endanger national military defense or otherwise threaten national security.
It also allows these authorities to suspend media services and the publication of journalistic outlets until the end of the state of war if there is reason to believe that the information they disseminate could endanger military defense or national security.
The new Crisis and National Defense Act bill provides that, during a state of emergency or war, the government — or, under its authorization, the TTJA, the Police and Border Guard Board, the Internal Security Service, and the Defense Forces — may partially or fully prohibit the provision of media services and the publication of journalistic outlets if necessary to resolve the emergency or wartime situation.
The draft law emphasizes that these agencies may impose such restrictions only to the extent necessary to address threats to public order, national security, or military defense.
Opposition MP Raimond Kaljulaid (Social Democratic Party), a member of the parliamentary National Defense Committee, said the bill appears reasonable to him.
Kaljulaid explained that although the authority to restrict media services would be extended to agencies, the final decision-making power would still remain with the government.
"Since crisis situations are led by the government and the Prime Minister, these decisions will not be made arbitrarily. They will be based on what is necessary to resolve the crisis. At the same time, it is clear that during war, not everything that happens can be broadcast in real time. It's obvious that military resistance cannot function like that," Kaljulaid said.
Erkki Tori, Director of Security and National Defense Coordination at the Government Office, told ERR that restrictions on media activity could only be considered after the Riigikogu declares a state of emergency or a state of war.
"These special regimes are subject to strict criteria: a state of emergency may be declared in the event of a serious threat to the constitutional order, while a state of war requires a situation where Estonia's independence, sovereignty, or territorial integrity is at risk," he said.
"Therefore, these measures can be applied only during a state of emergency or war, and for the protection of national security and the constitutional order. Every such decision must be based on a specific threat assessment and comply with general principles governing limitations of fundamental rights: the least harmful measure must be chosen, applied only to the extent necessary to achieve the objective, and only for as long as strictly required. Freedom of expression and of the press will still be respected during crises, and the purpose of restrictions cannot be to silence critical opinions or uncomfortable questions," Tori added.
He noted that the primary concern is information whose release could directly endanger people's safety or hinder defense or rescue operations — for example, images, videos, or other data revealing the movement or location of military units or vehicles, or details about critical infrastructure, its condition, or security measures.
According to Tori, the proposed amendments clarify who can impose such restrictions and how, during emergencies or wartime.
"While decision-making is currently mainly at the government level, once the law takes effect, authorized agencies with a central role in crisis management could also act quickly when necessary after a state of emergency or war has been declared. The bill deliberately limits this authority to four specific agencies," he said.
Tori added that the ability to implement restrictive measures is tied to crisis‑management roles and is planned in advance in both agency-level and national crisis plans. These plans determine which measures are delegated to government agencies and which remain solely within the government's authority.
"The draft also strengthens oversight and expands the powers of the Chancellor of Justice. Among other things, the Chancellor would review whether the declaration of a state of emergency or war complies with the constitution. Decisions restricting fundamental rights during a crisis would also fall under this supervision," Tori said.
"As with other restrictive measures, it is entirely necessary to discuss when and how such powers should be used. It is also important to consider what guidance, competencies, and tools should be provided to those responsible for implementing them," he added.
The new Crisis and National Defense Act bill has passed two readings in parliament. A third reading is scheduled for next Tuesday, when it is expected to be adopted.
--
Editor: Aleksander Krjukov, Argo Ideon
