Key issues
- The capacity of courts to deal with increased workloads has diminished.
- The assessment of courts’ reliability is still high but it has decreased in comparison to the previous reporting period.
- Cuts in court budgets have a negative effect on both the effectiveness of judicial proceedings as well as their quality.
Political and institutional developments
In the period of 2024-2025, the government has changed twice and in relation to it, two new coalition agreements have been signed between the government parties. On 22 July 2024 the Estonian Reform Party, the Social Democratic Party and the Party Eesti 200 signed the “Coalition Agreement 2024–2027“[1] and on 24 May 2025 the Reform Party and Eesti 200 confirmed the “Coalition agreement 2025–2027”.[2]
The 2024 coalition agreement did not contain any important initiatives regarding court trials and it was only mentioned that the digitalisation of court proceedings will be continued and opportunities for expediting court proceedings with the help of artificial intelligence need to be explored.
The 2025 coalition agreement lists various specific legal and practical measures for making the administration of justice more efficient (chapter 27, pages 184–197). The most important of these are (i) measures directed towards reducing the courts’ workload and digitalising proceedings, (ii) the plan to increase the independence of courts by equating the administration and development of courts with constitutional institutions, and (iii) enhancing the administration of courts by consolidation.
On both a political and public level, but also, of course, in courts and in the judicial system as a whole, in 2024 and 2025 the budget cuts for courts received a lot of attention. In the fall of 2024 the Ministry of Justice gave the courts an assignment to reduce costs in the 2025 budget by about 2 million euros and in the period of 2025–2027, it was planned that courts’ budgets would be cut by 4.4 million euros total (a 10% decrease) in comparison to the 2024 budget. In response to the plan to fulfill these goals, the Council for the Administration of Courts provided feedback that the proposed budgetary requirements do not allow for sufficient guarantees for the sustainable continuation of judicial proceedings.[3] To cut back on costs, it was decided that two courthouses will be closed at the end of 2024 and the closing of many others are still under discussion. The Estonian Association of Judges does not support[4] the closing of courthouses, and local governments as well as the Prosecutor’s Office[5] have been critical of the plan. The biggest concern regarding the closing of courthouses is the decrease in the availability of justice.
nancing remains a concern also in the provision of legal aid. The Estonian Bar Association has made proposals in both 2024 and 2025 to the Ministry of Justice to increase the funding of state legal aid but the ministry has not found sufficient funds for it.[6]
In the fall of 2025, a plan to stop providing free or discounted primary legal aid services by the state to impoverished persons from the beginning of 2026, and to replace these services with a chatbot, was revealed to the public.[7]
The realisation of such a plan will definitely limit the availability of legal aid to financially less secure persons, and therefore also will limit people’s access to trial. A chat bot cannot replace aid provided by a qualified legal counsellor.
On 20 September 2024, the Council for the Administration of Courts approved a new development plan for courts (Court Development Plan 2024–2030).[8]
According to the plan, the envisioned court system is human-centric and technologically progressive, whilst ensuring fair, efficient and transparent administration of justice. The development plan mainly focuses on modernising the administration and management of courts, the quality and efficiency of proceedings, digitalisation of courts, personnel policy and communication.
In 2024, two new chief justices were appointed: the Chief Justice of the Tartu County Court Marek Vahing[9] and Chief Justice of the Tallinn Circuit Court Kristjan Siigur.[10]
As of 2 April 2025, the Government of the Republic of Estonia appointed Astrid Asi,[11] previously the Chief Justice of the Harju County Court, as the new State Prosecutor General, due to the expiry of the term of office of the current Prosecutor General. Astrid Asi’s term of office as State Prosecutor will last until 1 April 2030.
Liina Naaber-Kivisoo (previously the Chief Justice of the Viru County Court) was appointed as the new Chief Justice of Harju County Court[12], and Priit Kama[13] was appointed as the Chief Justice of the Viru County Court.
Legislative developments
The most important legislative initiative is related to the new court administration model, the legislative intent[14] of which was published on 2 February 2024 and which has by now been made into a draft legislation (632SE).[15] currently under consideration in the Riigikogu. The main goal of the draft is the transfer of most court administration tasks from the Ministry of Justice to the courts, and for that purpose the creation of a new structure connected to the courts – the Court Administration and Development Council (KHAN). According to the plan, KHAN is to become the highest decision-making body for court administration. Under the draft, most members of the council would be judges (the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court and judges elected by the judicial panel), and in addition it would include representatives appointed by the Bar Association, the Chancellor of Justice, and the Minister of Justice and Digital Affairs. The aim of the bill is to increase the autonomy of the judiciary from the executive branch.
A draft legislation aimed at optimising and expediting court proceedings in criminal cases, as well as expanding access to court decisions, is under consideration in the Riigikogu (the draft amending the Code of Criminal Procedure and other acts, 560SE).[16]
Several other amendments to laws regulating court proceedings are still in the preparatory phase, with the aim of reducing the courts’ workload and making court proceedings more efficient.
For a long time, a draft legislation aimed at providing more effective protection of attorney–client privilege in criminal proceedings has been in preparation, and according to the original plan it was supposed to enter into force at the end of 2024.[17] Unfortunately, the completion of this draft has been delayed, and as of September 2025 it has not yet reached the parliament.
On 1 January 2025, an amendment[18] to the Penal Code entered into force, doubling the base amount (i.e., the fine unit) used for determining monetary fines imposed as punishment for misdemeanours (from 4 euros to 8 euros). Amendments to the Code of Civil Procedure[19] also entered into force, establishing in Estonia the procedure for consumer collective representative actions as provided for in EU Directive 2020/1828.
Case law
On 16 September 2025, the European Court of Human Rights delivered its judgment in the case of Seppern vs. Estonia (31722/22).[20] The issue in the case was whether the use of evidence for verifying the credibility of the applicant’s testimony in court, if it had been obtained through surveillance measures that had been declared unlawful, was compatible with the principle of a fair trial under Article 6(1) of the ECHR. The Court found that there had been no violation of Article 6(1).
In its judgment of 16 January 2025,[21] the judicial panel of the Criminal Chamber of the Supreme Court took the position that messages from the ANOM communication application, obtained from the United States through mutual legal assistance, are admissible as evidence in Estonian criminal proceedings. Previously, the circuit courts had, in two cases, found that there were justified grounds for doubting the lawfulness of the manner in which the so-called ANOM messages were obtained, and therefore considered them inadmissible as evidence. The compatibility of using such evidence with the principles of fair trial has sparked intense debates in many parts of the world, and the specific judgment of the Supreme Court has also been criticised by Estonian legal scholars.[22]
In 2025, courts suspended the processing of consumer credit debt cases under the expedited order-for-payment procedure because, in the courts’ view, the rules of the expedited procedure did not allow them to verify whether the loans in question had been issued in compliance with the principle of responsible lending.[23] Since, in many cases, it was not possible in the expedited procedure to properly take into account the rights and interests of consumer credit debtors who are natural persons, this shift in court practice should be regarded as a positive development.
Statistics and surveys
The European Commission’s 2025 Rule of Law Report[24] highlighted that the level of digitalisation of the court system remains among the highest in the European Union. The launch of the court administration reform was also noted as a positive development. Points of concern included the high workload of the courts and the negative impact of budget cuts on this. The overall functioning of the judicial system was assessed as efficient, although a slight increase in the length of proceedings in civil and commercial cases was observed.
The 2025 report of the EU Justice Scoreboard shows that Estonia’s court system remains among the most efficient and fastest in the EU, but that court workloads have increased and the courts’ capacity to resolve cases has slightly decreased.
According to the address by the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court to the Riigikogu on 10 June 2025,[25] a decrease in efficiency and an increase in the length of proceedings were observed in the court system in 2024, with the situation in the circuit courts (appeal proceedings) described as particularly critical. The address also noted that, according to a survey by Turu-Uuringute AS, the reliability of the court system fell from a record 71 percent in 2023 to 63 percent in 2024.
Promising practices
With regards to enhancing the transparency of court activities, the Supreme Court’s initiative to hold oral hearings in a greater number of cases deserves recognition. These hearings can be followed via an online live broadcast and they are also available for later viewing online.[26]
To explain court activities to the public, a podcast series titled “Kohtulood” (“Court Stories”) has been launched with the active participation of the courts. In 2024 and 2025, a total of 15 episodes on current topics related to the administration of justice have been published.[27]
Noteworthy public discussions
The new administrative model planned as part of the court administration reform, along with the plan to merge courts of the same type, has sparked discussion about the constitutionality of the reform. Several in-depth articles[28] have been published on this topic, and on 9 September 2025 a public discussion meeting was held, organised by the Estonian Academic Law Society and Juridica.[29]
Trends and outlook
In the situation where the state budget is strained (including cuts to the courts’ budget) and the workload of courts is increasing, the tendency to optimize and speed up court proceedings, limit the possibilities for appealing court decisions, and shift the resolution of certain types of disputes out of the courts, continues. Such developments may have a detrimental effect on the quality and accessibility of justice. It is important to find a balance between the efficiency and the quality of court proceedings, a point also emphasised in the new development plan for the courts. There remains optimism regarding technological solutions and especially the use of artificial intelligence, but concrete solutions in this area are still lacking, and the high expectations placed on technology may not be realistic.
Recommendations
- Adopt and implement amendments to the laws that regulate judicial proceedings, which would allow proceedings to be conducted more efficiently and faster, while also ensuring the fundamental and procedural rights of the persons involved.
- Carry out the court administration reform in a manner that does not compromise access to justice.
Implement the activities necessary to achieve the objectives set out in the courts’ development plan. - Apply measures to ensure the accessibility and sustainability of the state legal aid system.
[1] Vabariigi Valitsus. 2025. Koalitsioonilepe 2024-2027, 26.03.2025.
[2] Vabariigi Valitsus. 2025. Eesti Reformierakonna ja Erakonna Eesti 200 valitsusliidu alusleping, 26.05.2025
[3] Riigikohus. 2025. Kohtute haldamise nõukoja tegevus 2024. aastal, 07.10.2025.
[4] Eesti Kohtunike Ühing. 2025. Eesti Kohtunike Ühingu pöördumine seoses kohtumajade sulgemisega, 20.01.2025.
[5] ERR. 2025. Vald ja prokuratuur kardavad Jõhvi kohtumaja sulgemisest julgeolekuriski, 03.03.2025.
[6] Eesti Advokatuur. 2025. Riigi õigusabi korraldamine, 07.10.2025.
[7] L. Laks. Postimees. 2025. 10 000 Eesti inimest kaotab ligipääsu õigusabile, 10.10.2025; ERR. 2025. Valitsus vahetab tasuta õigusabi juturoboti vastu, 10.10.2025.
[8] Kohtute Haldamise Nõukogu. 2024. Kohtu arengukava 2024–2030, 20.09.2024.
[9] Justiits- ja Digiministeerium. 2024. Tartu maakohtu esimeheks sai Marek Vahing, 08.04.2024.
[10] Justiits- ja Digiministeerium. 2024. Justiitsminister nimetas ametisse uue Tallinna ringkonnakohtu esimehe, 26.03.2024.
[11] ERR.2025. Valitsus nimetas Asi peaprokuröriks, 16.01.2025.
[12] Justiits- ja Digiministeerium. 2025. Harju Maakohtu esimeheks sai Liina Naaber-Kivisoo, 18.03.2025.
[13] Justiits- ja Digiministeerium. 2025. Viru Maakohtu esimeheks sai Priit Kama, 18.04.2025.
[14] Eelnõude Infosüsteem. 2024. Kohtute seaduse muutmise seaduse eelnõu (kohtuhaldusmudel) väljatöötamise kavatsus, 26.02.2024.
[15] Riigikogu. 2025. Kohtute seaduse muutmise ja sellega seonduvalt teiste seaduste muutmise seadus (kohtute haldamise tõhustamine) 632 SE, 30.06.2025.
[16] Riigikogu. 2025. Kriminaalmenetluse seadustiku ja teiste seaduste muutmise seadus (kohtumenetluse optimeerimine ja kohtulahendite avalikkus) 560 SE, 27.02.2025.
[17] ERR. 2024. Ministeerium plaanib muudatusi advokaatide ametisaladuste tugevamaks kaitseks, 06.02.2024.
[18] Riigi Teataja. 2024. Karistusseadustiku muutmise ja sellega seonduvalt teiste seaduste muutmise seadus (trahviühiku suurendamine), 29.06.2024.
[19] Riigi Teataja. 2024. Tsiviilkohtumenetluse seadustiku ja teiste seaduste muutmise seadus (kollektiivse esindushagi menetluse loomine), 31.12.2024.
[20] Euroopa Inimõiguste Kohus. 2025. CASE OF SEPPERN v. ESTONIA, 16.09.2025.
[21] Riigikohus. 2025. Kohtuasi 1-21-7384, 16.01.2025.
[22] Sihtasutus Iuridicum. 2025. Ameerikalikult innovaatiliste nn ANOM-i tõendite vaieldav lubatavus Eesti kriminaalmenetluses. Riigikohtu 16. jaanuari 2025. a otsus kriminaalasjas 1-21-7384 (koos kahe riigikohtuniku konkureeriva arvamusega). Juridica 3/2025, lk 185-197, veebis.
[23] ERR. 2025. Eesti kohtud peatasid kiirlaenuvõlglaste maksekäskude menetlemise, 08.05.2025.
[24] Euroopa Komisjon. 2025. 2025 Rule of Law Report: Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Estonia, 08.07.2025.
[25] Riigikohus. 2025. Ülevaade kohtukorralduse, õigusemõistmise ja seaduste ühetaolise kohaldamise kohta, 10.06.2025.
[26] Riigikohus. 2025. JÄRELVAADATAV: Riigikohus arutas avalikul istungil advokaatide kliendisaladuse kaitset, 07.09.2025.
[27] Riigikohus. 2025. Kuula Eesti kohtute taskuhäälingu „Kohtulood“ saadet sellest, mis on kohtunikutöö eelised advokaadiameti ees ja vastupidi, 03.10.2025.
[28] ERR. 2025. Priit Pikamäe: kohtute haldusmudeli muutmise põhiseaduslikest probleemidest, 04.06.2025; ERR. 2025. Janar Jäätma: kohtute ühendamise põhiseaduslikust probleemist, 06.05.2025; Madis Ernits. 2025. Kohtuhalduse reformikavast põhiseaduslikkuse vaatevinklist. Juridica 5/2025. Lk 286-306.
[29] Eesti Akadeemiline Õigusteatduse Selts. 2025. Arutelukoosolek „Kohtuhalduse reformikavast põhiseaduslikkuse vaatevinklist“, 09.09.2025.
