By Plenary Sessions: Varro Vooglaid

The primary opposition is aimed at the government, which is being criticized for evading responsibility and shifting the tax burden onto citizens. The government also faces sharp criticism for ignoring the concerns of landowners, who are protesting the continuous encumbrance of their property and the lack of compensation.

The primary opposition is aimed at the government and Foreign Minister Margus Tsahkna, who is being criticized for blatant interference in Georgia's internal affairs and for violating diplomatic norms. The criticism is principled, focusing on the inconsistency and double standards inherent in the government's actions. The confrontation is intense and uncompromising regarding the principle of international non-interference.

The main opponent is the Reform Party, including Prime Minister Kaja Kallas and the Reform Party members on the Finance Committee. The criticism is intense and personal, directly accusing the opponent of lying and breaking election promises. The criticism targets both the political substance (the retraction of promises) and procedural actions (supporting the draft legislation in the committee).

The main opposition is directed at the Government of the Republic and the Ministry of Social Affairs, who are criticized for failing to protect the right to life of unborn children and for the mass funding of abortion. The criticism is intense and accusatory, stressing that the government itself decided to fund abortion, rather than merely fulfilling a legal obligation. The government's priorities in funding public opinion campaigns (e.g., COVID campaigns, "Diversity Enriches") are also criticized.

The main opponents are the authors of the draft legislation (the Ministry of Foreign Affairs) and its supporters, who are accused of bending the constitution and "pushing Estonia into harm's way." Specific officials (Kaupo Rosin, Jonatan Vseviov) are criticized for the absence of a risk analysis. The criticism is political, procedural, and personal, faulting Mr. Terras for "ugly labeling" when attaching the tag of being pro-Kremlin.

The main confrontation is with the government and the prime minister, who are criticized for bypassing the constitution and leading Estonia into war. The criticism is policy- and procedure-based, as the government has allegedly sent special forces operatives to Ukraine without a mandate from the Riigikogu. The speaker intensely rejects being labeled as a spreader of Kremlin narratives, claiming that they stand for the interests of the Riigikogu and the Estonian people.

The opposition is directed at the political forces that altered the definition of marriage in June 2023, and hypothetically, also at any court that might impede the restoration of the traditional definition. The criticism focuses on the durability of the legislation and the limits of constitutionality, and is not personal in nature.

Criticism is aimed at the banking sector, which violates the principles of non-discrimination by excluding people from public life. Strong opposition is also directed at government institutions (the minister, the Security Police Board) who make claims about the involvement of Russian special services without sufficient factual evidence. The speaker criticizes the alleged hybrid operation as "bungling" and "kindergarten level."

The primary criticism is directed at the ruling coalition, whose legitimacy is being called into question because of the untrustworthiness of the e-elections. The criticism is procedural as well as political, accusing the coalition of both denying and exacerbating the problems (for instance, through the introduction of m-elections). He/She warns that downplaying the issue of electoral integrity is dangerous and will ultimately lead to civil disobedience.

The opposition's stance is directed at the ruling parties and those responsible for procedural decisions (e.g., Mr. Odinets). The criticism is both political (regarding the taxation of banks) and strongly procedural (a violation of the rules of procedure when bundling amendments). The accusations are intense, pointing to personal gain and the "blunt steamrolling" of the opposition's objections.

The main opposition is directed against the government (the Prime Minister), which is being criticized for disregarding the Constitution and for diminishing the authority of the Riigikogu when undertaking international obligations. The criticism is both policy-based and procedural, accusing the government of ambiguity and potentially misleading the public. The third speaker criticizes a colleague (Urmas Reinsalu) for violating the rules governing the information session.

A strong oppositional stance is aimed at the supporters of the current electoral system and the political culture that disregards the public's distrust. The criticism is both procedural and value-based, accusing opponents of "arrogant negligence" and exacerbating the issue through e-voting. The speaker warns that such actions could lead to a "silent era or dictatorship," meaning compromise on the question of electoral integrity is out of the question.

The main criticism is directed at the government member (likely the Minister of Education), demanding they take responsibility and resign over the administrative blunder. Furthermore, the opponent's alleged ideological position is being criticized for contradicting the constitutional mandate, enshrined in the preamble, to preserve Estonian identity. The criticism is intense and demands political accountability.

The main opponents are the Board of the Riigikogu (due to the timing of the proceedings and evasion of responsibility) and the governing coalition, especially Interior Minister Lauri Läänemets. The criticism is intense, accusing them of deliberately offending Orthodox believers and creating illegal preconditions for the forced dissolution of the religious association. No willingness to compromise is evident; instead, the demand is for answers and accountability.