By Plenary Sessions: Kalle Grünthal

Strong criticism has been leveled against the actions of the Riigikogu and the government, citing " serious failures" and the repeated adoption of unconstitutional laws. The criticism targets both the substance of the law (its unconstitutionality) and the procedure used for its adoption via fast-track proceedings. The speaker demands the immediate halting of the process, not a compromise.

The main opposition is directed at the supporters of the RAB draft bill, directly criticizing Urmas Reinsalu for denying totalitarian threats and Maris Lauri for downplaying the bill's effects. The criticism is intense and ideological, accusing the opposing side of permitting illegal surveillance and constitutional breaches.

The main opposition is directed at the minister's positions and the solutions proposed by the government, which are deemed insufficient for protecting citizens' rights. The criticism is policy-based, challenging the minister's assumptions regarding the behavior and autonomy of local municipalities. The speaker also criticizes the system that allows local governments to quibble over small sums, thereby leaving families unprotected.

The primary confrontation is aimed directly at the government, coalition MPs, and the Minister of Finance, all of whom are accused of either malice or sheer incompetence toward the Estonian people. The criticism is intense, focusing on both political violations (tax hikes) and procedural breaches (unconstitutional lawmaking). The speaker asserts that the government’s actions could lead to a revolution, thereby ruling out any compromise regarding the current policies.

The main criticism is aimed at the coalition, which is accused of ramming legislation through, or employing "steamroller tactics." The criticism is intense and focuses on procedural and constitutional violations, citing interventions by the Chancellor of Justice and the President.

The main opposition is directed at Prime Minister Kristen Michal, whose answers are considered incomprehensible and "obfuscation," and at the law enforcement agencies (PPA, the Prosecutor's Office). The criticism is intense and is primarily based on accusations of legal violations, specifically accusing them of illegally carrying out state supervision. Compromise is ruled out until the individuals who acted illegally are held accountable ("a wolf does not prey on a wolf").

The opposition is primarily directed at ministry officials, who are criticized for their lack of knowledge, bureaucratic inertia, and unwillingness to act independently. He/She also criticizes the presumed actions of the Reform Party in rejecting the bill, as well as military leaders for their outdated mindset. The criticism is mainly focused on policy and procedure, but it also includes doubts regarding the motives of the opponents (ERJK).

The primary standoff is with the minister, who is accused of providing misinformation regarding the number of complaints and denying the seriousness of the problem. The criticism is intense and centers on the government's failure to recognize and address a serious issue of violating language requirements, even referencing instances of ridicule.

The opposition is directed at the presenter, who is accused of inaccuracy or an overly effusive emphasis on positivity. The criticism is intense and focuses on the lack of transparency, demanding concrete evidence, such as a business registry code, to rule out falsehoods.