Agenda Profile: Anastassia Kovalenko-Kõlvart

The core focus is an approach against corruption and the misuse of insider information, coupled with strengthening the oversight role of the Riigikogu (Estonian Parliament). He/She emphasizes the necessity of obtaining the complete list of insiders and achieving deeper transparency regarding the Eesti Energia Enefit Green case. The stance is sharply critical of both the government and the companies involved, and the individual is prepared to advance oversight and accountability. He/She has repeatedly delved into this topic in April and during parliamentary information sessions, raising questions concerning both legal entitlements and procedural matters. The focus remains on policy-driven principles of transparency and the necessity of ensuring compliance with rights and legal acts during the oversight process.

The speaker demonstrates a strong knowledge base regarding anti-corruption oversight, the use of insider information, and the financial sector's response. They specifically refer to the findings related to insider activity, indications of "trading volumes," and the boundaries of criminal procedure under § 284, along with the positions held by the Financial Supervision Authority and the work of the special committee. The speaker recognizes the necessity of publishing lists and utilizing legal mechanisms in the oversight conducted by the Riigikogu (Parliament).

The emphasis is on a formal style based on questions and evidence; it utilizes precise terminology, references to laws, and concrete examples (e.g., "fake list," "insider," "criminal proceedings"). The tone is thorough, yet simultaneously firm and somewhat accusatory, stressing the importance of substantive evidence and rigorous oversight. The texts contain recurring references to past discussions and clearly articulated demands.

They repeatedly participate in the same thematic discussion within a single day (September 17, 2025), referencing earlier sessions in April and the preceding debate. They regularly utilize the context of the Riigikogu Special Committee and information hours to submit questions and requests concerning lists. Consistent attention to increasing oversight and the accessibility of information has been highlighted.

Critical of the situation concerning the government and the company, it sought the right for the Riigikogu to obtain the list of insiders and criticized the concealment of information. The questions raised are politically aimed at increasing oversight and transparency; this position opposes the view that the committee should deal with internal regulations without exercising the rights of the Riigikogu. The tone of the protest is strong and continuous, not a flexible interruption.

It utilizes the special committee and Riigikogu oversight as a platform for cooperation, but communication frequently becomes conflictual when the required information is not shared. It refers to cooperative partnerships, such as those with Jürgen Ligi and the Financial Supervision Authority, but stresses its right and the involvement of the Riigikogu to obtain information. It appears ready to cooperate in developing oversight mechanisms, but demands clear rules and evidence.

The attention is directed at the national level, primarily focusing on the Riigikogu (Parliament), the special committee, and the Eesti Energia Enefit Green case as a range of national topics. This would be limited to the context of oversight of state institutions and the accessibility of public information.

Economically, the topic focuses on market trustworthiness and anti-corruption oversight, rather than specific tax or fiscal policy issues. It emphasizes that the use of insider information can generate criminal proceeds, necessitating stronger regulation and transparency. It supports financial supervision and fair economic activity as essential requirements.

Not enough data

The focus is on expanding the Riigikogu's oversight capabilities and access to information. It refers to the existing legal framework (e.g., restrictions under § 284 of the Code of Criminal Procedure) and demands that the list of insiders be disclosed to members of the Riigikogu. It seeks resources and mechanisms to enhance parliamentary scrutiny and transparency, and stresses the need for continuous development in this area.