Session Profile: Anastassia Kovalenko-Kõlvart

Representing the Centre Party, he stresses the need to protect constitutional rights and uphold the views of the Chancellor of Justice. He is also strongly opposed to simplified administrative procedures and the expanding sanctioning powers of the Competition Authority. He emphasizes that tax and budget policy must be based on honest debate, and accuses the government and the Reform Party of deceiving the public with tax hikes. He positions himself as a defender of democracy and the rule of law, highlighting the necessity of keeping state governance within constitutional limits and preventing the development of a “punitive state.”

He refers to the importance of constitutional principles such as the division of powers, proportionality, and judicial review, and highlights the opinions of the Chancellor of Justice and the decisions of the Supreme Court as a guiding foundation. The text employs terminology such as administrative procedure vs. criminal procedure and *ultima ratio*, and refers to specific legal standards. He demonstrates the capacity to link the impact of draft legislation to fundamental rights and the relevant positions of the Chancellor of Justice/Supreme Court, and provides examples concerning security and procedural matters.

The speaker employs a combative, emotional, and critical style, positioning themselves as a defender of rights and a listener to the voice of the people. They use strongly negative rhetoric ("punishment state," "lies to the people") and incorporate historical references (the Soviet period) and questions to heighten the emotional impact. The text is highly colloquial, yet simultaneously formalized, and often openly operates within a matrix of moral judgment.

He/She points to active participation in committees (economic and legal committees) and confirms both attendance and support for the positions discussed during the Center Party faction's meetings with the Chancellor of Justice. He/She pledges to participate in the upcoming votes and mentions the discussion of various bills and the presentation of several amendments. The overall pattern demonstrates regular and consistent participation in plenary sessions and committee work.

The main emphasis is placed on criticizing the government's tax policy and leveling accusations of "lies to the people." It positions itself as an adversary to the direction taken by the Reform Party and the government, stressing the protection of fundamental rights and highlighting the stances of the Chancellor of Justice and the Supreme Court. It employs strong criticism regarding both the decisions themselves and their impact on families with "medium and small incomes," and speaks about the necessity of setting boundaries against the government's increasing control and its shift toward becoming a punitive state. The vocabulary chosen is highly confrontational, critical, and serves to maintain an atmosphere of sustained criticism.

The speaker mentions cooperation with the Center Party faction, referencing meetings with the Chancellor of Justice and committee debates. However, deep involvement in cooperative efforts to adopt new bills is not permitted, resulting in an awkward process, and it is stressed that trade unions were unable to be included. He/She indicates a readiness to submit the Center Party’s amendments, emphasizing that they must avoid being unconstitutional. The overall tone expresses a willingness to cooperate, yet remains critical, prioritizing the communication of their own faction’s viewpoints.

While much of the focus is directed at the national level, attention is also given to the Tallinn city budget, the issue of free kindergarten, and how Tallinn's municipal policy affects the regional level. There is mention of current events in Tallinn, the amendments proposed within the context of the Tallinn City Council, and the regional disparities when compared to the situation of families in rural areas.

The central focus of the discussion is the concern regarding the adequacy of the tax increases and their subsequent effects. Criticism is directed at the permanent rise in VAT and income tax, which impacts middle and lower-income families, and the government is accused of misleading the public. The speaker emphasizes inflation and rising prices, arguing that the tax calculator and the changes provide only modest financial gains—a small benefit that affects everyone—which are negligible compared to the large overall benefit (or burden). The overall tone is critical and fundamentally dismissive, stressing the magnitude of the burden placed on consumers.

He emphasizes constitutional rights and rights related to religious equality, freedom of religion, and freedom of association. He criticizes the possibility of restricting the activities of religious associations and churches, as well as earlier legal formulations that might lead to forced dissolution. He points out that religious associations are protected and draws a clear line in the event of danger. Furthermore, he stresses democracy and draws attention to the balance of power and the necessity of public involvement.

The core stance opposes the expansion of the Competition Authority and the simplified administrative procedure. The desire is to submit amendments from the Centre Party that would preserve constitutionality and prevent the excessive increase of officials' powers. He/She refers to the necessity of utilizing existing penal law norms and the guidance/opinions provided by the Chancellor of Justice, emphasizing that the Riigikogu and the legal committees are aligned on this issue. He/She promises to participate in future votes and adhere to the fundamental values of democracy.