By Plenary Sessions: Eerik-Niiles Kross

The political focus is heavily centered on international democracy issues, particularly the constitutional crisis in Georgia and the necessity of supporting the people there, regarding which statements are being initiated in the Riigikogu (Estonian Parliament). Domestically, he/she is focused on initiating constitutional amendments, positioning this effort as a value-based compromise that satisfies diverse interests. His/Her activity is directed toward submitting specific legislative initiatives.

The political focus is on amending the constitution regarding the introduction of a citizenship requirement for local elections. The speaker strongly supports the amendment, viewing it as a timely and value-driven step that will lead the country to full democratic sovereignty and conclude the transition period. He emphasizes that the decision will improve the Estonian state and is more of a "sunrise" than a "sunset."

The most important topic is maintaining Estonian security and shaping a new world order amid the volatility of the US and the aggression of Russia. The political stance is strongly value-based, emphasizing the continuity of Estonian foreign policy over the last 30 years (freedom, responsibility, peace). The speaker criticizes the West for its insufficient speed and assertiveness in providing arms aid to Ukraine, as well as for European countries breaking unity due to internal political reasons.

The political stance is strongly value-based, centered on defending democracy and human rights in Georgia. The speaker forcefully opposes the ruling Georgian regime ("Georgian Dream"), accusing it of pursuing an autocratic trajectory and aligning itself with Russia. The objective is to support the Georgian people's demands for free elections and the continuation of the European course, stressing that maintaining a façade of cooperation with states deviating from the path of the free Western world only facilitates autocracy. The political assessment is sharp, calling for the non-recognition of the legitimacy of Georgia's de facto government.

The political position expresses strong support for amending the constitution to restrict the voting rights of citizens of aggressor states in local elections, while simultaneously retaining those rights for stateless persons. This stance is framed by value-based and security considerations, emphasizing the restoration of "rule of law and order" within society and the defense of democracy in the changed geopolitical situation. The amendment is considered essential because the current situation has run its course.

The political position is strongly value-based, focusing on the crisis of democracy in Georgia and its government’s anti-Western trajectory. The view is put forward that Georgia has violated its EU accession agreements, necessitating tough measures such as freezing aid and suspending visa-free travel. This is framed as a necessity to stand up for the interests of the Georgian people (who support the EU) and the Estonian sphere of values. The speaker acknowledges previous diplomatic failure (likening it to mistakes made concerning Russia) and calls for the escalation of the situation.

The political position is strongly value-based, focusing on the non-recognition of the results of the Russian elections and the legitimacy of V. Putin. Support is given to the draft resolution of the Riigikogu, which establishes a legal basis for the government’s future conduct, comparing it to the de jure non-recognition during the Soviet occupation. This position is aimed at creating a fundamental basis for Estonia’s legal and practical approach toward the Putin regime.

The most prominent stance is the strong condemnation of the political activities and the *russki mir* ideology of the Moscow Patriarchate Orthodox Church (MPÕK), as it openly incites aggression and calls state borders into question. It is emphasized that the Riigikogu must necessarily provide a political assessment of this institution, distinguishing it from religious freedom. The position is firmly rooted in values, focusing on security and the protection of international law.

The political focus is on the condemnation of the Russian Federation’s war crimes and acts of genocide (specifically, the deportation and re-education of children). This stance is strongly value-based, emphasizing violations of international law (the Genocide Convention and the Geneva Conventions). The speaker strongly supports the protection of the identity and rights of Ukrainian children and draws parallels with the March Deportation carried out by the Soviet Union. The political attitude is strongly antagonistic toward Russian occupation practices.