By Plenary Sessions: Irja Lutsar

Direct political opponents are not criticized, but the notion that the draft bill legalizes euthanasia—for which society is not yet ready—is refuted. The criticism is directed at the state’s insufficient investment in palliative care and basic research in medical science, especially when compared to what is happening in the USA.

The main opposition is directed at the activities of the EKRE parliamentary group, which is being criticized for its obstruction during the processing of the Tobacco Act. The criticism is procedural, citing as an example the repeated submission of amendments aimed at changing the numbers of fine units (e.g., 205, 204, 203 fine units). It was decided by consensus to reject EKRE's obstructionist proposals.

The criticism is directed at the government's inaction or inefficiency because assistance for victims of identity theft is unavailable. The opposition is policy- and results-based, emphasizing the state's inability to fulfill its obligations as a rule-of-law nation.

There isn't enough data.

No direct confrontation or criticism of political opponents is present. The criticism is instead aimed at the restrictions in the previous version of the law, which prevented the drug from being used to treat more than ten patients.