By Plenary Sessions: Rain Epler

A characteristic feature is the regular appearance at open mic events, where a "traditional overview" of world news that does not make it into the Estonian media is presented. This pattern points to a desire to offer an alternative narrative and keep voters informed about international developments. Participation in the European Union Affairs Committee is also mentioned.

The pattern of activity demonstrates active participation in the plenary session, posing questions both to the presenters and to the Speaker of the Riigikogu. They use the allotted time both to oppose specific draft legislation and to make broader political statements, while also criticizing the procedural management of time.

The speaker is actively participating in the plenary session as a questioner, repeatedly addressing the minister with questions and rejoinders. Mention is made of their previous activities, including conducting one-on-one discussions with the top candidates of Southeast Estonia prior to the 2019 elections. Their return from summer vacation is also noted.

The questioner is an active participant during the Riigikogu's Question Time, posing repeated and prepared questions to the Prime Minister regarding the minister's suitability for office. He reacts quickly to the previous day's events and answers, having prepared materials (transcripts, National Audit Office reports) to support his claims.

Insufficient Data

The speaker actively participates in plenary sessions, raising both substantive questions (on energy) and procedural inquiries. They respond to the arguments of other speakers, taking the floor even when it wasn't initially scheduled. A recurring pattern is observed where they reiterate important statistical data to substantiate their viewpoints.

The speaker is highly active during Riigikogu sessions, constantly submitting interpellations (A/P) and draft legislation, particularly addressing the Minister of Climate and the Prime Minister. A significant portion of this activity involves raising procedural questions and challenging the decisions of the Presidium, especially concerning the transmission and scheduling of those interpellations. Persistence is demonstrated by consistently resubmitting questions that have previously been rejected.