Debate contributions by Patryk JAKI

Madam President, I'm sorry. Mr. President, I'm sorry. Mr. Commissioner, I'm sorry. Dear Colleagues, I congratulate Mr. President on an interesting and ambitious programme. Declarations on migration are particularly welcome. We really need a return directive. We welcome the announcement of a hard line against Russia. We welcome the announcement of work on the enlargement of the European Union. I am also pleased to highlight and understand the issue of sovereignty. Declarations about industry and how important industry is, and about building competitiveness and fighting against hyperinflation of the law were very good. And these are very good things. We will be here, you will be able to count on our help here. But it is also important that we are not naive. Some things are irreconcilable. Some things, such as competitiveness, building a better industry, improving the cost of living of Europeans, cannot be reconciled with the requirements of the Green Deal, which makes the European Union weak and we are not able to deal with the most important problems, such as tariffs today, Greenland, we are not at the table at the most important negotiations. That is why it is also important that you keep in mind the new budget and do not push us to reduce agricultural spending or cohesion policy spending. We will not forget your problems, at the end I want to say. We will help you in your fight. Cyprus is very important to us. A country with a great history. We are here to help you and we keep our fingers crossed for you.

Madam President, I'm sorry. Mr. Commissioner, I'm sorry. Rule of law toy – your favourite toy, an illegal tool. Let us recall: it can never be the case – this principle should at least be clear to any lawyer – that secondary law is above primary law. Well, it so happens that the authors of the treaties, so all the states, have agreed to certain principles regarding the assessment of the rule of law (they are enshrined in the treaties) and what you do is completely illegal. Secondly, the definitions are unclear and that is why there is so much controversy about the rule of law. Thirdly, and perhaps most importantly, the European Union is losing its strength, its resources at a time when there is war on our border, and you, instead of building solidarity between states, are using this tool to turn one country against another, into your political games, which only strengthen external forces and strengthen Russia. The proof? Here you go. Poland had funds blocked for the previous government due to changes in the judiciary, and I would like to inform you that funds have been unlocked, precisely in connection with this tool, when the government changed and no law has changed – to this day, no law has changed in the judiciary. That is why it is a shame and disgrace to use such tools. You apply them only to those countries whose governments you do not like. And if that were not the case, let me just remind you that a journalist who dealt with the government was murdered in Malta. There is no rule of law mechanism. Not to mention Romania, where the elites twisted the elections, i.e. democracy. Not to mention Bulgaria – that's where I won't mention the history with Bojkov, etc. – whether Spain: new sexual scandals that are erupting there. Because that's where your people are, isn't it? There is no need for the rule of law. In addition, I would just like to recall that previous assessments of the rule of law have been influenced by people such as Mr Reynders – the rule of law model – or by NGOs involved in Qatargate – by other rule of law models that have not yet been settled, by the way. And if we see that you in the next MFF try to introduce even more centralist rules, even worse, then I have no doubt that this will destroy trust in the European Union. This is good news for Russia.

Madam President, I'm sorry. Commissioner, I'm sorry. Russia. Russia has never kept a deal and will never do so in the future. You have to talk to Russia in the only language she understands, that is, by force: immediately confiscate her funds and give all confiscated funds to the war, so that Russia gets what it deserves. However, if you say that the United States divides Europe, you have to ask yourself if it is not a coincidence that the United States only benefits from a divided Europe and a weak Europe that you have created and for which you are responsible. You have cut the European Union's share of world GDP by almost half in 20 years of government. You have led to the collapse of industry, to the decline of its competitiveness. You inflated Russia's money. You have quarreled nations. You've been bringing in migrants. You have destroyed energy sovereignty. Instead of democracy, you are introducing Orwellian sanitary cordons. You have poisoned traditional culture and education with some woke. You've destroyed industry, you've destroyed innovation. Instead of dealing with development, you deal with censorship. At this session, you want to waste Europeans' money again on the most necessary things, i.e. abortion on demand. The U.S. could never impose any tariffs on you, and Russia would not start a war if the European Union were different. The EU was supposed to be the largest and best free trade zone in the world, and through you it began to deal with measuring carbon dioxide, spreading leftist ideology, punishing countries that want to defend traditional values, or becoming a leader in inventing new regulations. We need less regulation, less Green Deal, less of your ideas, and more freedom for business and ordinary people. We need more freedom of speech and less terror. And yet now you are pushing Europe to destroy its own agriculture. You have made a mockery of the Old Continent and are directing it towards the open-air museum. And now you're screaming: Give us more power because we know how to do it. No, you've shown for 20 years that you don't know how to do it. And today, the United States only benefits from the weakness you have built here. Europe can be great again, but not with the people who made it small, ideological and ridiculous.

Madam President, I'm sorry. Mr. Commissioner, I'm sorry. This is a repetition of the attack, which first appeared 10 years ago, on Commissioner Várhelyi, when he was still an ambassador to the European Union and his right hand was Péter Magyar. I understand that at that time there was no doubt. Even then, the European Commission announced that this was nonsense. The same case was investigated by the Belgian authorities, stating exactly the same. Then you interviewed him twice for commissioner, and everything was fine. So what's really changed since then? This is another stage of illegal interference in the election campaign. Why illegitimate? Recall that the bodies of the European Union are obliged to behave in an objective manner. They cannot legally engage in what is happening in an electoral campaign in a Member State, as is currently the case in Hungary. Of course, Várhelyi's greatest sin is that he has different views than the right ones, so he must be attacked. He would probably be defended if he behaved like another lady who also liked to be in Hungary. I mean, Mrs. Salis. If Mr. Várhelyi was running with a telescopic battalion, he'd probably be defended. And yes, unfortunately, he has other conservative views, so he is an ideal target for attack. More or less, according to this logic, it all works.

Madam President, I'm sorry. Madam Minister, I'm sorry. Europe is falling because of you. Industry, innovation, research, artificial intelligence, space, the internet – we have lost everything. Security, migrants, war abroad again. Everything that was good in Europe, you have destroyed, and what is worse, you are even ridiculous, because even this letter calling the summit... Let me quote: "firstly, we need to step up our efforts to move away from over-regulation of the European Union..." (which is true, but the Union is over-regulated by the Green Deal), and in the next paragraph you write that we need to achieve our climate goals. So in order to reduce the Green Deal, we need even more Green Deal. It is more or less like saying that we must defend freedom in Europe and therefore ban the sale of diesel cars. The Chair said that competitiveness is the most important thing. Let me just remind you: The European Commission announced in 1995 that the European Union would outstrip the United States in terms of GDP by 2010. The World Bank report from April this year shows something different. Since the introduction of the ETS in 2008, the GDP of the European Union has increased by 13.5% and that of the United States by 90%. You said, Madam President, that green energy is the cheapest. Meanwhile, when we add ETS, system stabilization costs and investment durability, this energy is the most expensive. The President says that the market for green energy is growing. The only problem is that the market for traditional industry is growing more and growing faster than the GDP of the European Union. This market is many times larger. The Chair also boasted about the reduction of global carbon emissions just now. The problem is that this carbon dioxide emissions are increasing and Europeans, instead of being the frontrunners in carbon dioxide emissions, want to have cheap energy. Economic growth and the future of Europe have been destroyed by high energy prices. Since you're president, energy prices have risen by an average of 30%. In Europe, the chances of housing for young people will be destroyed by the ETS for buildings, and agriculture will be destroyed by an agreement with Mercosur. And by the way, you will destroy people's health, because you will be removing from Brazil products containing 370 different pesticides, which are mostly banned in the European Union. It is time for radical change.

Madam President, I'm sorry. Mr. Commissioner, I'm sorry. The discussion about banning the sale of diesel cars is a discussion about much more than just the industry. This is a discussion about who Europe should be for. Is Europe only for the rich or for everyone? This is a discussion about freedom of choice, which is supposed to be so important to us, or finally a discussion about the rationality of decisions and competitiveness. But first, let's repeat: we want to withdraw from the biggest fraud in history, the Green Deal, and to withdraw from the ban on the sale of diesel cars. Because what you're doing is just crazy. And now it's like this: The automotive industry has been one of the biggest pillars of the European economy for decades, both in terms of employment, exports and research. It directly and indirectly employs about 14 million people. It accounts for 8% of the value added of the European Union's processing industry and generates a trade surplus of €120 billion per year. Eliminating this in the name of a green ideology is a disaster for the competitiveness of European industry, jobs, economic security, employment structure and real technological opportunities. Let's talk about assumptions first. Well, you planned that the ban on the sale of internal combustion cars in 2035 would be only a destination, and by then you had imposed new taxes and burdens on manufacturers of internal combustion cars and subsidized those who produce electrics. And what's the effect? As a result, the price of new cars increased by 30%. What was the purpose? Reducing carbon emissions and forcing us to win the technological revolution and ultimately improving our competitive position. That's how it was supposed to be. And what are the effects? And now let's turn to your report, to Draghi's report. From year to year, our competitiveness decreases instead of growing. Between 2017 and 2022, EU vehicle exports fell by 16%. At the same time, imports of cars from China increased fivefold. Chinese manufacturers already control 14% of the import market in the European Union, and the share of European brands in Chinese sales of electric cars has fallen by 6%. From 2015 to 2023, the market share of Chinese brands in the electric vehicle market in Europe increased from 5% to 15%, while the share of European companies fell from 80% to 60%. The production costs of an electric vehicle burdened by the Green Deal are 30% higher in the European Union than in China, and the manufacturers there are one generation ahead of us when it comes to green technologies. In addition, they control about 70% of the global supply of lithium-ion cells, which are necessary throughout the entire production chain. So if we compare today the Chinese and American strategies, which were based on stable energy sources and proportional, peaceful development of RES, to the European Union, which did it radically, those strategies proved to be much more effective. They do not prohibit anything there, and in the United States there is no ETS system and all derivatives at all, and somehow they win with us. In addition, through the Green Deal, we have higher prices for energy, labour and raw materials, which reduces the attractiveness of investments in this sector. You have also set yourself climate goals and, of course, I just want to remind you that they do nothing at all, because from year to year carbon dioxide emissions simply increase. We have a huge problem with charging cars. Every time an electric car is charged, it is always zero in your tables. Why don't we talk about where this energy comes from? Very often, for example, it comes from coal-fired power plants, but in the table you always have zero. Or even if it comes from renewable energy sources, it must still be protected by stable energy sources that are emission-based, or else they would be blackouts, as we have seen in Spain. In Switzerland, as you know, there was even a regulation that, in the event of a lack of energy, the use of electric cars should be banned. The same thing happened in California in 2022 during the heat when residents were urged to avoid charging electric cars. And in general, the question is, for whom do we actually create this system? This is the system that will make an electric car a luxury good.

Madam President, I'm sorry. Mr. Prime Minister, I'm sorry. It's actually funny that you appealed to Robert Schuman, of whom we are all proud, and to the European values he defended. And you mentioned climate among these European values. I don't know anything about Robert Schuman defending the climate, but I do know of a value that the Lord did not mention at all, namely Christianity. He said that either Europe would be Christian or it would not be Christian at all. And he wrote that Europe owes its existence to Christianity, because it must have its soul, which you destroy so consistently. Furthermore, you are calling, Mr Prime Minister, for the Treaties to be amended and for the veto rights of states to be revoked. Robert Schuman, meanwhile, said on 9 May 1950 that ‘it is not for Europe to merge into one country’ and that the European Union saw, I quote, ‘as a community of peoples deeply rooted in their traditions’. I also want to say that it is no longer possible to listen to how you say, how it is necessary to fight Russia. Meanwhile, I don't know if you all know this, but Germany has just filed a motion to arrest the Ukrainian who blew up Nord Stream. So this is it: Russians can kill whoever they want every day, shoot civilians, bomb hospitals, and poor Ukrainians are no longer allowed to blow up the gas pipeline that helps Russia finance its war with Ukraine. You seem to be fighting Russia, but you still don't want to take away their frozen resources in Europe. We already have the seventeenth package of sanctions, from which there is absolutely nothing. Russia is still laughing at us. And let's call things by their first name: The Green Deal you are referring to is a scam and a scam. We lost everything in this case. Europe is much more expensive than China and the United States. Economic growth is lower. The world's carbon emissions are rising every year instead of falling. And we even lost the competition for green technologies to China. So it's time for a radical change in Europe, and what should we do? We should get back to our roots. As you rightly said, Mr. Prime Minister, Robert Schuman said. Back then, Europe was a power and it was strong because it was based on values and had a true soul. And what you are proposing now is a path from which Europe will no longer recover. A radical change is needed.

Madam President, today armed Russian drones fell on Poland. Poland shot them down. Therefore, as an exception, we are requesting a debate and resolution on this matter tomorrow. This is an unprecedented situation and we are expecting your solidarity.

Madam President, I'm sorry. What is the state of the European Union? You think that words will cover the facts that everyone feels today. This is enough to compare the data from 2019, when you became President of the European Union, to this day. Well, there was peace on our border, and now not only is there a war, but Russian drones are falling on Poland. Because, of course, you wanted to have cheap energy from Russia and you believed in all those resets with Putin. And now we're all paying for it. Energy prices have doubled in Europe since you became President. Food prices have also increased. The price of living has risen. The debt of the European Union has also increased. Since 2019, prices of new cars in the European Union have increased by 30%. And industry becomes the shadow of the old power. And you still want to increase the climate targets to 90%. Since then, the sense of security in Europe has also declined. Violence has increased, including sexual violence. In February 2025, in a report by the European Parliamentary Research Service, you acknowledged that gang violence is increasing across the European Union, a phenomenon related to the escalation of competition between rival criminal gangs. In 2008, the GDP of the European Union was more than 100% of the GDP of the United States. Today it is almost over 60%. How did you do it? You're still proud of yourself. We look bad, even when it comes to political freedom. It is here that the concept of ‘sanitary cordon’ was conceived. This is where the idea of cancelling the election results was conceived, if not the right one wins, or the persecution of political competition in countries where your people do not rule. In addition, there is an attack on freedom of speech, an attempt to attack freedom on the Internet. Instead of moving towards economic integration, which has always been profitable, the European Union opts for political integration. More mechanisms of conditionality, more centralization, that is, all that has led us to where we are today. However, not all of this taken together is the biggest problem. The biggest problem is that Europe has lost its sense of meaning. What is the symbol of the city we are in, a city that has more than 2,000 years of history? The green whims? The rainbow flag? Or those stupid bottle caps? No, I don't. The Cathedral of the Blessed Virgin Mary, that is, a symbol of the synthesis of faith and reason, that is, of all that is so lacking in Europe today. Goethe wrote about her: “Here music is enchanted in the stone, soaring lines and endless forms lead the spirit to God.” I'm talking about God. I hope I have not offended anyone in this House. For you, the generation of decadence, with some incomprehensible self-satisfaction are pushing us all to the abyss. That's why you have to leave.

Madam President, on the basis of Rule 164, after the CoP decision, if there is development about this scandal, it should be voted. You are afraid of voting on this debate because you are afraid of truth. After the CoP, lots of information about this scandal was published in Poland. So if you really would like to spend millions of euros on techno parties on balconies, I congratulate you.

Madam President, this is the first session after the holidays and I would like to raise a motion for debate in case you, in the future, would like to say that you didn't know about this scandal. So, during the holiday, your coalition spent millions of euros from European recovery funds on politicians' families, for example on PO members' spa, then they bought 107 yachts. And now –attention please, because this is not a joke – the funds went to a solarium in a pizzeria, a swingers' club, a techno party on balconies. So, if you vote even against the short debate on this matter, don't you even dare, in the future, lecture us about the rule of law, about how to develop the European economy, unless you really think that the swingers' club works for European competitiveness. Maybe, but not in the proper area. But anyway, if you think so, let it be a symbol that we need to restore common sense in Europe. So I would like to ask for the debate.

Madam President, I'm sorry. Mr. Commissioner, I'm sorry. Madam Minister, I'm sorry. The same crews have been here for years. You have been given the continent on which the greatest culture in the world has been built, the best economy, industry, development, the greatest democratic traditions – and you have ruined everything. First, demographic growth, because you pushed the so-called reproductive rights and kit, that the more children, the more carbon emissions. So children were missing and it was necessary to attract immigrants who, instead of building development, caused more and more costs and more problems. We know that illegal immigrants work on average less, on average, commit more crimes and despise our culture, and instead of getting rid of them, you feed, dress and still threaten those who want to defend ordinary people from them. How could President von der Leyen even say that you represent democratic forces? You were supposed to be an example of democracy around the world, and you were famous for cancelling election results that you didn't like. I remember when you imposed sanctions on Poland for so-called pushbacks on the border with Belarus. Today it turns out that Germany is doing exactly the same at the border with Poland within the Schengen area. And what? And nothing. Where is the equality of states? Instead of building solidarity, we have growing divisions and theories about better and worse cultures. Some may apply the rules in the judiciary as you wish, while others may not. So besides, the desire to be a primate in the so-called green madness only ridicules us and makes us suckers of the world. We have lost almost half of the share of nominal GDP in the global economy. Do you want to tighten your climate goals? It's crazy, isn't it? The ubiquitous decadence and decay of customs, symbolized by absurd theories about 256 genders, and yet you want to make payments in the next budget dependent on the fulfillment of all these green theories? This is another madness. Your policy was to build peace, and it brought another war to the continent. And how can you fight for Europe if you do not believe in its true heritage: Reason, law, beauty, innovation? Instead, you have made illegal immigrants, the rainbow flag and green madness a symbol of Europe. I forgot about the bottle caps. The President of the European Commission must therefore be dismissed.

During the previous government in Poland, you called for freezing funds in Poland every year in this report because, as it was written in resolution, laws breaching the rule of law in the judiciary were passed. Now you don't call for it. Do you know if any law in Poland, in the judiciary, has changed?

Madam President, I'm sorry. Mr. Commissioner, I'm sorry. First of all, I wanted to ask you, how do you deal with this split self? In Article 15, you write that non-execution of judgments of national courts violates the rule of law. And your people in Poland do this: If they win the verdict, they will recognize it, and if they lose in court, they will not recognize it. In article 39 you say this: politicians cannot interfere in the activities of the media, and in Poland they not only forcibly took over the media, but also the public media financed the activities of the candidate of your party and even admitted it. And what's more, you call in article 47 for more funding for your NGOs. I wanted to show you something, namely it's like this, it's a tree, and through this tree, one of the organisations you've been so eager to bring here to the European Parliament has spent more than half a million on funding your candidate. Unregistered, unpaid, illegal campaign financing. Are you going to teach anyone about the rule of law? It's a shame, isn't it? So once again we want to say, once again very loudly, I believe that this is the last term where you put off such a circus, that you support who you choose, who you want and who you do not, using illegal political tools. It finally has to change. This is the last such term. I remember Mr. Reinders sitting there teaching Poland day and night until he changed the government in Poland. And how did it end? After he taught, he went to the lottery and won his famous money, which you know about. That's what it looked like.

Madam President, I'm sorry. The media in Poland has just uncovered an incredible scandal. Namely, according to the communicators, there was an organized criminal network that smuggled migrants into the European Union and made huge money from it. The prosecutor's office has just filed an indictment in this case. The problem is that the names of current MEPs also appear in these text messages revealed on Signal. And this matter should be urgently clarified...

Mr President, thank you very much. Everything that surrounds us, from bridges, cars, furniture, these modern office buildings or your beloved windmills to photovoltaics, is made of steel. And for the production of durable steel, as well as for the metallurgical industry, coking coal is needed. Coking coal is therefore a strategic raw material without which there will be neither development nor security in the European Union. The largest producer of this raw material in the European Union is Poland and Jastrzębska Spółka Węglowa. Unfortunately, JSW thanks to your colleagues from the Platform is close to collapse. In addition to their inefficiencies, JSW is killing your green policy, and also uncontrolled import of this raw material from outside the European Union, where there is no burden of climate policy. So why are coconut coal and derivatives entering the European Union without the costs of climate policy not subject to duties intended for this? How is the same product from Poland, loaded with a green backpack of costs, to compete with the same product without these loads from Africa? The same goes for soda. The demand for soda in the European Union is and will be. You have just solemnly decided to close one of the largest such plants in the European Union, in Poland, in Janikowo. Hundreds of people on the pavement, and the activity can no longer be rebuilt. The owners say they have not withstood the costs of the Green Deal. So the same soda is supplied to our market by the Turks or the Chinese. So you liquidated your own business so that the planet wouldn't burn up by pulling the same product out of Turkey, emitting even more carbon dioxide. That is why we are tabling an amendment to impose tariffs on soda and coking coal entering the European Union, because we must save our economy, our development and our security.

Madam President, I'm sorry. Mr. Commissioner, I'm sorry. Let's call things by their first name. You have created a secret way of subsidizing the political parties of your choice with the money of all the citizens who have no idea. You're subsidizing hundreds of millions of euros of what you call civic organizations, and in fact they're run by politicians and they're running illegal campaigns. And this is exactly the example of Qatargate: These were organizations that allegedly dealt with the rule of law in Poland and did not notice the money from Qatar. Such an example applies to the current campaign in Poland, where the most expensive Facebook campaign in our country was financed from the outside by, by the way, your favorites, who often visited here. No registration required, no taxes, no nothing. It is simply an incredible scandal and that is why you are so afraid of transparency, that is, of this type of legislation. You are afraid of transparency – whether it is in the Pfizer case, whether it is in the LIFE Green programme, or now as in nation states – to show people how this mechanism really works. And the fact that one party illegally received all the funding from the budget, and the other party, your favorite, not only has this funding, but is also subsidized illegally from outside by third-sector organizations that are supposedly civic, and in fact are political, adds to the taste in Poland. And you call it a fair election? This is the example of Hungary. Transparency, transparency and more transparency.

Madam President, on the 80th anniversary of the end of World War II, you are talking about responsibility, courage, justice. But those are only words. We are still waiting for action. Poland, the country where the war was started, was divided between Germany and Russia after the Ribbentrop‑Molotov Pact. From the first to the last day of the war, Poland was on the right side. It had no institutional collaborators and lost almost 30 % of its pre-war resources – the most in Europe – and six million citizens. One third of this territory was taken and given to Russia. Until today, Poland has not received any reparation – no real compensation, only symbolic. Instead of giving justice and equal chances to Polish citizens, instead of helping new generations of Poles who should not pay for the fact that their parents stayed on the right side and did not collaborate with evil, the EU spent billions on silly ideology because the Earth will burn. This is not responsibility or justice which you are talking about so much. This unfair advantage built through a barbaric attack on the other nations must finally be reduced. This is not only about Poland, but also about Greece, the Baltic states and other victims. This 80th anniversary should finally bring real action to clean this stain. It is time to create compensation and an equal‑opportunity budget in Europe instead of a special budget for green ideology. To make up for the guilt, the effects of the evil must be removed completely.

Madam President, I'm sorry. Mr. Commissioner, I'm sorry. So this is it: The Spaniards have been left without electricity, and you say to the end that you do not know what happened. You are analyzing. You're checking it out. It is even funny, as I observe, that you are trying to do everything not to admit the thing that everyone knows, namely that it is the green policy that is to blame, that is, you. It's like this. On April 16, for the first time in history, the Spaniards boasted that they rely only on renewable energy, which was proudly announced by the left-wing authorities, and a moment later 55 million people were left without electricity. The reason is obvious, i.e. excess electricity was produced and too few synchronous generators with the so-called inertia, i.e. stable energy sources that you fight so much, such as atomic energy or energy from coal, were operating because of too much RES. You just want to cheat the laws of physics. You want to deceive science into believing that this will not burn the planet. What an absurdity. Energy is more expensive in Europe. As a result, our companies are losing competitiveness and Europe is losing importance. And you're putting people in danger of blackouts. In the case of Eastern and Central Europe, this is an invitation addressed to Putin. And just like with Nord Stream, we also explained it to you. You didn't understand anything either, and so on. And now it's like this: What are you going to do about it? This is the most interesting. The Commissioner says to add money from all European taxes precisely in order to mitigate these effects. So, yes, first you make people pay green taxes. They have to spend more of their money each month. And now they have to add, because it does not work. What an absurdity! We must finally put an end to this green madness.

Dear colleagues, I would kindly ask you to vote against this motion. This is, of course, true that the rebels connected to ISIS are not allowing anyone to displace. So not all organisations can get there. However, that does not change the facts. In the last 15 months, a total of 631 people have been murdered in this part of Africa, including 554 Christians. This was confirmed by US administration, previous administration, I need to say so. And then they left the last bodies of children and women in the church as a form of statement. So I kindly ask you to vote against this motion.

Madam President, I'm sorry. Commissioner, I'm sorry. Christians are the most persecuted group in the world. Worldwide, more than 380 million Christians in 78 countries experience intense persecution and discrimination because of their faith. In the 50 countries included in the World Persecution Index, persecution is very high or extremely high. And what's happening in the Congo lately cannot go unanswered. Once again, Christians were murdered there only for their faith, and the bodies were left as a form of statement by the bandits in the church. Over the past 15 months, a total of more than 600 brutally murdered people have been verified there, including more than 500 Christians who died in these attacks. These figures show the systemic nature of the persecution. ISIS-affiliated Allied Democratic Forces have intensified attacks since the declaration of allegiance to the Islamic State, which have become more dramatic, such as attacks and beheadings, some of which are recorded and shown as propaganda. The European Union, which was created by Christians, must call for the most persecuted religion in the world today - the religion of freedom, respect and dialogue.

Madam President, I'm sorry. Well, security, great, but it is good that you first take care of security within the European Union, end migration policy and start respecting the rights and freedoms of citizens. First you cancelled the results of the elections in Romania because the wrong candidate won, and now you have banned the poll leader Marine Le Pen from running in the elections, so as not to risk winning this time. You have done this despite the fact that the Western democratic system is built on the presumption of innocence and instance. And let's be honest, the head of the Constitutional Council who committed such a scandal is a longtime politician of Macron's party. He was just the head of his office and the deputy ceased to be, because he lost the election - the last election - and ironically forbade the person who won this election, and it was with record support. So you didn't really take Marine Le Pen's rights. You have taken away the rights of ordinary citizens, the right to decide their future, who they want to choose. You have noticed that people are increasingly no longer fooling themselves with this propaganda of yours, and you want to take away their rights and give them to the judges of your choice. It is up to them to decide for the citizens. Only then is it neither a separation of powers nor a democracy, but it is the tyranny of the oligarchy. And it does not matter how many times you repeat the word democracy, freedom of citizens, since in your decisions you do everything exactly the opposite, in order to take as many freedoms and rights as possible from citizens and give these rights to the judges of your choice. This has to be over.