Slovenia by Damjan Lajh and Alenka Krašovec

Capital: Population: 2.0 million GNI/capita: US$27,160

Source: The data above was provided by The World Bank, World Bank Indicators 2010.

Nations in Transit Ratings and Averaged Scores 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2009 Electoral Process 1.75 1.75 1.50 1.50 1.50 1.50 1.50 1.50 1.50 1.50 Civil Society 1.75 1.50 1.50 1.50 1.75 1.75 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 Independent Media 1.75 1.75 1.75 1.75 1.50 1.75 2.00 2.25 2.25 2.25 Governance* 2.50 2.25 2.25 2.00 n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a National Democratic Governance n/a n/a n/a n/a 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 Local Democratic Governance n/a n/a n/a n/a 1.50 1.50 1.50 1.50 1.50 1.50 Judicial Framework and Independence 1.50 1.75 1.75 1.75 1.50 1.50 1.50 1.50 1.75 1.75 Corruption 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.25 2.25 2.25 2.50 2.50 Democracy Score 1.88 1.83 1.79 1.75 1.68 1.75 1.82 1.86 1.93 1.93

* Starting with the 2005 edition, Freedom House introduced separate analysis and ratings for national democratic governance and local democratic governance to provide readers with more detailed and nuanced analysis of these two important subjects.

NOTE: The ratings reflect the consensus of Freedom House, its academic advisers, and the author(s) of this report. The opinions expressed in this report are those of the author(s). The ratings are based on a scale of 1 to 7, with 1 representing the highest level of democratic progress and 7 the lowest. The Democracy Score is an average of ratings for the categories tracked in a given year.

496 Nations in Transit 2010 Executive Summary

lovenia has undergone a number of simultaneous transformations since the end of the 1980s: it changed its economic and political system, became an Sindependent state (declared on June 25, 1991), and established itself as an internationally recognized state. As such, joined the United Nations in 1992, the Council of in 1993, and the (EU) and NATO in 2004. On January 1, 2007, the Slovenian tolar was replaced by the euro, and at the end of 2007, Slovenia entered the Association of EU countries that have abolished passport controls at common internal borders. From January to July 2008, Slovenia held the Presidency of the Council of the European Union, the first of the 12 new EU Member States to do so. In 2009, Slovenia witnessed very poor economic indicators and the government faced criticism for its inability to address the local effects of the global economic crisis. The center-left government has presented itself as more open toward civil society organizations and inclined to a consensual style of politics. Nevertheless, trade unions especially were unsatisfied with the social partnership. As a result, at the end of November, they organized mass protests against the government. Elections to the (EP), conducted in June, also sent a warning to the government, with the opposition, the Slovenian Democratic Party (SDP), receiving the highest percentage of votes.

National Democratic Governance. The Slovenian government faced criticism for its inability to sufficiently address the local effects of the global economic crisis, prompting Janez Janša, leader of the opposition SDP, to call for early elections. Yet, during the year, only one, albeit unsuccessful, demand for explanation was leveled at a government official: the Minister of Interior Affairs, Katarina Kresal, in connection with the issue of the “Erased”(persons whose names were moved from the register of permanent residents to that of foreign citizens). In the second half of the year, energies were focused on resolving a border dispute, which allowed to continue its EU accession process. The resignation of Minister without Portfolio Zlata Ploštajner, who was responsible for local self-government and regional development, caused serious conflicts within the Democratic Party of Pensioners of Slovenia. Despite strong criticism of its inability to manage the economic downturn, Slovenia’s national government demonstrated its relative stability throughout the year, especially in reaching a successful border agreement with Croatia. Slovenia’s national democratic governance rating remains at 2.00. Slovenia 497

Electoral Process. On June 7, the second elections to the EP were held in Slovenia. The opposition SDP received the highest percentage of votes, while the governing Social Democrats received a much lower percentage; but it did secure more seats than in 2004. Since the campaign was concentrated around domestic issues, the EP election results could be largely interpreted as the public’s signal to the lead governing party that the government’s measures to stop or alleviate the economic crisis were not viewed as correct or sufficiently forceful. In addition, voter turnout was very low at just 28.3 percent. Slovenia’s electoral process rating remains at 1.50.

Civil Society. The center-left government publicly expressed the importance of dialogue and consultation with civil society and appointed a state secretary in the prime minister’s office responsible for organizing social dialogue with NGOs. Trade unions, however, were especially dissatisfied with the government’s efforts toward social partnership and, at the end of November, organized mass protests against the government. In September, the government appointed the former deputy of the Liberal Democracy of Slovenia, Aleš Gulič, as head of the Office for Religious Communities, triggering protests from the country’s largest religious community, the Catholic Church. Also, the new Family Law Bill was proposed, stimulating public discussion and protest over inclusion of same-sex marriage and allowing same-sex partners to adopt children. Civil society groups within Slovenia remained active and vibrant despite limited opportunities for meaningfully engagement with policy makers, and as a result Slovenia’s civil society rating remains at 2.00

Independent Media. Slovenia’s freedom of the press was considerably challenged when the daily newspaper Dnevnik received an injunction from the Ljubljana District Court barring it from writing about the past activities of Italian businessman Pierpaolo Cerani. Dnevnik appealed and the ruling was overturned. The Ministry of Culture proposed a new Law on Radio-Television Slovenia aimed at reducing government influence on the public broadcaster.The newly proposed Law on Radio-Television Slovenia raised hopes of reducing government influence on the public broadcaster; the country’s independent media rating remains at 2.25.

Local Democratic Governance. The controversial issue of establishing provinces in Slovenia was put on the back burner in 2009. The Bill on Integrity in the Public Sector, which was put into legislative procedure in October, included a proposal to ban simultaneously holding the offices of National Assembly deputy and mayor of a municipality. Also in October, the National Assembly discussed the Capital City of the Republic of Slovenia Act, which would allow the central authorities to co-fund special projects in the municipality. Coalition members supported the act citing the capital city’s need for additional means to implement its tasks, while the opposition reproached the proposal claiming that it represented political payback and put Ljubljana in a privileged position. Slovenia’s local democratic governance rating remains at 1.50. 498 Nations in Transit 2010

Judicial Framework and Independence. In September, the National Assembly adopted four laws to resolve the crisis in the country’s judicial wage system, an issue that prompted the “work-to-rule” strike that judges began in 2008. The opposition criticized the government arguing that the proposed salary hike was too high, especially considering the current financial crisis. The problem heated up even more when some judges and jurisdictional officials sought unpaid back wages from the state in October 2009. Also in October, the Minister of Justice put forward a to clarify the role of the Constitutional Court, strengthen its ability to protect the , and reduce its workload. In December, Constitutional Court Judge Ciril Ribičič ended his mandate and was replaced without controversy by Jadranka Sovdat. The National Assembly resolution on the judicial wage crisis was welcomed in 2009, but reforms to the Constitutional Court had not been enacted by year’s end. Slovenia’s judicial framework and independence rating remains at 1.75.

Corruption. In September, Finnish investigators began an interrogation of Slovenian citizens, including former prime minister Janez Janša, in relation to unproven claims of bribery of Slovenian officials by the Finnish company Patria in order to secure the purchase of armored carriers for the Slovenian army in 2008. While Finland has nearly completed the proceedings, Slovenia has not yet begun investigations. The Bill on Integrity in the Public Sector was prepared but not put into legislative procedure by the end of the year. Prepared by the Ministry of Public Administration, the bill aims to stimulate fair and transparent behavior of civil servants and good practices in decision-making, and establishes the Commission for the Prevention of Corruption as the implementer of these goals. Slovenia’s corruption rating remains at 2.50.

Outlook for 2010. During 2010, Slovenia will continue to face pressure to resolve the financial and economic crisis affecting the country’s increasing unemployment and lagging wages. Controversial debates on adopting the proposed Family Law Bill and Bill on Integrity in the Public Sector will continue. Local elections will be held in 2010 and will likely be heavily marked by the problem of Slovenia’s regionalization and the issue of the legality of being both a deputy in the National Assembly and a mayor at the same time. In international relations, Slovenia will continue to resolve its border question with neighboring Croatia. Slovenia 499 Main Report

National Democratic Governance 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 n/a n/a n/a n/a 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00

Slovenia, according to its constitution (Article 2), is a democratic republic based on the rule of law. The division of powers is provided through checks and balances among the legislative, executive, and judicial branches. The country’s system of government has achieved stability without coercion, violence, or other abuse of basic rights and civil liberties. Citizens may participate in decision-making processes, and referendums have become a stable feature in Slovenian politics, although some experts have argued that referendums in Slovenia are most often used in an undemocratic and illegitimate manner. The role of the president of the republic is weak and mainly ceremonial, while the government holds executive authority. In 2009, the Slovenian government— led by Prime Minister and comprised of a four-party coalition including the Social Democrats (SD), Zares, Democratic Party of Pensioners of Slovenia (DeSUS) and Liberal Democracy of Slovenia (LDS)—became the target of various critics, especially the largest opposition party, the Slovenian Democratic Party (SDP), but also from left-oriented intellectuals. Despite being the most ideologically homogeneous (center-left) coalition in post-communist Slovenia, the so-called cluster of center-left parties was internally divided in 2009. Moreover, throughout the year members of Parliament (MPs) and prominent politicians from Prime Minister Pahor’s own SD party seriously challenged his decisions. The government received strong criticism for its inability to effectively cope with domestic shocks from the global economic crisis. During the past few years, the growth of Slovenia’s GDP had been relatively high—as high as 7 percent in 2007—due mainly to highway projects and other works in the construction sector. But the country’s GDP growth in 2009 fell to –7.8 percent. Also, industrial output declined by 20 percent between May 2008 and May 2009, and this drop in economic activity was greater than the average in the euro zone.1 A budget passed by the previous center-right government predicted a 2009 deficit of 0.3 percent of GDP, but at the beginning of 2009 the center-left government passed a supplemental budget with an anticipated deficit of 3.1 percent. Just a few months later, the same government made another revision to the budget in anticipation of a national debt of 5.5 percent of GDP. The unemployment rate increased from a relatively stable 6.5 percent in June 2008 to 9.3 percent by October 2009, with an average of 9.1 percent for the whole year. The leader of the opposition SDP, Janez Janša, called for early elections in September and October. Poor working conditions, and economic performance, and, ultimately, the layoff of several thousand workers 500 Nations in Transit 2010

by two important Slovenian manufacturers, Gorenje and Mura, also contributed to the call for early elections. In 2009, an unsuccessful interpellation was made against the Minister of Interior Affairs, Katarina Kresal. The demand was made in connection with the government’s efforts to find a solution in line with a 2003 Constitutional Court decision on the so-called Erased. are citizens of former Yugoslavia who, in 1992, were erased from the register of permanent residents of Slovenia and were moved to the register of foreign citizens. As these individuals did not apply for Slovenian citizenship or permanent residence by a certain date, their legal status has remained in limbo. Minister without Portfolio Zlata Ploštajner, responsible for the country’s local self-government and regional development, resigned in 2009. According to a coalition agreement, DeSUS was responsible for the sector, and proposed Henrik Gyjerkeš as Ploštajner’s replacement. The decision over the new minister caused conflicts within the party, since some of the party’s MPs accused the party leader of making the decision alone, without respecting party decision-making rules. Consequently, some MPs left the party and became independent supporters of Prime Minister Pahor’s government. The majority of parliamentary support for the government, however, remained intact. Finally, in the second half of 2009, the Slovenian government was heavily occupied with resolving a slate of Slovenian–Croatian bilateral issues, especially concerning the border dispute that has been linked with Slovenia blocking Croatian European Union (EU) accession negotiations. The Slovenian and Croatian prime ministers agreed to resolve the long-standing border dispute through international arbitration, but the proposed agreement still needs to gain support in both countries. Nonetheless, on the basis of the proposed agreement, Slovenia unblocked the Croatian EU accession negotiations in September, leading to much political debate in both countries.

Electoral Process 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 1.75 1.75 1.50 1.50 1.50 1.50 1.50 1.50 1.50 1.50

Deputies to Slovenia’s National Assembly are elected on the basis of proportional representation with a 4 percent threshold. Only 200 signatures are required to establish a political party, and there are few barriers to political organization, registration, and participation in elections. In practice, it is much easier for parliamentary parties to participate in elections, while non-parliamentary parties and independent candidates must obtain 50 signatures from eight electoral districts. According to the constitution, professionals in the defense forces and the police may not be members of political parties. Similarly, members of the Office of the State Prosecutor and the judiciary may not hold office in a political party. Slovenia 501

On June 7, Slovenia’s second elections to the European Parliament (EP) were held. Altogether, 12 candidate lists competed in the EP elections: all seven parliamentary parties offered their own candidate list; some non-parliamentary parties also ran (, Youth Party of Slovenia, Christian Socialists of Slovenia, and Greens United); and one independent list (Independent List for Patients’ Rights) participated. The governing coalition (SD, Zares, DeSUS, and LDS) received 52.4 percent of the votes at the 2008 parliamentary elections but only 46.9 percent of the votes at the 2009 EP elections. The economic crisis was an important contributing factor in the results of the EP elections. The opposition SDP was the clear winner in the EP elections with 26.6 percent of the votes, although taking only two seats. New Slovenia (NSi) with 16.3 percent of the votes and LDS with 11.5 percent could also be characterized as winners. While, LDS recorded its worst result ever at the 2008 parliamentary election, receiving only 5.2 percent of the votes, NSi failed to pass the 4 percent threshold needed to enter Parliament. However, both parties made a comeback in the 2009 EP elections. This was primarily due to the fact that, in the eyes of the public, both had a candidate who was clearly appropriate to work at the EU level, Lojze Peterle and Jelko Kacin, respectively. Both were incumbent members of European Parliament and prominent politicians who, after several disputes within their own parties, refocused their interests on the EU level. Among the losers, the governing SD, with 18.4 percent of the vote, was the only ruling party not to confirm or improve its results from the 2008 parliamentary election. Prime Minister Pahor acknowledged that his party lost the elections but stressed that its resulting number of EP seats was better than in 2004. Other MPs from the Social Democrats publicly said that it was impossible to view the EP election results as anything but a defeat. Voter turnout for the EP elections was low at 28.3 percent, while voter turnout for the national parliamentary elections in 2008 was 63.1 percent It appears that voters used the 2009 EP elections to send a signal to the leading ruling party that government attempts to stop or alleviate Slovenia’s economic crisis were not seen as correct or sufficiently forceful.

Civil Society 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 1.75 1.50 1.50 1.50 1.75 1.75 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00

Article 42 of the Constitution of Slovenia states that the right of peaceful assembly and public meeting is guaranteed, and that everyone has the right to freedom of association. Legal restrictions of these rights are permissible where so required for national security, public safety, and for protection against the spread of infectious diseases. Slovenian civil society is well developed and vibrant. Of the almost 21,000 non-governmental organizations (NGOs) in the country, the majority are organized as associations and work at the local level in the fields of sports, culture 502 Nations in Transit 2010

and art, as well as in the form of foundations, private institutes, and fire brigades. Slovenia, however, is currently contending with a personnel deficit in the civic sector. Following the ‘golden era’ of Slovenian civil society during the 1980s, which featured the establishment of an independent state and democratic transition, most NGOs today are not involved in public affairs. The Center for Information Service, Cooperation, and Development of NGOs (CNVOS) was established in 2001 to empower organizations to participate in public affairs through publications and an informative Web site. In 2005, the government established an inter-ministerial working body to facilitate cooperation with NGOs, yet cooperation did not flourish and the expectations that NGOs would become more engaged in public affairs following Slovenia’s membership in the EU went unmet. In September 2007, CNVOS and the Office of Government Communication signed an agreement defining relations between the two offices, and that same year the government and NGOs signed a special agreement between the Government Communication Office and the Web portal Predsedovanje.si about communication before and during the Slovenian Presidency of the EU to encourage efficient, interactive, and transparent cooperation.2 To this end, Predsedovanje.si established an electronic means of notifying NGOs of activities and events organized during the presidency and also allowed NGOs to become engaged through online participation. An online forum was established, including moderated discussions and consultations, as well as a system of online petitions, surveys, and other actions. As a result, the viewpoints of NGOs were forwarded to the relevant ministries and other public administration bodies. However, these online activities did not bring radical change in cooperation between the government and civil society. During the term of the center-right government there were two major issues concerning civil society participation: the government enabled only particular civil society organizations to follow and cooperate in policy preparation; and civil society organizations frequently did not have sufficient time to study the material and to effectively participate in policy preparation. By contrast, the center-left government has presented itself as more open toward civil society participation and inclined to a consensual style of politics. In fact, the prominence of consultations and/or consensus building is almost a trademark of Prime Minister Pahor’s style of leadership (which has drawn frequent criticism). The center-left government has several times publicly expressed the importance of social dialogue and appointed a State Secretary, Miloš Pavlica, in the cabinet responsible for organizing contact with social partners (employers and employees organizations), while the other State Secretary, Jožef Školč, is responsible for organizing and managing a dialogue with NGOs. Nevertheless, trade unions were especially dissatisfied with this social partnership, and as a result, the six largest confederations of trade unions organized mass protests against the government at the end of November. As a result, the government again publicly expressed its commitment to social partnership and has continued talks with employer and employee organizations over several reforms (including the pension system, health system, and labor code). Slovenia 503

The increasingly poor working conditions and worsening social situation of several thousand workers led to a spontaneous demonstration at the home appliance manufacturer Gorenje in September. Although a trade union exists within the enterprise, it was not involved in organizing the protest. This also raised the question about the role of trade unions in protecting the rights of workers. A similar revolt took place at the textile factory Mura, which had been in deep distress for several months. The factory employed over 3,000 workers and is situated in the less developed Pomurje region of Slovenia. While at Gorenje workers achieved most of their demands, Mura declared insolvency. Although the government is a minority owner of Mura, it did not offer financial support for the factory in its existing form. Over 2,000 workers lost their jobs, but with the government’s commitment to reforming the factory, it managed to maintain about 1,000 jobs and to keep a strategic foreign partner. The rights of the lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) community became a focal point of civil society in 2009. Although the center-right government had granted same-sex couples some rights (including the right to register a domestic partnership), the LGBT community did not have what could be viewed as equal rights. In 2009, a day before the traditional Gay Pride Parade in Ljubljana, several people threw torches into a bar where gays and lesbians were meeting. In contrast to a similar attack in 2007, the media widely covered the 2009 attack, and the minister of internal affairs joined the Gay Pride Parade the following day to demonstrate his support for the rights of gays and lesbians. The police acted quickly to find the persons responsible for the attack, and the perpetrators were convicted. In October, a public debate in the National Assembly was conducted on a government proposed Family Law Bill. The proposal, which defined marriage as a life-long commitment of two persons of the same or opposite sex and supports adoption by same-sex partners, was widely discussed and met with some resistance. The civil initiative “For Family and the Rights of Children” in Ljubljana organized a “Family Day” advocating the traditional family comprised of father, mother, and children. Representatives of the Catholic and Evangelical Church participated in the event. Furthermore, members of the non-parliamentary NSi party declared their intention to call a referendum if the proposal were adopted. The minister of social affairs raised the question of the referendum’s constitutionality, as the Slovenian constitution does not allow the organizing of referendums on the rights of minorities. On the other hand, there was also some action from groups advocating for the proposed bill. At the end of the year, the government still had not formally sent the proposal to legislative procedure. As of 2009, there were 43 religious communities registered in Slovenia according to the Office for Religious Communities. In September, the government appointed former deputy of the LDS, Aleš Gulič, as Head of the Office for Religious Communities. The appointment of Gulič drew many protests from the country’s largest religious community, the Catholic Church, because during Gulič’s tenure as deputy he twice proposed a law on religious freedom that was heavily criticized by the Church. His appointment led to a conflict between Slovenia and the Vatican; 504 Nations in Transit 2010

when Prime Minister Pahor visited the Vatican, he was told that Pope Benedict was too busy to meet him. The prime minister did, however, meet the high-ranking Slovenian cardinal, Franc Rode, in the Vatican. Cardinal Rode called Gulič’s appointment a “provocation that not even the Communist Party itself would have permitted.”3 The discussion on the “Erased” in Slovenia, put on the back burner in 2008, returned to the agenda in 2009. The determination of the new parliamentary coalition to resolve the problem in April led to a demand for removal of Minister of Internal Affairs, Katarina Kresal. The demand was raised in order to determine the political responsibility for, according to the opposition, the inadequate implementation of a Constitutional Court decision concerning the Erased. The consequences of the decision not being implemented, again according to the opposition, included the creation of clear inequality (positive discrimination against the Erased) before the law and jeopardizing the public finance system (because of the potential to sue a country and the possibility of high compensation awards for damages). In April, there were 31 deputies that supported the demand for Kresal’s removal, while 48 were against it. Thus, the minister of internal affairs retained her office.

Independent Media 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 1.75 1.75 1.75 1.75 1.50 1.75 2.00 2.25 2.25 2.25

In 2009, Slovenia’s ranking dropped from 30 to 37 in Reporters Without Borders’ World Press Freedom Index. In the view of Grega Repovž, President of the Slovene Association of Journalists, this downward slide was not unexpected and was mostly the result of happenings in the media field under former Prime Minister Janez Janša’s government. According to the President of the Association of Journalists and Publicists, Igor Kršinar, 90 percent of media in Slovenia support the political option which has been in power the longest.4 Such statements demonstrate that the problems concerning media freedom and journalist autonomy in Slovenia are heavily connected with media ownership and the role of the state in the media sector. The media ownership situation results from the specific model of privatization that evolved after the collapse of the socialist system and establishment of the Slovene independent state in the early 1990s. The model enabled the state to keep a significant portion of ownership in privatized companies using state- controlled funds. Over the past 15 years, Slovenia’s media have privatized according to that model. Additional problems arose between 2005 and 2007 in relation to controversial changes to media regulation, private takeovers of several daily newspapers, and compositional changes in the governing body of the public service radio and television. In 2009, the judicial branch was criticized for suppressing the daily newspaper Dnevnik from writing about the past activities of Italian businessman Pierpaolo Cerani. During the summer, Cerani acquired the troubled financial firm Infond Slovenia 505

Holding, which formerly controlled the Laško Brewery group. Soon after the takeover, several Slovenian media began to investigate Cerani’s questionable business deals in , which were well covered in the Italian press. When Dnevnik referred to Cerani’s “controversial past,” the businessman asked the Ljubljana District Court to intervene. As a result, the newspaper received an injunction ordering it to cease using language portraying Cerani as “untrustworthy” or face a fine of €50,000 (US$59,500). TheDnevnik editors insisted that the ruling prevented them from covering the story completely. The court decision was condemned by Reporters Without Borders, who called the court’s reasoning “unbelievable and unacceptable for an EU Member State.”5 Legal scholars and experts also strongly supported Dnevnik’s freedom of expression, and pointed to the court’s decision to illustrate how legal issues involving the media have not been judiciously resolved. Dnevnik appealed the court ruling, which was ultimately overturned. Political pressure on the public radio and television broadcaster is a long-term practice in Slovenia. In 2005, the center-right government passed a Law on Radio- Television Slovenia introducing a new formula for selecting the supervisory council of the public broadcaster that even enhanced political/government influence. Under the law, MPs are entitled to appoint the majority of the council’s members, which minimizes the role of civil society in the appointment process. In 2009, the Ministry of Culture began preparing a new Law on Radio- Television Slovenia with the stated aim to reduce government influence. Although several media experts participated in a working group that prepared a draft of the new law, most media experts called for significantly stronger reductions in governmental influence than what appears in the draft proposal. At the end of 2009, it was still unknown what course of action the ministry would take.

Local Democratic Governance 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 n/a n/a n/a n/a 1.50 1.50 1.50 1.50 1.50 1.50

In Slovenia, the municipality is the basis of local self-governance. In accordance with legislation, the territory of a municipality comprises a settlement, or several settlements, bound together by the common needs and interests of residents. The competences of a municipality are regulated autonomously and only affect the residents of the municipality. With prior consent of the municipality, the state may legally vest specific duties under the state’s jurisdiction into the municipality if the state provides financial resources for this purpose. When work has been vested in the municipality, state authorities then supervise whether the work was performed properly and competently. In principle, a municipality is financed from its own resources. Municipalities unable to completely provide for the performance of their duties due to insufficient economic development are assured additional funding by the state in accordance with principles and criteria provided by law. 506 Nations in Transit 2010

Slovenia has no historical tradition of regional government and thus its political-administrative regionalization has been no simple task. To achieve this goal, amendments were made to the Slovenian Constitution in mid-2006 to state that regions, as political-administrative entities, shall be established by a special law, which has yet to be adopted. Accordingly, the constitution manages the issue of regions only in principle, while the procedures for setting up regions, (their size, number, responsibilities, financing and other related issues) will be arranged at some point in the future under a special law on provinces. In November 2007, the government proposed the Act Establishing Provinces, which suggested dividing Slovenia into 14 provinces, but the National Assembly rejected the proposal in late January 2008. In 2009, the debate on establishing provinces was put on the back burner. A new bill on MPs, put into legislative procedure in October 2009, includes a proposal on the incompatibility of two functions, that is, being a deputy in the National Assembly while also holding representative roles on the local level, notably, that of mayor. This is a long-standing debate in Slovenia, but the strong mayoral lobby in the National Assembly (about one-third of deputies are also mayors) has been thus far successful in preventing the introduction of the proposal. Some governmental parties, however, have agreed to try to insert a clause into the new Bill on Integrity in the Public Sector that would prevent anyone from holding the two offices. In October, the National Assembly discussed the proposal for the Capital City of the Republic of Slovenia Act. The proposed act would establish a special relationship between the state and the municipality of Ljubljana, especially with respect to implementing development programs. Co-financing of municipal programs that are of national importance would be enabled by direct contract without requiring public tender. The opposition challenged the proposal, claiming it represented political payback from the ruling coalition to Ljubljana Mayor Zoran Janković, who publicly supported the so-called ‘left triplet’ (SD, LDS and Zares) before the 2008 national parliamentary elections. While members of the coalition are convinced that the capital city needs additional means for implementing its tasks, the opposition rejected the proposal as putting Ljubljana in a privileged position.

Judicial Framework and Independence 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 1.50 1.75 1.75 1.75 1.50 1.50 1.50 1.50 1.75 1.75

The Slovenian judicial system includes 44 local courts, 11 district courts, 4 courts of appeal, the Supreme Court, and the Constitutional Court. The Supreme Court is the highest regular court, while the Constitutional Court has the special function and judicial role of protecting fundamental rights and liberties. Judges are elected by the National Assembly on the proposal of the Judicial Council, and may not belong to any political party. The National Assembly elects five persons to the Judicial Slovenia 507

Council on the proposal of the president from a group of candidates (comprised of university law professors and attorneys); judges holding permanent judicial office elect six members from their own ranks. The Constitutional Court is composed of nine judges elected by the National Assembly on the proposal of the president. Constitutional Court judges elect the president of the Constitutional Court also from their own ranks for a three-year term. Despite reform efforts, the judicial system remains overburdened, with long delays in trials. In July 2008, Slovenian judges initiated a “work-to-rule” strike over their inclusion in the public sector salary system. The Constitutional Court sided with the judges, declaring that the judiciary represents a third branch of power and therefore their wage system must be comparable with those of the executive and legislative branches. As a result, one of the more pressing problems that new Minister of Justice Aleš Zalar had to resolve in 2009 included negotiations with judges on arranging their wage system. In September, the National Assembly adopted four laws concerning judicial wages. The National Council vetoed the proposed wage system, but the National Assembly overturned the ruling. As a result, the opposition SDP and (SNP) issued a call for a referendum on two adopted acts: Act on the Wage System in the Public Sector and the Judicial Service Act. The governing coalition, however, demanded that the Constitutional Court decide the constitutionality of holding the referendum. The opposition reproached the government, arguing that the Constitutional Court had never set a concrete salary level for judges and that the proposed raise was too high, especially given the country’s current economic crisis and high unemployment. This was a heated public topic, stirring political debates not only among the opposition but also in the governing coalition parties. In October, some judges and jurisdictional officials sought unpaid back wages from the state. In November, the Constitutional Court reached a unanimous decision that the referendum would cause an unconstitutional situation and the referendum was not organized. For the last couple of years, legal experts have ascertained that the Constitutional Court is overburdened. At the end of October, the minister of justice publicly presented proposals to amend those areas of the constitution addressing the role and responsibilities of the Constitutional Court. The key question in preparing the amendment proposals has been how to strengthen the role of the Constitutional Court as a guardian of the constitution. The younger generation of constitutional scholars argues that the Ministry of Justice’s strategic plan on how to reduce the Constitutional Court overload is not conceptually founded, methodologically reasonable, or constitutionally persuasive. Talks on potential constitutional amendment continued through the end of the year. In December, the mandate of Constitutional Court Judge Ciril Ribičič expired. President Danilo Türk collected proposals for a new candidate several months prior to the end of Ribičič’s tenure, as a post on the Constitutional Court is not very attractive for top-level legal experts due to the aforementioned problems related to workload and pay. Furthermore, deputies have not typically supported candidates 508 Nations in Transit 2010

nominated by the president. However, on December 19, Jadranka Sovdat, with parliamentary support, replaced Ribičič.

Corruption 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.25 2.25 2.25 2.50 2.50

Slovenia adopted the Law on Prevention of Corruption in 2003, followed in 2004 by the first Slovenian anticorruption strategy and the Resolution on the Prevention of Corruption in the Republic of Slovenia. The strategy included 172 measures to eliminate conditions for the appearance and spread of corruption in investigative, prosecutorial, and judicial bodies and in the areas of politics, state administration, business, NGOs, the media, and the general public. Slovenia’s Commission for the Prevention of Corruption began operations in October 2004. The commission has five members, two of whom are proposed by the speaker of the National Assembly, one by the parliamentary Commission for Mandates and Elections, one by the Judicial Council, and one by the government. The commission’s tasks are mostly preventive, to ensure that officials do not abuse public office for private business gain. Although the commission continuously fights the threat of its abolishment, it remains an effective enforcer of the Law on Prevention of Corruption and a confident watchdog of public employees. In 2009, a conflict emerged between the Commission for the Prevention of Corruption and the parliamentary commission established under the Prevention of Corruption Act led by a deputy from the opposition SDP. The parliamentary commission changed its standing orders, which now enables it to be informed about all reports, including information on those reporting acts of corruption. Drago Kos, head of the Commission for the Prevention of Corruption, argues that such provisions provide the parliamentary commission (politicians) with full access to information on all corruption matters, which is not in accordance with one of the basic principles of an anticorruption commission—protecting the identity of informers. According to Kos, the commission sometimes receives very sensitive reports where deputies of the National Assembly are informers, and such a change to the parliamentary commission’s role represents an attack on the independence of the Commission for the Prevention of Corruption.6 In 2009, the biggest corruption case in Slovenia continued over the still unproven claims of bribery of Slovenian officials by the Finnish company Patria to finalize the purchase of armored carriers for the Slovenian army. In September, Finnish investigators began interrogating Slovenian citizens suspected of involvement in the Patria affair, including former prime minister Janša. According to Drago Kos, 7 the judicial investigation in Finland is already completed, and the case there is solid enough for some convictions. The situation is quite different in Slovenia, where no criminal complaints have been filed and an investigation has yet to begin. Slovenia 509

Just before the 2009 EP elections, it was revealed that Gregor Golobič, leader of the governmental Zares party and minister of higher education, science, and technology, hid the truth in response to journalists’ explicit questions about the source of his wealth.8 While the opposition claimed that Golobič had lied and should resign his ministerial post (thereby leaving politics), Golobič admitted he had made a mistake and his party defended him, noting that he had reported his financial means to the Anticorruption Commission. Other governing coalition parties tried to avoid taking any clear positions, and Golobič did not resign. As a result, deputies of the opposition SDP, SNP, and Slovenian People’s Party (SPP) in the National Assembly demanded the creation of a special investigative commission. In July 2009, a Commission of Inquiry was formed to investigate several topics, connected with the assumed clientelism and corrupt practices of Minister Golobič. The commission is formally known as: “Commission of Inquiry for determining the political responsibility with regard to alleged clientelism and corrupt conduct by the Minister of Higher Education, Science and Technology Gregor Golobič in obtaining considerable public grants and deals on public procurement for the companies of the Ultra group (Urbana city card, system for tracking and monitoring the buses of the public company Ljubljanski potniški promet d.o.o., fictive security services for the company Mercator d.,d., computerisation of students’ meals supposedly provided by the company Margento R&D d.o.o., etc.) co-owned by Gregor Golobič, and in transferring electronic communications from the ministry of economy to the ministry of higher education, science and technology; for determining the political responsibility with regard to the allegation that the Minister of Higher Education, Science and Technology Gregor Golobič evaded taxes, unduly obtained the status of farmer to purchase agricultural land, and failed to fully report his material standing and the origin thereof to the competent authorities; for determining the political responsibility of the Minister of Higher Education, Science and Technology Gregor Golobič with regard to alleged avoidance of taxes in the Republic of Slovenia, parallel with his active involvement in increasing the tax burdens of the citizens of the Republic of Slovenia; and for determining the political responsibility with regard to alleged clientelism and corruptive conduct by the Minister of Higher Education, Science and Technology Gregor Golobič to obtain poorly-insured loans granted by the mainly state-owned NLB d.d. bank for the companies of the Ultra group.” By year’s end the commission had not been very active. The Bill on Integrity in the Public Sector, prepared by the Ministry of Public Administration, was presented in March 2009, but it was not put into legislative procedure by the end of the year. The chief aim of the bill is to stimulate fair and transparent behavior among civil servants and good practices in decision-making. The bill is intended to govern implementation of the goals of the Commission for the Prevention of Corruption. 510 Nations in Transit 2010

Author: Damjan Lajh and Alenka Krašovec Damjan Lajh is assistant professor at the Faculty of Social Sciences, University of Ljubljana, Slovenia, and a researcher in the Center of Political Science Research at the same university. Alenka Krašovec is associate professor at the Faculty of Social Sciences and a researcher in the Center of Political Science Research at the same university.

1 Urad za makroekonomske analize in razvoj [The Office for Macroeconomic Analysis and Development] Poročilo o razvoju [Report on Development], Ljubljana, 2010. 2 Dogovor med Uradom vlade za komuniciranje in portalom www.predsedovanje.si o komuniciranju pred in med predsedovanjem Slovenije EU [Agreement between the Government Communication Office and portal www.predsedovanje.si about Informing Before and During Slovenian Presidency to the EU], http://www.predsedovanje.si/files/ dogovor_predsedovanje-ukom.pdf (accessed April 14, 2008). 3 Delo and Dnevnik, September 17, 2009. 4 “Kršinarja in Repovža poročilo Novinarjev brez meja ne preseneča” [Kršinar and Repovž Are Not Surprised over the Report of Reporters without Borders], Siol, October 20, 2009, http:// www.siol.net/Slovenija/Novice/2009/10/Krsinarja_in_Repovza_porocilo_Novinarjev_brez_ meja_ne_preseneca.aspx. 5 Dnevnik ne sme pisati o Ceraniju [Dnevnik Is Not Allowed to Write about Cerani], rtvslo. si, http://www.rtvslo.si/slovenija/dnevnik-ne-sme-pisati-o-ceraniju/210291 (accessed August 19, 2009). 6 “Kos: Napadli so neodvisnost Protikorupcijske komisije” [Kos: They Have Attacked the Independence of Anti-corruption Commission], Finance, October 13, 2009, http://www. finance.si/260320/Kos-Napadli-so-neodvisnost-protikorupcijske-komisije?sort=asc. 7 Slovenian Press Agency “Anti-Graft Boss Says Patria Trial in Finland Expected in Autumn,” August 6, 2009, http://www.sta.si/vest.php?s=s&id=1416077&pr=1. 8 “Gregor Golobič priznal, da je lagal” [Gregor Golobič admitted he has lied], Dnevnik, June 4, 2009, http://www.dnevnik.si/novice/slovenija/1042271862.