Horizontal Accountability
#9Key Findings
Slovenia falls into the upper-middle ranks (rank 9) in the area of horizontal accountability.
The independent and well-respected Court of Audit monitors the use of public funds and audits all institutions receiving public or European funds. The Office of the Information Commissioner handles complaints in the area of personal data privacy.
While most governments respect judicial independence, three-time Prime Minister Janša criticized the judiciary and contributed to declines in the rule of law. Civil rights and liberties are generally highly respected. Discrimination against same-sex couples occurs, but same-sex marriages and adoptions have been legalized.
Officeholders who break the law or engage in corruption are generally investigated, but oversight institutions’ performance is somewhat weak. A significant share of the public lacks confidence in anticorruption measures. The parliament has sufficient resources and powers to oversee the executive and help shape policy effectively.
The independent and well-respected Court of Audit monitors the use of public funds and audits all institutions receiving public or European funds. The Office of the Information Commissioner handles complaints in the area of personal data privacy.
While most governments respect judicial independence, three-time Prime Minister Janša criticized the judiciary and contributed to declines in the rule of law. Civil rights and liberties are generally highly respected. Discrimination against same-sex couples occurs, but same-sex marriages and adoptions have been legalized.
Officeholders who break the law or engage in corruption are generally investigated, but oversight institutions’ performance is somewhat weak. A significant share of the public lacks confidence in anticorruption measures. The parliament has sufficient resources and powers to oversee the executive and help shape policy effectively.
Graph View
Graph View
Is there an independent audit office? To what extent is it capable of exercising effective oversight?
10
9
9
There exists an effective and independent audit office.
8
7
6
7
6
There exists an effective and independent audit office, but its role is somewhat limited.
5
4
3
4
3
There exists an independent audit office, but its role is considerably limited.
2
1
1
There is no independent and effective audit office.
The Court of Audit, which was established in 1991 and has been operational since 1995, is an independent state body tasked with monitoring and ensuring the transparent and efficient use of public funds in Slovenia. It audits all public institutions that receive public or European funds. Financially independent, it presents a financial plan to the National Assembly, which authorizes funds, making it an autonomous budget user. While mandated to conduct certain audits, no entity can delegate tasks or issue instructions. However, the National Assembly and the government can propose specific audits, with the court selecting at least five proposals from the National Assembly, including two from opposition MPs. Additionally, it can initiate audits based on initiatives from individuals and civil society organizations. The National Assembly appoints the president and two deputies of the court for nine-year terms.
The highly trusted Court of Audit regularly conducts effective and independent audits, prompting remedial actions for identified irregularities. From 2020 to 2022, it faced pressures from both the government and the opposition, including internal conflicts over audit reports, notably regarding the procurement of COVID-19 protective equipment.
During the same government’s tenure, Prime Minister Janša initially refused to nominate two Slovenian prosecutors proposed by the Judicial Council to the EU Public Prosecutor’s Office (EPPO). After negotiations and EU intervention, the government finally informed the EPPO about the candidates in November 2021, leading to their nomination for a five-year term.
Under Robert Golob’s new government, a new president of the Court of Audit was appointed in July 2022, following changes in the deputy president position in 2021. In 2022, the court issued numerous audit reports, summary reports, and post-audit reports covering 94 audited entities. The National Assembly committee overseeing public finances reviews these reports regularly, and the media frequently covers the court’s findings.
Citations:
Računsko sodišče. 2023. “Poročilo o delu 2022.” https://www.rs-rs.si/o-racunskem-sodiscu/o-racunskem-sodiscu/o-nas/
Delo. 2023. “Evropska delegirana tožilca.” https://www.delo.si/tag/evropska-delegirana-tozilca/
Dnevnik. 2021. “Po izvolitvi Frank Elerjeve in Oštirja za delegirana tožilca Dikaučič želi spremeniti zakonodajo.” https://www.dnevnik.si/1042977756
The highly trusted Court of Audit regularly conducts effective and independent audits, prompting remedial actions for identified irregularities. From 2020 to 2022, it faced pressures from both the government and the opposition, including internal conflicts over audit reports, notably regarding the procurement of COVID-19 protective equipment.
During the same government’s tenure, Prime Minister Janša initially refused to nominate two Slovenian prosecutors proposed by the Judicial Council to the EU Public Prosecutor’s Office (EPPO). After negotiations and EU intervention, the government finally informed the EPPO about the candidates in November 2021, leading to their nomination for a five-year term.
Under Robert Golob’s new government, a new president of the Court of Audit was appointed in July 2022, following changes in the deputy president position in 2021. In 2022, the court issued numerous audit reports, summary reports, and post-audit reports covering 94 audited entities. The National Assembly committee overseeing public finances reviews these reports regularly, and the media frequently covers the court’s findings.
Citations:
Računsko sodišče. 2023. “Poročilo o delu 2022.” https://www.rs-rs.si/o-racunskem-sodiscu/o-racunskem-sodiscu/o-nas/
Delo. 2023. “Evropska delegirana tožilca.” https://www.delo.si/tag/evropska-delegirana-tozilca/
Dnevnik. 2021. “Po izvolitvi Frank Elerjeve in Oštirja za delegirana tožilca Dikaučič želi spremeniti zakonodajo.” https://www.dnevnik.si/1042977756
Is there an independent authority that effectively holds government offices accountable for their handling of data protection and privacy issues?
10
9
9
An independent and effective data protection authority exists.
8
7
6
7
6
An independent and effective data protection authority exists, but its role is somewhat limited.
5
4
3
4
3
A data protection authority exists, but both its independence and effectiveness are considerably limited.
2
1
1
There is no effective and independent data protection office.
The Office of the Information Commissioner, an autonomous institution that also ensures and monitors personal data protection, was established in 2005. The current Information Commissioner has extensive experience in this area, having held office since 2014 (her second term began in 2019) and previously served as deputy commissioner from 2003 – 2008. The commissioner has a five-year mandate and is appointed by the National Assembly on the proposal of the president of the republic.
The funds for the commissioner’s work are allocated from the state budget once the National Assembly determines them based on the commissioner’s proposal. The institution’s functions in data protection include monitoring the implementation of laws regulating the processing and protection of personal data and acting as an appeal body in the event of complaints from individuals about refusals to provide personal data.
Personal data protection is addressed in several other laws, resulting in a wide range of initiatives and complaints from various areas. For example, in 2022, the commissioner received 1,030 requests or initiatives for introducing the inspection procedure and 160 complaints regarding violations of individuals’ rights. Additionally, the office received 12 cases of unauthorized disclosure or other unauthorized processing of patients’ personal data, dealt with 81 complaints from individuals about breaches of the right to access their data, and received 22 complaints about violations of the right to erasure of their data.
According to the Information Commissioner, she has faced many problems and challenges due to legal confusion in this area. However, the new Law on Personal Data Protection, adopted at the end of 2022, along with other laws and regulations, represents an improvement in Slovenia’s regulatory system for better personal data protection.
Decisions and statements by the commissioner regarding personal data protection have often been labeled as rigid positions under pressure from politicians and the media. During the COVID-19 pandemic, government representatives even blamed the commissioner for vaccination problems in Slovenia. Nevertheless, the Information Commissioner proved to be an independent state institution, and the public recognized this.
Two government offices handle data protection, among other responsibilities. The Government Office for Information Security focuses on enhancing information security. Its primary goal is to increase resilience to cyber threats that endanger individuals, businesses, the government, and society. Meanwhile, the Government Office for the Protection of Classified Information handles the classification and protection of sensitive information. It ensures the development and implementation of standards for safeguarding classified information within government agencies, local authorities, public license holders, non-governmental organizations, and commercial companies that manage classified data. The office also grants authorizations for legal entities to access classified information and issues security certificates.
Citations:
Informacijski pooblaščenec. 2023. “Letno poročilo Informacijskega pooblaščenca 2022.” https://www.ip-rs.si/fileadmin/user_upload/Pdf/porocila/LP2022.pdf
The Slovenia Times. 2021. “Vaccination Coordinator Blames Info Commissioner For Vaccination Problems.” https://sloveniatimes.com/23954/vaccination-coordinator-blames-info-commissioner-for-vaccination-problems
The funds for the commissioner’s work are allocated from the state budget once the National Assembly determines them based on the commissioner’s proposal. The institution’s functions in data protection include monitoring the implementation of laws regulating the processing and protection of personal data and acting as an appeal body in the event of complaints from individuals about refusals to provide personal data.
Personal data protection is addressed in several other laws, resulting in a wide range of initiatives and complaints from various areas. For example, in 2022, the commissioner received 1,030 requests or initiatives for introducing the inspection procedure and 160 complaints regarding violations of individuals’ rights. Additionally, the office received 12 cases of unauthorized disclosure or other unauthorized processing of patients’ personal data, dealt with 81 complaints from individuals about breaches of the right to access their data, and received 22 complaints about violations of the right to erasure of their data.
According to the Information Commissioner, she has faced many problems and challenges due to legal confusion in this area. However, the new Law on Personal Data Protection, adopted at the end of 2022, along with other laws and regulations, represents an improvement in Slovenia’s regulatory system for better personal data protection.
Decisions and statements by the commissioner regarding personal data protection have often been labeled as rigid positions under pressure from politicians and the media. During the COVID-19 pandemic, government representatives even blamed the commissioner for vaccination problems in Slovenia. Nevertheless, the Information Commissioner proved to be an independent state institution, and the public recognized this.
Two government offices handle data protection, among other responsibilities. The Government Office for Information Security focuses on enhancing information security. Its primary goal is to increase resilience to cyber threats that endanger individuals, businesses, the government, and society. Meanwhile, the Government Office for the Protection of Classified Information handles the classification and protection of sensitive information. It ensures the development and implementation of standards for safeguarding classified information within government agencies, local authorities, public license holders, non-governmental organizations, and commercial companies that manage classified data. The office also grants authorizations for legal entities to access classified information and issues security certificates.
Citations:
Informacijski pooblaščenec. 2023. “Letno poročilo Informacijskega pooblaščenca 2022.” https://www.ip-rs.si/fileadmin/user_upload/Pdf/porocila/LP2022.pdf
The Slovenia Times. 2021. “Vaccination Coordinator Blames Info Commissioner For Vaccination Problems.” https://sloveniatimes.com/23954/vaccination-coordinator-blames-info-commissioner-for-vaccination-problems
Graph View
To what extent does an independent judiciary ensure that the government, administration and legislature operate in accordance with the constitution and law?
10
9
9
The judiciary effectively ensures that the government and legislature act in accordance with the law.
8
7
6
7
6
The judiciary usually manages to ensure that the government and legislature act in accordance with the law.
5
4
3
4
3
The judiciary fails to ensure effective legal compliance in some crucial cases.
2
1
1
The judiciary fails to ensure effective legal control.
Slovenia’s judiciary is characterized by a constitutionally guaranteed separation of powers among the legislative, executive, and judicial branches, ensuring the application of the principle of checks and balances. Independent courts and the Constitutional Court conduct judicial reviews of legislation and administrative actions. Political actors in Slovenia have generally respected the rule of law as a core value. In practice, however, there are several issues regarding respect for the courts and their decisions.
The Slovenian Democratic Party (SDS) and its leader, Janez Janša, faced significant challenges in this regard, especially during their governance from 2020 to 2022. For instance, in 2021, the SDS-led government avoided nominating the delegated prosecutors to the European Public Prosecutor’s Office and delayed making payments to the Slovenian Press Agency, despite court rulings. Janša, a three-time prime minister, has been a longtime critic of the Slovenian judiciary and has undermined public trust in the courts with various statements. V-Dem data indicates that the rule of law deteriorated in 2020 and 2021 but improved in 2022.
Following the 2022 parliamentary elections, the ruling coalition led by the Freedom Movement declared its intention to respect judicial independence. In 2022, serious discussions about judicial appointments began, aiming to strengthen the judiciary’s independence from politics. The proposed change suggests that judges should be appointed by the president of the republic rather than the National Assembly. However, organizations of judges and some legal experts have criticized the proposed reform and other planned changes.
The Constitutional Court’s decisions have been especially difficult for various governments to implement. Both the government and the National Assembly have long been criticized for failing to enforce several of its rulings. In January 2024, judges and prosecutors went on strike to protest the government’s failure to raise their salaries to align with those of the other two branches of government, as demanded by the Constitutional Court. The judiciary has had major problems with backlogs, although this has improved in recent years. The 2022 edition of the EU Justice Scoreboard also showed that the public trusts the Slovenian judiciary. For years, those working in the judiciary have complained about inadequate infrastructure and poor working conditions.
Citations:
Freedom House. 2023. “Slovenia.” https://freedomhouse.org/country/slovenia
Varieties of Democracy. 2024. “Democracy Report.” https://v-dem.net/
Krašovec, A. and Lajh, D. 2021. “Slovenia: Tilting the Balance?” In G. Verheugen, K. Vodička, and M. Brusis, eds., Demokratie im postkommunistischen EU-Raum, 161-174. Wiesbaden: Springer.
The Slovenia Times. 2024. “Judges and Prosecutors Stage Protest Over Pay.” https://sloveniatimes.com/40119/judges-and-prosecutors-stage-protest-over-pay
The Slovenian Democratic Party (SDS) and its leader, Janez Janša, faced significant challenges in this regard, especially during their governance from 2020 to 2022. For instance, in 2021, the SDS-led government avoided nominating the delegated prosecutors to the European Public Prosecutor’s Office and delayed making payments to the Slovenian Press Agency, despite court rulings. Janša, a three-time prime minister, has been a longtime critic of the Slovenian judiciary and has undermined public trust in the courts with various statements. V-Dem data indicates that the rule of law deteriorated in 2020 and 2021 but improved in 2022.
Following the 2022 parliamentary elections, the ruling coalition led by the Freedom Movement declared its intention to respect judicial independence. In 2022, serious discussions about judicial appointments began, aiming to strengthen the judiciary’s independence from politics. The proposed change suggests that judges should be appointed by the president of the republic rather than the National Assembly. However, organizations of judges and some legal experts have criticized the proposed reform and other planned changes.
The Constitutional Court’s decisions have been especially difficult for various governments to implement. Both the government and the National Assembly have long been criticized for failing to enforce several of its rulings. In January 2024, judges and prosecutors went on strike to protest the government’s failure to raise their salaries to align with those of the other two branches of government, as demanded by the Constitutional Court. The judiciary has had major problems with backlogs, although this has improved in recent years. The 2022 edition of the EU Justice Scoreboard also showed that the public trusts the Slovenian judiciary. For years, those working in the judiciary have complained about inadequate infrastructure and poor working conditions.
Citations:
Freedom House. 2023. “Slovenia.” https://freedomhouse.org/country/slovenia
Varieties of Democracy. 2024. “Democracy Report.” https://v-dem.net/
Krašovec, A. and Lajh, D. 2021. “Slovenia: Tilting the Balance?” In G. Verheugen, K. Vodička, and M. Brusis, eds., Demokratie im postkommunistischen EU-Raum, 161-174. Wiesbaden: Springer.
The Slovenia Times. 2024. “Judges and Prosecutors Stage Protest Over Pay.” https://sloveniatimes.com/40119/judges-and-prosecutors-stage-protest-over-pay
How well does the executive branch and its members uphold and safeguard civil rights, and to what extent do the courts effectively protect citizens against rights violations?
10
9
9
There are no limits or constraints on the realization of civil rights.
8
7
6
7
6
There are no significant limits or constraints on the realization of civil rights.
5
4
3
4
3
There are some significant limits or constraints on the realization of civil rights.
2
1
1
There are multiple significant limits or constraints on the realization of civil rights.
Civil rights are codified in the constitution and legislation and are generally respected by state institutions. Oversight and advocacy institutions, such as the Human Rights Ombudsman, play a crucial role in upholding these rights. Established by the 1991 constitution, the Human Rights Ombudsman is an independent and autonomous authority widely respected by the public, with the first Ombudsman taking office in 1994. The Ombudsman’s annual reports are regularly presented to the National Assembly, and the government prepares responses to his findings, criticisms, and proposals.
The Advocate for the Principle of Equality, established in 2016, is less well known despite its numerous activities. This institution protects against discrimination in both the public and private sectors and, in certain cases, for legal entities. It informs, advises, and represents individuals who believe they have been discriminated against and assesses regulations for discriminatory practices.
V-Dem data indicates that civil liberties are generally highly respected in Slovenia, though there was a decline in 2020 and 2021, as noted by Amnesty International. The situation improved in 2022. Despite the existing legal framework, women still earn less than men for the same work, although Slovenia has one of the lowest gender pay gaps. Discrimination against same-sex couples has occurred, but there have been legal improvements. In 2022, the National Assembly amended legislation to legalize same-sex marriages and adoptions following a Constitutional Court ruling that restricting these rights to heterosexual couples was unconstitutional.
In 2023, after decades of debate and previous refusals to implement the law passed in 2021, the new Long-Term Care Act came into force to address the inadequate care services for Slovenia’s growing elderly population. The Ombudsman’s 2022 report was critical, highlighting an increase in the number of cases handled compared to pre-pandemic levels, though fewer than during the pandemic in 2020 and 2021. The report covered a wide range of civil rights issues and noted that Slovenian society is becoming more intolerant and desensitized to others, coinciding with a decline in social standards experienced by most citizens.
Citations:
Amnesty International. 2023. “Amnesty International Report 2022/23: The State of the World’s Human Rights.” https://www.amnesty.org/en/documents/pol10/5670/2023/en/
Human Rights Ombudsman. 2023. “Summary of the Work of the Human Rights Ombudsman of the Republic of Slovenia 2022.” https://www.varuh-rs.si/fileadmin/user_upload/pdf/lp/LP_2022/Summary_of_the_work_of_the_Human_Rights_Ombudsman_of_the_Republic_of_Slovenia_for_2022.pdf
Republika Slovenia, Zagovornik načela enakosti. 2023. https://zagovornik.si
Varieties of Democracy. 2024. “Democracy Report.” https://v-dem.net/
The Advocate for the Principle of Equality, established in 2016, is less well known despite its numerous activities. This institution protects against discrimination in both the public and private sectors and, in certain cases, for legal entities. It informs, advises, and represents individuals who believe they have been discriminated against and assesses regulations for discriminatory practices.
V-Dem data indicates that civil liberties are generally highly respected in Slovenia, though there was a decline in 2020 and 2021, as noted by Amnesty International. The situation improved in 2022. Despite the existing legal framework, women still earn less than men for the same work, although Slovenia has one of the lowest gender pay gaps. Discrimination against same-sex couples has occurred, but there have been legal improvements. In 2022, the National Assembly amended legislation to legalize same-sex marriages and adoptions following a Constitutional Court ruling that restricting these rights to heterosexual couples was unconstitutional.
In 2023, after decades of debate and previous refusals to implement the law passed in 2021, the new Long-Term Care Act came into force to address the inadequate care services for Slovenia’s growing elderly population. The Ombudsman’s 2022 report was critical, highlighting an increase in the number of cases handled compared to pre-pandemic levels, though fewer than during the pandemic in 2020 and 2021. The report covered a wide range of civil rights issues and noted that Slovenian society is becoming more intolerant and desensitized to others, coinciding with a decline in social standards experienced by most citizens.
Citations:
Amnesty International. 2023. “Amnesty International Report 2022/23: The State of the World’s Human Rights.” https://www.amnesty.org/en/documents/pol10/5670/2023/en/
Human Rights Ombudsman. 2023. “Summary of the Work of the Human Rights Ombudsman of the Republic of Slovenia 2022.” https://www.varuh-rs.si/fileadmin/user_upload/pdf/lp/LP_2022/Summary_of_the_work_of_the_Human_Rights_Ombudsman_of_the_Republic_of_Slovenia_for_2022.pdf
Republika Slovenia, Zagovornik načela enakosti. 2023. https://zagovornik.si
Varieties of Democracy. 2024. “Democracy Report.” https://v-dem.net/
To what extent are public officeholders prevented from abusing their position for private interests?
10
9
9
Legal, political and public integrity mechanisms effectively prevent public officeholders from abusing their positions.
8
7
6
7
6
Most integrity mechanisms are effective and provide disincentives for public officeholders to abuse their positions.
5
4
3
4
3
Few integrity mechanisms are effective and provide disincentives for public officeholders to abuse their positions.
2
1
1
Public officeholders can exploit their offices for private gain as they see fit without fear of legal consequences or adverse publicity.
In general, officeholders who break the law or engage in corruption are investigated. However, the relatively poor performance of various oversight institutions is evident, likely due to certain legal and procedural loopholes in prosecuting abuse of office. In 2023, Eurobarometer found that 38% of respondents in Slovenia believe those caught committing minor corruption offenses are adequately punished, while only 18% believe the same for those caught bribing senior officials. Despite the Commission for the Prevention of Corruption being quite active, it is not as respected today as it was ten years ago. The commission’s powers remain relatively limited, with GRECO (Group of States Against Corruption) calling for adequate financial and human resources in 2023. The commission’s reports and findings often face public criticism, including from politicians, and are not always respected. The president of the commission believes systemic changes and education in integrity, accountability, and transparency are necessary.
Overall, while there are mechanisms to investigate and address corruption among officeholders, the effectiveness of these efforts is hindered by institutional weaknesses and insufficient resources. The public perception reflects a lack of confidence in the adequacy of punishments for corruption, particularly for higher-level offenses.
The commission’s online app, ERAR, continues to provide transparency into transactions of public and state-owned companies but is generally considered inferior to its predecessor, Supervizor. In 2023, a Eurobarometer survey found that 83% of Slovenians believe corruption is widespread, although this is 4% less than in 2022. The Corruption Perception Index shows no progress in the fight against corruption in Slovenia, with the index score at 56 in 2023. The score has fallen below 60 for the previous two years, whereas it was 60 or above from 2015 to 2020. For a decade, the public has viewed corruption as one of Slovenia’s biggest problems, especially systemic corruption.
In 2023, the OECD raised concerns about the lack of enforcement of foreign bribery offenses, noting that Slovenia has not prosecuted any foreign bribery cases since joining the Anti-Bribery Convention in 1999. GRECO was also dissatisfied with Slovenia’s progress in 2023, finding that only five of the 15 recommendations from the Fifth Round Evaluation Report had been satisfactorily implemented or addressed. Key recommendations, such as developing an integrity plan for the government and promoting awareness of integrity issues, had not been fully implemented.
In 2023, the Slovenian Commission for the Prevention of Corruption addressed high-profile issues, including alleged corruption in the healthcare sector and cases involving politicians, such as an member of parliament, a minister, and Prime Minister Robert Golob. The commission investigated alleged unauthorized pressure from Prime Minister Golob on former Interior Minister Tatjana Bobnar and other Interior Ministry employees. The Law on Whistleblower Protection also came into force in 2023.
The 2013 Law on Political Parties prohibits donations from companies to political parties, while foreign funding has been banned for decades. Annual financial reports submitted by parties to the Agency of the Republic of Slovenia for Public Law and Related Services show that parties rely heavily on public funds. Parties receiving at least 1% of votes in the previous parliamentary elections are entitled to state budget funds.
In 2023, the law was amended to allocate 10% of the total party funding budget equally among all eligible parties, with the remaining 90% distributed according to their vote share. This distribution was in place from 2000 – 2013; in the past ten years, the shares were 25% and 75%, respectively. Indirect public party funding includes additional funds for organizational and administrative support. The Court of Audit is required to audit parties’ financial reports, but sanctions for breaches of the law are rarely implemented.
Citations:
Group of States Against Corruption. 2023. “Fifth Evaluation Round: Slovenia.” https://rm.coe.int/fifth-evaluation-round-preventing-corruption-and-promoting-integrity-i/1680aa9f5d
OECD. 2023. Implementing the OECD Anti-Bribery Convention: Phase 4 Two-Year Follow-Up Report: Slovenia. https://web-archive.oecd.org/2023-03-13/653088-slovenia-phase-4-follow-up-report.pdf
Transparency International. 2023. “Corruption Perception Index.” https://www.transparency.org/en
Tranparency International Slovenia. 2023. “Julijski barometer o zaznavi korupcije.” https://www.transparency.si/novica/julijski-eurobarometer-o-zaznavi-korupcije/
Overall, while there are mechanisms to investigate and address corruption among officeholders, the effectiveness of these efforts is hindered by institutional weaknesses and insufficient resources. The public perception reflects a lack of confidence in the adequacy of punishments for corruption, particularly for higher-level offenses.
The commission’s online app, ERAR, continues to provide transparency into transactions of public and state-owned companies but is generally considered inferior to its predecessor, Supervizor. In 2023, a Eurobarometer survey found that 83% of Slovenians believe corruption is widespread, although this is 4% less than in 2022. The Corruption Perception Index shows no progress in the fight against corruption in Slovenia, with the index score at 56 in 2023. The score has fallen below 60 for the previous two years, whereas it was 60 or above from 2015 to 2020. For a decade, the public has viewed corruption as one of Slovenia’s biggest problems, especially systemic corruption.
In 2023, the OECD raised concerns about the lack of enforcement of foreign bribery offenses, noting that Slovenia has not prosecuted any foreign bribery cases since joining the Anti-Bribery Convention in 1999. GRECO was also dissatisfied with Slovenia’s progress in 2023, finding that only five of the 15 recommendations from the Fifth Round Evaluation Report had been satisfactorily implemented or addressed. Key recommendations, such as developing an integrity plan for the government and promoting awareness of integrity issues, had not been fully implemented.
In 2023, the Slovenian Commission for the Prevention of Corruption addressed high-profile issues, including alleged corruption in the healthcare sector and cases involving politicians, such as an member of parliament, a minister, and Prime Minister Robert Golob. The commission investigated alleged unauthorized pressure from Prime Minister Golob on former Interior Minister Tatjana Bobnar and other Interior Ministry employees. The Law on Whistleblower Protection also came into force in 2023.
The 2013 Law on Political Parties prohibits donations from companies to political parties, while foreign funding has been banned for decades. Annual financial reports submitted by parties to the Agency of the Republic of Slovenia for Public Law and Related Services show that parties rely heavily on public funds. Parties receiving at least 1% of votes in the previous parliamentary elections are entitled to state budget funds.
In 2023, the law was amended to allocate 10% of the total party funding budget equally among all eligible parties, with the remaining 90% distributed according to their vote share. This distribution was in place from 2000 – 2013; in the past ten years, the shares were 25% and 75%, respectively. Indirect public party funding includes additional funds for organizational and administrative support. The Court of Audit is required to audit parties’ financial reports, but sanctions for breaches of the law are rarely implemented.
Citations:
Group of States Against Corruption. 2023. “Fifth Evaluation Round: Slovenia.” https://rm.coe.int/fifth-evaluation-round-preventing-corruption-and-promoting-integrity-i/1680aa9f5d
OECD. 2023. Implementing the OECD Anti-Bribery Convention: Phase 4 Two-Year Follow-Up Report: Slovenia. https://web-archive.oecd.org/2023-03-13/653088-slovenia-phase-4-follow-up-report.pdf
Transparency International. 2023. “Corruption Perception Index.” https://www.transparency.org/en
Tranparency International Slovenia. 2023. “Julijski barometer o zaznavi korupcije.” https://www.transparency.si/novica/julijski-eurobarometer-o-zaznavi-korupcije/
Graph View
Do members of the legislature possess sufficient personnel and structural resources to effectively monitor government activities?
10
9
9
As a group, legislative members have access to a range of resources that are suited for effectively monitoring all government activity.
8
7
6
7
6
As a group, legislative members have access to a range of resources that are suited for effectively monitoring a government’s key activities.
5
4
3
4
3
As a group, legislative members have access to a range of resources that are suited for selectively monitoring some government activities.
2
1
1
The resources provided to legislative members are not suited for any effective monitoring of the government.
The National Assembly is adequately resourced. Although the Assembly has its own job classification system, its administration has always employed fewer staff than provided for in the HR allocation plan classification system. In 2022, the Assembly employed around 250 people in its administration.
Although the Assembly had already enjoyed various types of autonomy before 2019, it was legally strengthened by the National Assembly Act. This Act ensures greater coherence between its different forms of autonomy, including administrative, financial, regulatory, and security autonomy. Deputies can rely on the support of the Assembly’s administration, the research-documentation division, and, within this division, the research unit. The unit provides expert, objective, and politically neutral support to members of parliament and other parliamentary actors, such as working bodies, PPGs, and the secretary-general, or on their own initiative.
In the 2018 – 2022 legislature, for example, the Section prepared 157 research requests. As in the previous legislature, most requests came from opposition members of parliament (59), followed by ruling coalition members of parliament (22), while Assembly working bodies requested nine and political groups requested 17 such requests.
The parliamentary groups employ several staff members who have been paid by the Assembly for administrative, organizational, and technical tasks since 1993. Each parliamentary group is entitled to several staff members, with larger groups allocated slightly more staff. During the last parliamentary term, more than 100 people were employed in the political groups.
Each member of the European Parliament also has a personal allowance for their office, which ranges from €500 to 800 per month, and additional entitlements. They also have a budget for education and training. For 2022 and 2023, 90 members of parliament spent around €45,000 per year.
Citations:
Državni zbor. 2022. “Poročilo o delu državnega zbora v mandatnem obdobju 2018-2022.” https://fotogalerija.dz-rs.si/datoteke/Publikacije/PorocilaDZ/Mandat_2018%E2%80%932022/Porocilo_o_delu_Drzavnega_zbora_v_mandatnem_obdobju_2018%E2%80%932022__.pdf
Krašovec, A. 2023. “Slovenia’s Parliamentary Administration.” In T. Christiansen, E. Griglio, and N. Lupo, eds., The Routledge Handbook of Parliamentary Administrations, 425-434. Routledge.
N1. 2024. “Izobraževanja poslancev: Koliko denarja so porabile poslanske skupine?” https://n1info.si/novice/slovenija/izobrazevanja-poslancev-koliko-denarja-so-porabile-poslanske-skupine/
Dnevnik. 2022. “Poslanci DZ: poleg plače dobijo še vrsto dodatkov.” https://www.dnevnik.si/1042988624
Although the Assembly had already enjoyed various types of autonomy before 2019, it was legally strengthened by the National Assembly Act. This Act ensures greater coherence between its different forms of autonomy, including administrative, financial, regulatory, and security autonomy. Deputies can rely on the support of the Assembly’s administration, the research-documentation division, and, within this division, the research unit. The unit provides expert, objective, and politically neutral support to members of parliament and other parliamentary actors, such as working bodies, PPGs, and the secretary-general, or on their own initiative.
In the 2018 – 2022 legislature, for example, the Section prepared 157 research requests. As in the previous legislature, most requests came from opposition members of parliament (59), followed by ruling coalition members of parliament (22), while Assembly working bodies requested nine and political groups requested 17 such requests.
The parliamentary groups employ several staff members who have been paid by the Assembly for administrative, organizational, and technical tasks since 1993. Each parliamentary group is entitled to several staff members, with larger groups allocated slightly more staff. During the last parliamentary term, more than 100 people were employed in the political groups.
Each member of the European Parliament also has a personal allowance for their office, which ranges from €500 to 800 per month, and additional entitlements. They also have a budget for education and training. For 2022 and 2023, 90 members of parliament spent around €45,000 per year.
Citations:
Državni zbor. 2022. “Poročilo o delu državnega zbora v mandatnem obdobju 2018-2022.” https://fotogalerija.dz-rs.si/datoteke/Publikacije/PorocilaDZ/Mandat_2018%E2%80%932022/Porocilo_o_delu_Drzavnega_zbora_v_mandatnem_obdobju_2018%E2%80%932022__.pdf
Krašovec, A. 2023. “Slovenia’s Parliamentary Administration.” In T. Christiansen, E. Griglio, and N. Lupo, eds., The Routledge Handbook of Parliamentary Administrations, 425-434. Routledge.
N1. 2024. “Izobraževanja poslancev: Koliko denarja so porabile poslanske skupine?” https://n1info.si/novice/slovenija/izobrazevanja-poslancev-koliko-denarja-so-porabile-poslanske-skupine/
Dnevnik. 2022. “Poslanci DZ: poleg plače dobijo še vrsto dodatkov.” https://www.dnevnik.si/1042988624
Are legislative committees able to exercise oversight of government activities in practice?
10
9
9
The legislature is able to exercise its oversight function.
8
7
6
7
6
The legislature is able to exercise its oversight function most of the time.
5
4
3
4
3
The legislature faces constraints in exercising its oversight function in a significant number of cases.
2
1
1
The legislature’s oversight function is frequently and severely compromised.
Within the scope of their competencies and areas of work, the parliamentary working bodies also directly and indirectly control the government and its ministries. These working bodies can request that the government and other institutions provide all necessary documents and explanations to fulfill this function. The government must supply the requested information and documents unless it is against the law. However, governments have sometimes provided documents only at the last moment or with considerable delay, thereby compromising the Assembly’s ability to fulfill its oversight role.
Ministers generally honor the invitations of the National Assembly and the working bodies. If ministers cannot attend a meeting, State Secretaries may be authorized to represent the ministries. Ministers are also obliged to answer questions from members of parliament either orally or in writing, which is largely honored in practice. Additionally, the prime minister must personally answer four questions from members of the National Assembly at each regular parliamentary session. Notably, both Prime Minister Janša and Prime Minister Golob tended to avoid certain meetings of some parliamentary bodies and did not attend despite being invited.
In 2022, 372 questions and initiatives were put forward: eight to the prime minister, the largest number to the government as a whole – 140, followed by the minister of health with 40 questions and initiatives. Twenty-five remained unanswered.
Citations:
Državni zbor. 2022. “Poročilo o delu državnega zbora v mandatnem obdobju 2018-2022.” https://fotogalerija.dz-rs.si/datoteke/Publikacije/PorocilaDZ/Mandat_2018%E2%80%932022/Porocilo_o_delu_Drzavnega_zbora_v_mandatnem_obdobju_2018%E2%80%932022__.pdf
N1. 2023. “Goloba ni bilo na sejo Knovsa, za prisilno privedbo nimajo pristojnosti.” https://n1info.si/novice/slovenija/goloba-ni-bilo-na-sejo-knovsa-za-prisilno-privedbo-nimajo-pristojnosti/
Delo. 2021. “Težave z dvigovanjem pošte.” https://www.delo.si/novice/slovenija/tezave-z-dvigovanjem-poste/
Ministers generally honor the invitations of the National Assembly and the working bodies. If ministers cannot attend a meeting, State Secretaries may be authorized to represent the ministries. Ministers are also obliged to answer questions from members of parliament either orally or in writing, which is largely honored in practice. Additionally, the prime minister must personally answer four questions from members of the National Assembly at each regular parliamentary session. Notably, both Prime Minister Janša and Prime Minister Golob tended to avoid certain meetings of some parliamentary bodies and did not attend despite being invited.
In 2022, 372 questions and initiatives were put forward: eight to the prime minister, the largest number to the government as a whole – 140, followed by the minister of health with 40 questions and initiatives. Twenty-five remained unanswered.
Citations:
Državni zbor. 2022. “Poročilo o delu državnega zbora v mandatnem obdobju 2018-2022.” https://fotogalerija.dz-rs.si/datoteke/Publikacije/PorocilaDZ/Mandat_2018%E2%80%932022/Porocilo_o_delu_Drzavnega_zbora_v_mandatnem_obdobju_2018%E2%80%932022__.pdf
N1. 2023. “Goloba ni bilo na sejo Knovsa, za prisilno privedbo nimajo pristojnosti.” https://n1info.si/novice/slovenija/goloba-ni-bilo-na-sejo-knovsa-za-prisilno-privedbo-nimajo-pristojnosti/
Delo. 2021. “Težave z dvigovanjem pošte.” https://www.delo.si/novice/slovenija/tezave-z-dvigovanjem-poste/
Do legislative committees have the capacity to investigate unconstitutional or illegal activities carried out by the executive branch?
10
9
9
The legislature is able to exercise its investigation function.
8
7
6
7
6
The legislature is able to exercise its investigation function most of the time.
5
4
3
4
3
The legislature faces constraints in exercising its investigation function in a significant number of cases.
2
1
1
The legislature’s investigation function is frequently and severely compromised
The National Assembly may order an investigation into matters of public importance and appoint a commission of inquiry. The constitution, the Law on Parliamentary Investigation, and the Rules of Procedure for Parliamentary Investigation determine its role, status, and powers. Once the inquiry is completed, a commission may draw up a final report and submit it to the Assembly for presentation and discussion at a plenary session.
Commission meetings are generally open to the public, allowing them to exert some form of political and public pressure. A commission can also propose that the Assembly adopt a resolution on the political responsibility of officeholders or request the competent authorities to propose a legislative amendment in a specific area. Several such commissions have been set up in each legislative period since 1992, totaling 38. The highest number of such commissions was in the 2008 – 2011 and 2018 – 2022 legislative periods, each with seven committees of inquiry. Nonetheless, only 12 reports prepared by commissions were adopted by the National Assembly.
From June 2022 to January 2024, three commissions of inquiry were formed; the opposition requested one, which an opposition member of parliament also chairs.
In general, it is common for the opposition to call for establishing such commissions. As many have observed, the outcome rarely has important consequences for the government. The commissions often serve the political agenda and the election campaign. Therefore, many are highly politicized and misused for campaign purposes or discrediting.
Citations:
Državni zbor. 2024. “Vprašanja novinarjev in odgovori nanje.” https://www.dz rs.si/wps/portal/Home/is/PogostaVprasanja
RTVSLO. 2022. “Rok Snežič: Kot podjetnik nimam kaj odgovarjati parlamentarni komisiji.” https://www.rtvslo.si/slovenija/rok-snezic-kot-podjetnik-nimam-kaj-odgovarjati-parlamentarni-komisiji/610175
Commission meetings are generally open to the public, allowing them to exert some form of political and public pressure. A commission can also propose that the Assembly adopt a resolution on the political responsibility of officeholders or request the competent authorities to propose a legislative amendment in a specific area. Several such commissions have been set up in each legislative period since 1992, totaling 38. The highest number of such commissions was in the 2008 – 2011 and 2018 – 2022 legislative periods, each with seven committees of inquiry. Nonetheless, only 12 reports prepared by commissions were adopted by the National Assembly.
From June 2022 to January 2024, three commissions of inquiry were formed; the opposition requested one, which an opposition member of parliament also chairs.
In general, it is common for the opposition to call for establishing such commissions. As many have observed, the outcome rarely has important consequences for the government. The commissions often serve the political agenda and the election campaign. Therefore, many are highly politicized and misused for campaign purposes or discrediting.
Citations:
Državni zbor. 2024. “Vprašanja novinarjev in odgovori nanje.” https://www.dz rs.si/wps/portal/Home/is/PogostaVprasanja
RTVSLO. 2022. “Rok Snežič: Kot podjetnik nimam kaj odgovarjati parlamentarni komisiji.” https://www.rtvslo.si/slovenija/rok-snezic-kot-podjetnik-nimam-kaj-odgovarjati-parlamentarni-komisiji/610175
To what extent are the organization and operations of legislative committees effective in guiding the development of legislative proposals?
10
9
9
The organization and operations of legislative committees are well-suited for effectively monitoring ministry activity.
8
7
6
7
6
The organization and operations of legislative committees are, for the most part, suited for effectively monitoring ministry activity.
5
4
3
4
3
The organization and operations of legislative committees are rarely suitable for monitoring ministry activity.
2
1
1
The organization and operations of legislative committees are not at all suitable for monitoring ministry activity.
The National Assembly has two types of working bodies – commissions and committees. Some of the commissions are standing bodies, while the committees usually cover the work of ministries. In the 2022 – 2024 period, there were eight commissions. After the 2022 elections, 17 ministries (three without portfolios) were formed, and the Assembly had 13 committees. However, in 2023, while three additional ministries were established, the number of Assembly committees did not increase. This means some committees oversee more than one ministry. This situation is not unusual in Slovenia, even though the number of ministries and committees is relatively similar.
The rules of procedure for the National Assembly stipulate that the leading positions and the majority of seats in the Commission for the Control of Public Finances and the Commission for the Supervision of Intelligence and Security Services are held by members of parliament from opposition parliamentary groups. This is respected. When distributing seats in the individual working bodies, the ratio between governing coalition members and opposition members is considered. At present, all but one of the commissions are chaired by members of the opposition, while only in two committees does the president come from the opposition. As a rule, each parliamentary group is guaranteed at least one seat on each working body. In Slovenia, at least three members of parliament are required to form a parliamentary group. In the 2022 – 2024 period, almost all committees had 15 seats, some even 17, and in most commissions, there were more than 10. This means participation in working bodies is a considerable burden for parliamentary groups with fewer members.
Citations:
Državni zbor. 2024. “https://www.dz-rs.si”
Državni zbor. 2024. “Rules of Procedure.” https://www.dz-rs.si/wps/portal/Home/odz/pristojnosti/PoslovnikDrzavnegaZbora
The rules of procedure for the National Assembly stipulate that the leading positions and the majority of seats in the Commission for the Control of Public Finances and the Commission for the Supervision of Intelligence and Security Services are held by members of parliament from opposition parliamentary groups. This is respected. When distributing seats in the individual working bodies, the ratio between governing coalition members and opposition members is considered. At present, all but one of the commissions are chaired by members of the opposition, while only in two committees does the president come from the opposition. As a rule, each parliamentary group is guaranteed at least one seat on each working body. In Slovenia, at least three members of parliament are required to form a parliamentary group. In the 2022 – 2024 period, almost all committees had 15 seats, some even 17, and in most commissions, there were more than 10. This means participation in working bodies is a considerable burden for parliamentary groups with fewer members.
Citations:
Državni zbor. 2024. “https://www.dz-rs.si”
Državni zbor. 2024. “Rules of Procedure.” https://www.dz-rs.si/wps/portal/Home/odz/pristojnosti/PoslovnikDrzavnegaZbora