The public is increasingly convinced that the recent confiscation of cattle from the Možgan family was an orchestrated political project. The President of the Trade Union of Veterinarians of Slovenia (Sindikat veterinarjev Slovenije – SVS) has expressed her suspicions, as she also believes that that is the case, given the circumstances of the event. Vida Čadonič Špelič, Chairwoman of the National Assembly’s Committee on Agriculture, also believes that to be true. The disclosure of the e-mail sent by an activist to the Prime Minister’s partner, Tina Gaber, the Speaker of the National Assembly, Urška Klakočar Zupančič, and the Social Democrats (Socialni demokrati – SD) MP Meira Hot, further deepens the suspicions. The project could have been orchestrated at the very top of the state. Today, all those involved are denying responsibility, most of all the SD MP, who was the first signatory of the amendment to the law in force at the time the animals were taken. If we lived in a democratic country, this fiasco would have led to the resignation of MP Hot and Speaker Klakočar Zupančič, as well as to Golob’s resignation – due to Gaber’s involvement.
Nataša Ajdič, President of the Trade Union of Veterinarians of Slovenia, was clear in her statement to the media: “Veterinarians in this field do not practise calling on NGOs to be present at such things. At most, they invite a team of official veterinarians, or, in the case of a conflict party, they ask for the assistance of the police […] everything indicates, at least our assumptions are such, that this whole thing is actually a staged affair. Just look at the recipients of the reports, for example Tina Gaber, the Secretary of State… the official reports are normally sent to the official post addresses.”
Vida Čadonič Špelič, a former veterinary inspector who is now a member of the National Assembly, also suspects that the procedure was staged. The e-mail is an indication of the involvement of the political top of the country. She also pointed out that “the report was sent to the Prime Minister’s office or to his partner. This is my first question, what has she got to do with this procedure, this is where the politics starts.” A further indication that the top of the state is involved in the matter can be found in the copy of the e-mail sent to Eva Knez. According to the revelations on a recent episode of the show Tarča (Target), she has just recently become involved in politics. She came to the Ministry straight from the Gen-I energy company – where Golob used to be the President of the Management Board – and is herself a member of the Association for the Protection of Horses. The activist sent the message to Knez’s private e-mail address.
The author also sent the message to the Acting Director-General of the Administration for Food Safety, Veterinary Sector and Plant Protection, Vida Znoj, the Director of Inspection for Food Safety, Veterinary Sector and Plant Protection, Fabian Kos, the Head of the National Centre for Animal Welfare, Ožbalt Podpečan, along with the aforementioned recipients – Klakočar Zupančič, Hot, Gaber and Knez.
A copy of the e-mail in question was revealed on the show Tarča on Thursday, which read:
“To whom it may concern,
Following a citizen’s request, I went to see the animals who, according to the citizen who contacted me, live in a very small area throughout the year and are only occasionally let out to the nearby pasture.
The owner of the animals is:
Možgan Rudi
As I was warned that the citizen is quick to get angry and even violent sometimes, I took the photo I am sending in the attachment from the road, which is a few ten metres away from his farm, so the actual state of the animals is unfortunately not entirely clear from it.
The first time I went to see them was around 1 p.m., and then I drove by again around 8 p.m., and the animals were still on the same small plot of land – which is important to note, in case he might claim that they spend the night in the barn.
I kindly ask you to conduct an official investigation of the situation, and to also check on the state of the animals and then act accordingly.
Thank you, and kind regards,
Valerija Podgornik”
Avoiding responsibility
Reporting on the partners of political leaders is considered taboo. But in the case of the Prime Minister’s current partner, Tina Gaber, the media simply cannot avoid it. She is, after all, a person who is clearly more involved in the functioning of the state than the authorities are willing to admit to the public. And the fact that Podgornik sent the e-mail to some of the recipients’ private addresses indicates two things. First, the links between activists and the authorities are much stronger than the authorities would like to portray. Secondly, it suggests that two government politicians could be involved in specific and controversial inspection procedures. Moreover, the Prime Minister’s partner could also be involved. All three are now avoiding taking responsibility.
For example, in the latest episode of the show Tarča, the Social Democrats MP Meira Hot argued that the confiscation of animals could not have happened because of the new law, as the activist who broke into the Možgan farm had not completed the 40-hour course to become a qualified whistle-blower, since the courses are not even being offered yet. The MP tried to obfuscate the fact that the amendment to the Animal Protection Act, to which she was an original signatory, entered into force on the 11th of November – at the time of the controversial cattle seizure. However, the law will obviously be in force when the money from the sale of cattle has to be shared. This will flow into the accounts of NGOs. As a web user with the username Johanca pointed out, “Meira Hot said on the show Tarča that the confiscation of the animals was not carried out under the new law (the law is valid because it has been passed), but the money from the eventual sale of the confiscated cattle would be shared by the NGOs UNDER THE NEW LAW… can someone please explain this nonsense to me?”
After the theft of animals, they are avoiding taking responsibility
One of the big supporters of the law was also Urška Klakočar Zupančič, the Speaker of the National Assembly and another one of the recipients of the controversial e-mail. She told the national media outlet RTV: “I am not an expert who could judge when it is justified to take animals away from someone.” On the other hand, the Speaker of the National Assembly considered herself competent enough to publicly defend a law that both justifies the activities of activists and provides them with a source of financial income. This was also noticed by Jaka Šoba, who wrote on the social network X: “Today, none of the ‘sponsors’ of the law that was the basis for the seizure of cattle wants to give an opinion on what happened because they do not feel they have the expertise to do so. But they felt competent enough to write the law and to challenge the profession.”
We have addressed a press question to the Prime Minister’s Office about the involvement of the Prime Minister’s partner in this particular procedure. The official profile of the government denied any involvement of the Prime Minister’s partner in the seizure of the cattle, despite media revelations that Gaber is a public supporter of the association of which the activist who was present at the seizure is a member. And later on, the above-mentioned e-mail was disclosed on the show Tarča, showing that Gaber was not only a supporter of the association, but was also aware of what was happening on the farm. However, the Prime Minister’s Office once again denied all this. They wrote, in a nutshell: “The Prime Minister’s partner is in no way connected with the confiscation of animals in Krško during the inspection procedure conducted on the 14th of November 2023.”
The source of all the problems is the bad amendment
Farmers Timotej and Rudi Možgan already suspected that the amendment to the Animal Protection Act was the source of the problems in our introductory interview. “Why would anyone do that? Because the livestock was very well kept and the new law stipulates that if your animals are taken away from you, all the money goes to these associations. In fact, they can steal from us and make a profit for themselves,” Rudi Možgan said. He and his son speculated that this could be a new way of funding activist associations. And this has now been confirmed on the show. The essential difference between the new and the old legislation governing this area is precisely the account into which the money from the sale or slaughter of the confiscated animal flows. Under the old legislation, the money went into the owner’s account, whereas under the new legislation, it goes into the accounts of the NGOs involved in the confiscation.
It is not surprising that the law is written in this way. It was written in cooperation with NGOs, just like the amendment to the Radio-Television Slovenia Act. As Dr Janez Posedi, former Director of the Administration for Food Safety, Veterinary Sector and Plant Protection, said: “The amendment of the law went mainly in the direction of regulating the legal position of NGOs in the field of animal protection and, obviously, also the material benefits for NGOs. Prices are not regulated; this was one of the important tasks that the amendment of the law should have done. The hunt for public money is on, and there is a lot of money flowing into these matters.”
Ž. K.
