Thursday’s meeting of the Committee on Justice of the National Assembly focused on Slovenia’s “miscarriage of justice”. MPs of the Slovenian Democratic Party (Slovenska demokratska straka – SDS) expressed their disagreement with the conduct of the Slovenian judicial system, which often acts unjustly, with many cases ending up before the European Court of Human Rights. But all the evidence suggests that the judiciary is not yet ready for dialogue. The President of the Supreme Court, Miodrag Đorđević, left the meeting immediately after his speech. The session was marred by autocratic chairmanship and reprimands from the Chairwoman, MP Lena Grgurevič. The coalition even voted, including the Speaker of the National Assembly, to “silence” the opposition MP Zvone Černač.
At Thursday’s meeting of the Justice Committee, the Slovenian justice system and its wrongful judgments were on the agenda. The extraordinary sitting started at 4 p.m. The SDS party proposed that the Committee adopt the eight conclusions drawn up by their group of MPs. Among other things, they proposed that the Ministry of Justice should provide the Committee within 15 days with a comparison between Slovenia and other EU Member States on the number of cases brought before the European Court of Human Rights from each country.
Many judges give the appearance of bias with their actions
The Committee on Justice noted that in 2023, 978 complaints were lodged against Slovenia with the European Court of Human Rights, three times more than the 287 in 2022. This puts Slovenia in first place in terms of the number of complaints filed per capita. The Committee further noted that many judges’ actions give the appearance of bias, and that such a judiciary undermines the rule of law.
We need a fair, independent and impartial judiciary
In order to improve confidence in the judiciary, the SDS parliamentary group believes that a concerted effort by all three branches of government is needed to improve efficiency, fairness, openness and transparency. The parliamentary group also called on the government to work with the judiciary to take steps within six months to guarantee the constitutional right to a public trial and the right to a fair, independent and impartial trial, etc.
Several judicial authorities were also invited to the meeting. After the Chair’s introductory remarks, the first speaker was SDS MP Žan Mahnič, who made a procedural motion. This was of a “more technical nature”. He noted that the President of the Supreme Court, Miodrag Đorđević, was also present at the session. Mahnič: “To ensure that we don’t feel uncomfortable here, I would just like to ask if he was thoroughly checked by the security services, in order to ensure that he didn’t bring his revolver into Parliament, because we know that he likes to take photographs with it.” At this point, he was given his first reprimand by the Chairwoman of the Committee from the Freedom Movement party (Gibanje Svoboda), Lena Grgurevič.
The President of the Supreme Court with the revolver says the judiciary is not in crisis
The Chairwoman is convinced that it is the MPs who are inciting people against judges. She recalled the recent events in front of the Celje court, the incident with the RTV Slovenia car that drove provocatively into a crowd of protesters, provoking their angry reaction, and the words of the MP and SDS party leader Janez Janša, who was present at the meeting, about the beginning of a rebellion against the crooked judiciary. She also recalled Janša’s words that if someone calls the Slovenian criminal justice system a mafia, that person is actually insulting the mafia. She also pointed out the next protest before the court that will be held at the next hearing in the Trenta case.
She believes that undermining trust in judges undermines the judicial system in its entirety. The Chairwoman particularly condemned cases in which a politician does it. The next speaker was the President of the Supreme Court, Miodrag Đorđević, who reiterated that things had gone too far. He believes that it is unacceptable to discredit the judiciary, to subordinate it or to tailor it to one’s own needs and interests. He believes that the judiciary is not in crisis, but that society is in crisis. He also called for the protection of the constitutional order of the Republic of Slovenia.
MP Hoivik: Đorđević’s departure from the session is unacceptable, we chose the hour of the meeting because of him!
He also condemned the “aggressive protests in connection with individual court proceedings”. Afterwards, Đorđević excused himself and left the meeting, wishing those present “a fruitful debate”. The Prosecutor General, Katarina Bergant, also took the floor. However, a procedural motion was put forward by SDS MP Andrej Hoivik, who said he believes that the behaviour of the President of the Supreme Court was unacceptable. He recalled that the time of the sitting had been chosen precisely because of the President of the Supreme Court.
Therefore, they need the President of the Court at the session so that they can respond to the criticisms, which would be the democratic and correct way to go about this process.
Bergant also tried to portray the judiciary as a victim. She pointed to the danger of undermining the independence of the judiciary. She added that the prosecutor’s office was confronted daily with the consequences of “intolerant and inflammatory speech”.
Janša: I agree with the President of the Supreme Court that things have gone too far!
The SDS party leader, Janša, also spoke later in the session. He also agreed with the President of the Supreme Court that things have gone too far. The first proof of this, in his opinion, is the use of vocabulary, both in the motion for the sitting and in all the interventions so far. He recalled that decades ago, in this very same Chamber, attacks had been debated, both on the Yugoslav People’s Army, and on the gains of the socialist revolution. After more than three decades of living in an independent and democratic country, the other side is once again using the same vocabulary, as if we did not have a democracy where no one is above criticism. He recalled the famous saying of the Greek philosopher: “Tell me who must not be criticised, and I will show you a dictator!” When the word “attack” is used for valid criticism of an institution that even says it judges on behalf of the people, but allows two or three representatives of the people into the courtrooms and forbids the recording of the chambers (which judge on behalf of the people), Janša said, “God forbid that the public should be able to listen to a court hearing in its entirety! Indeed, things have gone too far!”
Lena Grgureviž, the Chairwoman of the Justice Committee, even forgot for a moment at the meeting that she was chairing a working body of the National Assembly, not a prosecutorial body. As MP Jelka Godec, Chairwoman of the SDS party parliamentary group, pointed out, “Lena Grgurevič said that the prosecutor’s office has a lot of work to do because the protests in front of the court are a criminal offence, and she hopes that things will be resolved.” Grgurevič, the Chairwoman of the committee, even said, “So I won’t have to be the one to write the criminal offences!”
Janša also brought up the financial holes in Slovenian banks. “I, too, am talking about protecting the reputation of the rule of law, it’s just that the reasons for the decline of this reputation are obviously interpreted differently, but we are a parliament, we are in a democracy and supposedly, this is allowed. I am thinking of the example that I mentioned, where now we taxpayers are still filling the bank hole, close to half a billion in this particular bank, and those responsible have been ordered to do community service. There is no worse thing to bring the judiciary into disrepute than such judgments,” said Janša.
Mahnič: It has been proven over the years that the judiciary is not independent from politics
SDS MP Žan Mahnič said at the meeting that it had been proven over the years that the judiciary was not independent from politics. “Not only do judges and prosecutors attend political party rallies, as we have seen … Now, maybe some of you don’t remember because you didn’t follow politics back then. But when the judiciary issues a decision, it is said that it should not be criticised. But when the Commission of Inquiry of this National Assembly found something out, and the report was adopted with the votes of both the coalition and the opposition at the time, on what kind of wrongdoings Harij Furlan was doing about the purchase of medical equipment, what did Harij Furlan do? He did not respect this report, he went on to sue MP Jelka Godec, who was the rapporteur of this report. Did anyone protect the MP at the time? Did anyone speak up? Did anyone from the judiciary speak up and reprimand their colleague, saying that this is not the way to behave, this is not to be criticised?” wondered MP Mahnič.
When he started to talk about the unfair trial, he was silenced
The session was marked by autocratic chairing by Lena Grgurevič, Chairwoman of the Committee on Justice. At one point, there was even a parliamentary precedent. SDS MP Zvone Černač wrote: “The Freedom Movement regime in all its glory: I have just been deprived of the floor by MPs of the Freedom Movement and MPs of the Left party (Levica), including the Speaker of the National Assembly, Klakočar Zupančič, because I quoted the decisions of the Supreme Court of Justice which overturned all the Patria judgments and started reading Article 288 of the Criminal Code, which speaks of a perjury trial.”
MP Černač said that even coalition MPs were leaving the session because of Grgurič’s authoritarian leadership.
Domen Mezeg
