COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT 2025 Rule of Law Report Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Slovenia Accompanying the document Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions 2025 Rule of Law Report The rule of law situation in the European Union

EN EN
EUROPEAN
COMMISSION
Strasbourg, 8.7.2025
SWD(2025) 924 final
COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT
2025 Rule of Law Report
Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Slovenia
Accompanying the document
Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the
European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions
2025 Rule of Law Report
The rule of law situation in the European Union
{COM(2025) 900 final} - {SWD(2025) 901 final} - {SWD(2025) 902 final} -
{SWD(2025) 903 final} - {SWD(2025) 904 final} - {SWD(2025) 905 final} -
{SWD(2025) 906 final} - {SWD(2025) 907 final} - {SWD(2025) 908 final} -
{SWD(2025) 909 final} - {SWD(2025) 910 final} - {SWD(2025) 911 final} -
{SWD(2025) 912 final} - {SWD(2025) 913 final} - {SWD(2025) 914 final} -
{SWD(2025) 915 final} - {SWD(2025) 916 final} - {SWD(2025) 917 final} -
{SWD(2025) 918 final} - {SWD(2025) 919 final} - {SWD(2025) 920 final} -
{SWD(2025) 921 final} - {SWD(2025) 922 final} - {SWD(2025) 923 final} -
{SWD(2025) 925 final} - {SWD(2025) 926 final} - {SWD(2025) 927 final} -
{SWD(2025) 928 final} - {SWD(2025) 929 final} - {SWD(2025) 930 final} -
{SWD(2025) 931 final}
Offentligt
KOM (2025) 0900 - SWD-dokument
Europaudvalget 2025
1
ABSTRACT
The Slovenian justice system saw positive developments, with safeguards for judicial
independence and autonomy of prosecutors as regards parliamentary inquiries having entered
into force. The level of remuneration of judges and state prosecutors has increased, and work
is ongoing to strengthen the rules related to their protection. Amendments to the judicial
legislation introducing safeguards to the disciplinary framework and the appointment
procedure for Supreme Court judges, as well as reforming the judicial map are in discussion
before Parliament. Plans to amend the procedure of promotion and appointment of
prosecutors are envisaged to address staffing challenges in State Prosecution Offices.
Digitalisation efforts continue, and a full transition to electronic communication remains a
priority. The efficiency gains in recent years have not prevented backlogs from further
increasing and length of trials remain a challenge particularly in money laundering and
corruption cases, but measures taken by the Supreme Court resulted in an increase of the
number of resolved cases.
A new anti-corruption strategy and action plan were adopted. Efforts towards establishing a
track record of investigations, prosecutions and final judgments in corruption offences
continued. The Commission for the Prevention of Corruption called for more transparency
and integrity in the appointment of high-level officials such as the Police Director-General.
The lobbying guidelines were updated to clarify the existing exemptions from the registration
obligation. Transparency and clarity were improved in the updated rules on the submission of
the annual reports of political parties. The technical capabilities of the Commission for the
Prevention of Corruption improved although concerns remain on staff recruitment. Efforts to
improve transparency and competition in public procurement continued.
The media regulator generally remains independent, while concerns exist regarding its human
and financial resources, including in relation to the envisaged responsibilities. The
independence of public service media has further improved. Some steps were made to ensure
the adequate funding for public service media, such as a proposed revision of the financing
model, although challenges persist. The private media remain affected by financial
difficulties and risks to media pluralism. The framework for accessing public information
remains favourable. Some further steps were taken to improve the protection of journalists,
yet the challenges remain.
To address the Constitutional Court’s considerable caseload, the transfer of certain types of
cases to administrative courts was achieved by interpretation of legislative changes.
Legislative amendments would extend the competence of the Human Rights Ombudsperson
and allow the Constitutional Court to establish the incompatibility of office of its members.
The civic space in Slovenia continued to improve and has been upgraded to ‘open’.
2
RECOMMENDATIONS
Overall, concerning the recommendations in the 2024 Rule of Law Report, Slovenia has
(made):
• Fully implemented the recommendation to finalise the legislative process to amend the
rules on parliamentary inquiries with adequate safeguards for independence of judges and
state prosecutors, taking into account European standards on judicial independence.
• Significant progress on taking further measures to ensure that the reform of judicial
appointments contains adequate safeguards for judicial independence, taking into account
European standards on judicial independence.
• Fully implemented the recommendation to finalise the measures to increase the
remuneration of judges and state prosecutors, taking into account European standards on
resources and remuneration for the justice system.
• Fully implemented the recommendation to complete the adoption of the new anti-
corruption strategy and action plan and begin implementation, and some further progress
on taking measures to ensure a track record of investigations, prosecutions and final
judgments in corruption offences, including in high-level cases.
• Some further progress on the recommendation to further advance with the process of
adopting legislative and non-legislative safeguards to improve the protection of
journalists, particularly online, taking into account European standards on the protection
of journalists.
• Some progress on ensuring that rules or mechanisms are in place to provide funding for
public service media that is appropriate for the realisation of its public service remit while
guaranteeing its independence.
On this basis, and considering other developments that took place in the period of reference,
and in addition to recalling the relevant commitments made under the Recovery and
Resilience Plan, it is recommended to Slovenia to:
• Take further measures to ensure a track record of investigations, prosecutions and final
judgments in corruption offences, including in high-level cases.
• Further advance with the process of adopting legislative and non-legislative safeguards to
improve the protection of journalists, taking into account European standards on the
protection of journalists.
• Complete reforms to ensure that the rules or mechanisms are in place to provide funding
for public service media that is appropriate for the realisation of its public service remit
while guaranteeing its independence.
3
I. JUSTICE SYSTEM1
Independence
The level of perceived judicial independence in Slovenia continues to be average among
both the general public and companies. Overall, 56% of the general population and 55% of
companies perceive the level of independence of courts and judges to be ‘fairly or very good’
in 20252
. The perceived judicial independence among the general public has significantly
increased in comparison with 2024 (45%), as well as in comparison with 2021 (47%). The
perceived judicial independence among companies has significantly increased in comparison
with 2024 (40%) as well as in comparison with 2021 (43%).
Safeguards for judicial independence and autonomy of prosecutors as regards
parliamentary inquiries are now in force, fully implementing the 2024
recommendation3. Amendments to the Parliamentary Inquiries Act in July 2024, introduced
safeguards for judicial independence and autonomy of prosecutors. The legislation allows a
request to the Constitutional Court to decide on the constitutional conformity of any
parliamentary inquiry, including in relation to judicial independence and autonomy of
prosecutors4
. As the amendments entered into force on 4 January 20255
, the 2024 Rule of
Law Recommendation has been fully implemented.
Proposed amendments to the Judicial Council Act and a new Judges Act aim to
overhaul the disciplinary framework for judges. Following the public consultation in
autumn 2023, the Government on 16 May 2025 submitted to Parliament the amendments to
the Judicial Council Act which focus on the transparency and judicial review in elections of
judge-members of the Council, and on more detailed provisions on withdrawal and recusal,
with the aim of preventing potential conflicts of interests and ensure the impartiality of
Judicial Council members, both in disciplinary matters and judicial appointments6
. The
amendments would also limit the term of office of Council members to a single six-year term.
The procedural changes in the Judicial Council Act concern the regulation of disciplinary
prosecutors, the suspension of judges during disciplinary proceedings, and the legal remedy
against a disciplinary decision. The amendments also envisage to address the
unconstitutionality of certain provisions on disciplinary proceedings by removing the Judicial
Council’s power to initiate disciplinary proceedings regarding judges7
. A new ground for the
1
An overview of the institutional framework for all four pillars can be found here.
2
Figures 50 and 52, 2025 EU Justice Scoreboard and Figures 51 and 53, 2024 EU Justice Scoreboard. The
level of perceived judicial independence is categorised as follows: very low (below 30% of respondents
perceive judicial independence as fairly good and very good); low (between 30-39%), average (between 40-
59%), high (between 60-75%), very high (above 75%).
3
The 2024 Rule of Law Report recommended Slovenia to ‘[f]inalise the legislative process to amend the
rules on parliamentary inquiries with adequate safeguards for independence of judges and state prosecutors,
taking into account European standards on judicial independence’.
4
This request may be made by one third of all deputies (who have not submitted the request for the
parliamentary inquiry), the Judicial Council or the State Prosecutorial Council. Until the decision of the
Court, the proposed parliamentary inquiry may not be established.
5
The entry into force was delayed due to an initiative to hold a referendum on the amendments. In November
2024, the Constitutional Court held that a referendum would not be permissible as the amendments aim at
addressing the unconstitutionality established in two Constitutional Court judgments. Judgment of the
Slovenian Constitutional Court, U-I-109/24, Slovenian Parliament, written input, pp. 19-20, and 2024 Rule
of Law Report, Slovenia, p. 4.
6
Country visit Slovenia, Judicial Council.
7
2024 Rule of Law Report, Slovenia, pp. 4-5.
4
termination of the mandate of a Judicial Council member is envisaged, namely the member’s
appointment as the president or vice-president of a court, in view of the Council’s extensive
competences regarding the selection, appointment, and dismissal of court presidents and vice-
presidents. On 16 May 2025, the Government submitted to Parliament the new Judges Act,
which would provide, on the initiative by the judiciary, for a more precise definition of
disciplinary offences and clearer procedures for the evaluation of the judicial work by a
special body and as the basis for a judge’s promotion.
A refocus towards safeguards in the appointment of Supreme Court judges constitutes
significant progress on the recommendation concerning the judicial appointments
reform8. Previous Rule of Law Reports noted a lack of adequate safeguards for judicial
independence in the reform of judicial appointments9
. In 2024, due to lack of quorum, the
Parliament’s Constitutional Commission did not continue the process of the constitutional
revision regarding appointment of judges, which had been initiated with the aim of
transferring the power to appoint first-time judges from Parliament to the President of the
Republic10
. On 16 May 2025, the Government submitted to Parliament the new Judges Act
which would transfer the power to appoint Supreme Court judges (if the candidate is already
a judge) from Parliament to the Judicial Council. The revised procedure would allow for
judicial review of the appointment of Supreme Court judges and the appointment decision,
would also need to be reasoned. Additionally, the proposed amendments to the Judicial
Council Act aim at strengthening the guarantees in the selection procedure for judges
conducted by the Judicial Council11
. However, Parliament would keep the power to appoint
the Supreme Court President, which would not be, as envisaged previously, transferred to the
Judicial Council, and the Supreme Court expressed concerns about Parliament’s influence in
the appointment process12
. Considering that the proposed legislative amendments contain
adequate safeguards in judicial appointment of Supreme Court judges, there was significant
progress on the 2024 Rule of Law Report recommendation.
Work is ongoing to strengthen rules on protection measures for judges and state
prosecutors. In 2024, incidents involving judges and state prosecutors13
led to a reflection on
whether the regulations are appropriate to ensure their protection. In November 2024, the
Ministry of Justice established an interdepartmental working group consisting of the
representatives of ministries, the police, the judiciary and state prosecution to develop
systemic solutions for enhancing protection14
. Its objective is, amongst others, to review, by
8
The 2024 Rule of Law Report recommended Slovenia to ‘[t]ake further measures to ensure that the reform
of judicial appointments contains adequate safeguards for judicial independence, taking into account
European standards on judicial independence’.
9
2024 Rule of Law Report, Slovenia, pp. 6-7. In the past, Parliament rejected several candidates for Supreme
Court judges (three between 2018 and 2022 alone) or a candidate for the President of the Supreme Court (in
2010). 2023 Rule of Law Report, Slovenia, p. 6.
10
The proposed changes to the composition of the Judicial Council also stalled. Slovenian Parliament, written
input, p. 20.
11
See previous paragraph. The amendments envisage that the Council’s decision on the selection of a
candidate for a vacant judicial position should contain an assessment of the fulfilment of all criteria and
reasoning why the selected candidate meets them, or why the selected candidate meets the criteria best.
12
Country visit Slovenia, the Ministry of Justice and the Supreme Court.
13
These security incidents included an arson attack on a court president’s private house, alleged irregularities
in how the Police exercised protective measures over a state prosecutor at the Specialised State Prosecution
Office, and statements made by protesters about judges and the State Prosecutor General in front of a court
during a hearing. Association of judges condemned the arson attack. Association of judges (2024).
14
Country visit Slovenia, Ministry of Justice.
5
the end of 2025, the regulations on protection measures, legal safeguards, and personal
assistance, evaluate systemic responses to severe security incidents against officials, and
formulate proposals for systemic improvements in judicial officials’ protection. The Ministry
of the Interior is preparing amendments to the Regulation on the protection of certain
persons, which would change the protocol regulating cooperation between the Police, the
protected judge/state prosecutor (and their superiors), the adjustment period for a protected
person, the conditions for revoking protection, and regarding the jurisdiction of the superior
of the protected person in the protection process. In December 2024, the Parliament
Committee on Justice addressed the attacks on the judiciary and efforts to discredit it, as well
as the responsibility of politicians to respect the judiciary and uphold the rule of law15
.
Quality
Full transition to electronic communication in administrative, civil and commercial
cases remains a priority, while pilot trials are planned for criminal cases. Advanced case
management tools are used for all courts and by the Supreme Court to assist in the allocation
of resources. The electronic communication tools show only small improvements, while
advances could be made particularly in the State Prosecution Offices, and before courts in
criminal, civil and administrative cases16
. In 2025, the full transition to e-communication in
administrative, civil and commercial cases for all courts and participants in court proceedings
remained a priority task for the Ministry of Justice and the Supreme Court, and several tools
were being implemented in 2025. The Ministry aims to equip 19 courts with
videoconferencing systems by mid-2026, enabling remote hearings. It is also developing a
solution for e-authentications with a centralised register. In 2024, a speech-to-text
application, aiming to address staffing challenges, was implemented in all courts. The
introduction of electronic communication in criminal cases remains a priority as well, despite
delays in upgrading IT systems of State Prosecution Service and the Supreme Court. The
Ministry of Justice established a working group in 2024, tasked to identify and address the
delays. The transfer of e-documents between the police units and prosecution service is being
tested, and all police units would be included in 202517
. The application for viewing and
annotating electronic court cases is currently in use in district courts in insolvency cases,
while its use in civil and criminal procedure was being tested in beginning of 2025. All the
staff at the Administrative Court have been trained for transition to the transition to electronic
15
Among its conclusions, it strongly condemned the protests held in front of a court organised with the intent
of exerting pressure on the judiciary. Parliament (2025), written input, p. 16.
16
2025 EU Justice Scoreboard. In 2024, apart from the improvements in machine-readability of judicial
decisions (Figure 48), no change was made in the digitalisation of justice compared to the situation in 2023.
Figures 40-48, 2025 EU Justice Scoreboard. Since September 2024, filing of electronic applications and
documents via the e-Justice portal, including electronic communication, is also possible in judicial redress
procedures of former holders of qualifying liabilities of banks. Slovenian Government (2025b), written
input, p. 7.
17
However, the plan to start pilot testing of e-communication between prosecution service and district court in
Kranj was postponed from January to autumn 2025 (in 2025, additional testing and adjustment of e-
communication between the Supreme Court and the Supreme State Prosecution Office took place). As part
of RRF, the eSpis application has begun additional upgrades to enable integration with judicial procedure
systems and to ensure electronic access for participants and their legal representatives to electronic case
files. A new security scheme is being implemented, and the e-Justice portal – through which parties and
their legal representatives carry out electronic actions in digitally supported court procedures – is also being
updated. Slovenian Government (2025a).
6
communication, planed in autumn 202518
. The implementation of real-time subtitling of court
hearings for hearing impaired users is planned for 2025, as well as an IT solution for
recording and managing financial obligations in the judiciary for the criminal and later for
other judicial proceedings.
Proposed amendments on judicial map reform would merge first instance District and
Local Courts. As stated in past Rule of Law Reports, the split between the first instance
courts has long been identified as affecting the efficiency of the courts, and the previous
attempts to conclude this reform have not been successful19
. On 16 May 2025, Government
submitted to Parliament the new Courts Act which would merge District and Local Courts
(and keep 11 District Courts only, making all first instance judges into District Court judges),
while retaining the geographical distribution of court units20
. The primary objective is to
equalise the workload across the eleven judicial districts, thereby enhancing the efficiency of
courts. The proposed law also emphasises the responsibility of court presidents for the
effective functioning of the court21
. The Judicial Council has stated its support for this
optimisation but warned of two past unsuccesful reforms which negatively affected the length
of court proceedings22
. With regard to the network of local courts, the Judicial Council found
that an analysis would be appropriate to determine whether any of them should be abolished,
as some operate with only one or two judges but with a larger number of public servants who
could be more effectively reassigned to other courts.
With the increases in the level of remuneration of judges and state prosecutors the
recommendation is fully implemented23. Following a Constitutional Court judgment in
June 202424
, the Government increased the salaries of judges and state prosecutors by
18
In June 2025, testing of electronic serving to public bodies was nearing its end. A significant part of the
digitalisation investments is co-funded from the Recovery and Resilience Facility (Target no. 105),
requiring the authorities to finalise them by June 2026. The Supreme Court continues to upgrade and further
develop IT tools to facilitate the decision-making process such as the collaborative virtual sessions (eSEJE),
the internal search engine and the smart query (DoR) to identify and classify submissions and assess them
against past decision. By mid-2026, the Supreme Court is set to establish the national Central
Documentation Digitalisation Centre (CDDC), which would take over the process of digitalising documents
from all courts, while the Supreme State Prosecutor's Office should fully implement the AI tool Virtual
Assistant to facilitate the decision-drafting process and set up the Green Meeting Room system to enable
teleworking. Slovenian Government (2025a), and Slovenian Government (2025b), written input, p. 7.
19
Currently, the court system has 55 first instance courts (44 Local Courts and 11 District Courts). 2024 Rule
of Law Report, Slovenia, p. 10. As a partial remedy, the 2009 and 2015 reforms brought Local Courts under
the stronger control of District Courts in order to even-out the caseload and reduce jurisdictional conflicts.
2020 Rule of Law Report, Slovenia, p. 5.
20
Local Courts would be transformed into external departments, which would continue to operate in their
local environments. The law also provides for an evaluation of the district court network after two years of
operation. On 16 May 2025, the Government submitted to Parliament amendments to the State Prosecution
Office Act, which would align the status of prosecutors with the new framework for judges (unified title,
rights, and responsibilities).
21
Court presidents’ key task would be to ensure efficient operation, balanced workload among judges, and
timely case resolution. The proposed law would introduce mandatory regular internal audits of the court
administration every three years, would shorten the term of court presidents (from six to five years) with the
possibility of one reappointment at the same court, and would enables the suspension of a court president.
22
Country visit Slovenia, Judicial Council.
23
The 2024 Rule of Law Report recommended Slovenia to ‘[f]inalise the measures to increase the
remuneration of judges and state prosecutors, taking into account European standards on resources and
remuneration for the justice system’.
24
The level of remuneration of judges and state prosecutors was largely unchanged since 2012. The 2024
Rule of Law Report, Slovenia, pp. 8-9.
7
12.35% starting from January 202425
. Additionally, as part of the larger public salaries
reform, a new Common Foundations of the Public Sector Salary System Act was adopted in
October 2025, which led to the higher salary grade classifications of judges and state
prosecutors. The salary increases started in January 2025 and will be implemented gradually
until January 2028 for all public employees, including for judges and state prosecutors. In
addition, an automatic indexation mechanism was introduced into the law: if no agreement is
reached through negotiations, salary grades will be by law automatically adjusted by 80% of
the increase in the cost of living. Representatives of the judiciary nevertheless noted that
compared to the legislative and the executive branch, salaries are still lower in the judicial
branch26
. Considering that the salaries of judges and state prosecutors were increased and that
an automatic indexation mechanism was introduced, the 2024 Rule of Law Report
recommendation was fully implemented.
Plans to amend the procedure of promotion and appointment of prosecutors are
envisaged to address staffing challenges in State Prosecution Offices. As noted in the
2021 and 2022 Rule of Law Reports, State Prosecution Offices experienced staffing
shortages due to unjustifiable delays in appointments of state prosecutors, which were later
resolved27
. However, due to the prolonged appointment and promotion procedures for state
prosecutors, lasting 12 months on average, the negative effects of past delays continue and, at
the end of 2024, only 216 out of 268 state prosecutor posts were occupied, only 3,8% more
than at the end of 202328
. According to the procedure, the Government approves not only the
appointment of new state prosecutors, but also promotion into a higher position (e.g. from
local state prosecutor to district state prosecutor) – following a proposal from the State
Prosecutorial Council. Consequently, a procedure to appoint a new state prosecutor following
the promotion of an existing state prosecutor could last up to two years in total29
.
Amendments to the State Prosecution Office Act are envisaged for 2026 that would transfer
the power to promote state prosecutors from the Government to the State Prosecutorial
Council, shortening the procedures30
.
Efficiency
The efficiency gains in recent years have not prevented backlogs from further
increasing and the length of trials remain a challenge, particularly in money laundering
and corruption cases. Based on 2023 comparative data, the justice system continued to
function efficiently overall, except in administrative cases, where courts continued to
experience challenges in managing the increasing caseload31
. In 2024, according to the latest
Supreme Court data, in total, all courts received 4% more cases and resolved 4% more cases
than in 2023, which continued to reverse the past positive trends and again slightly increased,
25
Slovenian Government, written input, p. 1.
26
For example, in January 2025, the salary of a first instance (local court) judge was about 14% lower than
the starting salary of a member of Parliament (by January 2028, the salary of the first instance judges would
be 9% lower, if, following the judicial map reform, all local court judges would become district court
judges), while the salary of a Supreme Court judge was about 8% higher than that of a minister (to be
equalised by January 2028). Country visit Slovenia, Ministry of Public Administration, Judicial Council and
Association of Judges, and Slovenian Government (2025a).
27
2023 Rule of Law Report, Slovenia, pp. 4-5.
28
Slovenian Government (2025b), written input, p. 4 and country visit Slovenia, State Prosecutor General and
State Prosecutorial Council.
29
Country visit Slovenia, State Prosecutor General and State Prosecutorial Council.
30
Country visit Slovenia, Ministry of Justice and State Prosecution Office.
31
Figures 1 – 14, 2025 EU Justice Scoreboard.
8
by 3%, the total backlog of cases at the end of 202432
. This continued slight decrease in
efficiency could be seen in most courts, except in local, labour and social courts. In 2024, the
average length of proceedings at first instance courts slightly increased in civil cases but
remained stable in commercial cases and decreased in criminal cases33
. The time needed for
the first instance courts to conduct the first hearing stagnated, taking up to 21 months in civil
and 16 months in commercial cases34
. At first instance criminal courts, the average length in
2023 increased in money laundering offences (926 days) and decreased in corruption
offences (526 days) – remaining the third and second longest in the EU35
. The continued
increase in the administrative courts’ caseload in administrative courts (by 7% in 2024,
compared to 2023) has led to a further increase in pending cases (by 6% end 2024), despite a
further 7% increase in resolved cases and increased efficiency of judges. At the first-instance
Administrative Court, the average length of proceedings decreased (by 1 month) to 15.8
months36
.
Measures taken by the Supreme Court resulted in an increase in the number of resolved
cases. The Supreme Court identified a shortage of court staff, new competences assigned to
courts by the legislation (especially in administrative courts), complex procedural rules and
inadequate courthouses as the main factors affecting the performance of the courts37
. It
identified measures which seek to ensure that the number of resolved cases in courts remains
at least at the level of previous years. Proposals include the unification of case registration in
all courts, increased support for court operations by the Ministry of Justice, and some
legislation changes. In commercial cases, it found that pending cases are due to higher
number of incoming cases and increased complexity of cases, including high value of claims
and specialised exclusive competences. Proposed activities include transfer of cases to less
burdened courts, unification of case registration and implementation of case-weighting,
additional judges and assistance from other courts. The work of the Administrative Court is
closely monitored. The Supreme Court has set ambitious timeframes for all courts to
encourage them to resolve cases more efficiently and is also developing unified criteria for
quality of work of courts, encompassing formal court management measures and best
practices. In 2024, timeframes for some procedures have already been fully met (particularly
at appellate courts of general jurisdiction and social disputes). Following the gradual
implementation of measures, the number of resolved cases started to increase (by 4% in 2024
in total, compared to 2023)38
.
32
Supreme Court (2025), written input.
33
In 2024, the average length at district courts was 25,7 months in large value civil cases (about two years in
2023), 13 months in litigious commercial cases, and 20,7 months in more serious criminal cases (21,2 in
2023, and 18,5 months in 2022). Country visit Slovenia, Supreme Court.
34
Values for first instance district courts.
35
Average length in money laundering cases was 631 days in 2023 and 1 043 days in 2022, while in bribery
cases it was 889 days in 2023 and 793 days in 2022. Figures 21 and 22, 2025 EU Justice Scoreboard.
36
Supreme Court (2025), written input, and Slovenian Government (2025a).
37
Country visit Slovenia, Supreme Court.
38
Supreme Court (2025), written input.
9
II. ANTI-CORRUPTION FRAMEWORK
The perception among experts, citizens and business executives is that the level of
corruption in the public sector is relatively low. In the 2024 Corruption Perceptions Index
by Transparency International, Slovenia scores 60/100 and ranks 13th
in the EU and 36th
globally39
. This perception has been relatively stable over the past 5 years40
. The 2025
Special Eurobarometer on Corruption shows that 85% of respondents consider corruption
widespread in their country (EU average 69%) and 33% of respondents feel personally
affected by corruption in their daily lives (EU average 30%). As regards businesses, 84% of
companies consider that corruption is widespread (EU average 63%) and 42% consider that
corruption is a problem when doing business (EU average 35%). Furthermore, 26% of
respondents find that there are enough successful prosecutions to deter people from corrupt
practices (EU average 36%), while 13% of companies believe that people and businesses
caught for bribing a senior official are appropriately punished (EU average 33%)41
.
The recommendation to adopt the new anti-corruption strategy and action plan was
fully implemented42. The new Resolution on the prevention of corruption was adopted by
Parliament on 28 March 2025. The Resolution takes a strategic and ‘whole-of-society’
approach, covering the public and private sectors, civil society, media, and the public. It
provides sector- and policy-specific objectives to mitigate corruption risks, increase
transparency, integrity and accountability, and strengthen the enforcement of rules on
conflicts of interest, lobbying, political party financing, public procurement, public spending
and whistleblower protection. It sets out that appointments to public sector and state-owned
bodies must be free from undue influence, that the effectiveness of the prosecution of corrupt
practices must be improved, and that cooperation between supervisory institutions and public
sector cooperation with civil society must be strengthened. The Commission for the
Prevention of Corruption (CPC) adopted the corresponding Action Plan for the
Implementation of the Resolution on 23 June 2025. The Action Plan includes concrete
measures to address the strategy’s broader and more strategic objectives, including those with
high corruption risks, and with specific timelines for their implementation. Amendments to
the Action Plan over time will be possible to reflect evolving risks. In March 2025, a working
group was set up to determine whether the Integrity and Prevention of Corruption Act (IPCA)
requires updating43
. In view of these developments, the 2024 Rule of Law Report
recommendation has been fully implemented.
Some further progress was made towards establishing a track record of investigations,
prosecutions and final judgments in corruption offences44. In 2024, several open and
major investigations from previous years were concluded by the police, which overall
39
The level of perceived corruption is categorised as follows: low (above 79); relatively low (between 79-60),
relatively high (between 59-50), high (below 50).
40
In 2020, the score was 60, while in 2023 the score is 60. The score significantly increases/decreases when it
changes more than five points; improves/deteriorates (changes between 4-5 points); is relatively stable
(changes from 1-3 points) in the last 5 years.
41
Data from Special Eurobarometer 561 (2025) and Flash Eurobarometer 557 (2025).
42
The 2024 Rule of Law Report recommended Slovenia to ‘complete the adoption of the new anti-corruption
strategy and action plan and begin implementation’.
43
The Action Plan is conceived as a living document. The CPC must report on implementation annually.
Slovenian Government (2025b), written input, p. 10. Country visit Slovenia, Ministry of Justice, Ministry of
Public Administration, Parliament Secretariat, the CPC and Transparency International.
44
The 2024 Rule of Law Report recommended Slovenia ’to take measures to ensure a track record of
investigations, prosecutions and final judgments in corruption offences, including in high-level cases’.
10
transmitted to the state prosecution offices many more corruption cases and crimes with
elements of corruption (695 cases) compared to 2023 (212 cases)45
. Looking at the six main
corruption offences, in 2024 the State Prosecution Office managed to reduce the backlog of
unresolved criminal notifications (181; 375 in 2023), although there were considerably fewer
indictments and convictions46
and no foreign bribery cases were reported or investigated47
.
While no judgments have been delivered since 2020 in high-level corruption cases,
investigations and prosecutions are progressing in some high-level cases48
. Operational
cooperation and training between the Specialised State Prosecutor’s Office and the General
Police Directorate on the investigation of corruption offences intensified49
. Following the
2024 internal peer review that found deficiencies in the effectiveness of prosecutions of local
officials, mainly relating to abuse of functions and misuse of public financing resources, a
specialised working group was established to develop and share best practices, develop
uniform or comparable approaches to the conduct of pre-trial proceedings. Targeted training
of state prosecutors started in December 202450
. At the same time, the state prosecution
reported that their capacity to access information and to collect evidence on natural persons,
including banking information, in an efficient way has been impacted by the changes to the
Criminal Procedural Code enacted last year, as a judicial decision is now required for the
acquisition of such data, which may also affect international cooperation51
. On 16 May 2025,
the Government submitted to Parliament amendments to the State Prosecution Office Act,
which aim to contribute to more effective prosecution of corruption by facilitating the filling
of state prosecutor’s post at the Specialised State Prosecutor’s Office . Cooperation between
the European Public Prosecutor’s Office and the national prosecution offices continues to
work well52
. In light of these developments, there has been some further progress in the
implementation of the recommendation made in the 2024 Rule of Law Report.
45
These data concern ten offences, among them six classical corruption offences, as well as two offences
relating to abuse of position and two relating to electoral process. They involved 130 natural persons and 16
legal persons. Slovenian Government and Police Economic Crime Division (2025), written input, p. 21, and
p. 1, respectively, and country visit Slovenia, Ministry of Interior, Police and NBI, and Prosecution
Services.
46
In 2024, state prosecutors requested investigative judges to conduct 12 investigations (89 in 2023) and
launched 13 indictments (33 in 2023) on corruption. Courts adjudicated 15 corruption cases at first instance
(29 in 2023), handed down 11 convictions (21 in 2023), 3 acquittals (4 in 2023) and 1 dismissal (4 in 2023),
and imposed 4 prison sentences (12 in 2023) and 7 conditional sentences (8 in 2023). Slovenian
Government (2025b), written input, p. 18.
47
The OECD Working Group on Bribery carried out a high-level mission to Slovenia in February 2025 to
discuss its concerns relating to the implementation of the OECD Anti-Bribery Convention. OECD (2025).
48
These include an ongoing trial involving a former Prime Minister concerning a controversial land purchase,
a criminal investigation into a criminal complaint against the current Prime Minister in relation to
irregularities in political interference in the appointment of the former Police Director-General (who
resigned in January 2025) and a criminal pre-trial procedure concerning the procurement of premises by the
ex-Minister of Justice. Slovenian Government (2025b), written input pp. 18-21; Country visit Slovenia,
Specialised State Prosecution Office and the Police.
49
Slovenian Government (2025b), written input, pp. 10 and 21-22.
50
Country visit Slovenia, State Prosecutor General.
51
Country visit Slovenia, State Prosecutor General, Supreme State Prosecution Office and Specialised State
Prosecution Office. The 2024 amendments to the Criminal Procedure Act limit the possibility for Police and
prosecutors to access certain financial or communications data. As explained by the Ministry of Justice, the
changes to the Criminal Procedure Act regarding the collection of banking information of natural persons
implement the judgment of the Constitutional Court U-I-144/19_3 of 6 July 2023. See also 2024 Rule of
Law Report, Slovenia, p. 15 and related footnotes.
52
EPPO (2025), written input, pp. 53-55. In 2024, none of the EPPO investigations in Slovenia concerned
corruption offences, EPPO (2025), Annual Report 2024, p.55.
11
Recommendations were issued to improve the transparency and integrity in the
appointment of high-level officials including the Police Director-General. In November
2024, an Administrative Court judgment found irregularities in the procedure for the
appointment of the Police Director-General in September 2023, who subsequently resigned in
January 202553
. The Commission for the Prevention of Corruption (CPC) concluded its own-
initiative investigation into a possible infringement of the Integrity and Prevention of
Corruption Act in relation to that appointment. On 20 March 2025, it issued two
recommendations to change and improve the selection procedures for high-level
appointments to ensure greater transparency and integrity in decision-making, improve public
trust and avoid corruption risks, which closely align with the findings of the Administrative
Court judgement 54
. The selection procedure for a new Director-General started in April 2025
and is still ongoing. Changes announced to the Police Tasks and Powers Act to improve the
supervision of police work and prevent any political influence in decision-making in 2024 are
envisaged for end 2025. Amendments to the relevant provision in the Organisation and Work
of the Police Act (Art. 47) are being discussed among Ministries to address some of the
issues regarding the appointment and dismissal of the Director General of the Police. A
working group to coordinate the implementation of the Resolution on the National
Programme for the Prevention and Suppression of Crime (2024-2028) held its first meeting in
January 2025 to discuss an action plan and next steps55
.
The technical capabilities of the Commission for the Prevention of Corruption are being
improved although further measures are needed to improve recruitment. In 2024 and
2025, the CPC continued upgrading its publicly accessible web portal ‘ERAR’ to modernise
and enhance the presentation, accessibility and transparency of data on the expenditure of
public funds as well as information on asset declarations, lobbying and business restrictions.
However, the March 2025 ‘ERAR’ upgrade uncovered multiple errors regarding data on
public spending, apparently originating in the underlying databases from which the data were
extracted as well as the huge amount of data involved56
. The CPC’s internal system and
database ‘Corruptio’ is also being upgraded so as to provide a ‘one-stop-shop’ to submit
reports under the Integrity and Prevention of Corruption Act and improve the efficiency of
the CPC’s monitoring of the reporting obligations. The overall aim is to strengthen
transparency and oversight, reduce corruption risks and boost integrity. The CPC’s 2025
budget was increased for technical support, although more is needed to employ additional in-
53
In the judgment I U 1401/2023-85, the Administrative Court found that the act of the Special Selection
Board of the Council of Officials was unlawful due to insufficient reasoning as to why the selected
candidate fulfilled the required leadership experience criterion. The parliamentary inquiry and the pre-trial
investigation initiated in 2024 into allegations of undue political influence in this appointment are still
ongoing. See also 2024 Rule of Law Report, Slovenia, p. 16 and related footnotes.
54
The CPC’s recommendations call for changes to the Government’s rules of procedure to ensure that
decisions on appointments or dismissals are more detailed, reasoned and justified. CPC (2025e) and CPC
(2025f). The CPC had made similar recommendations to the Government in December 2022. One of the
objectives of the 2025 Resolution on the Prevention of Corruption is for all stages of the appointment and
recruitment procedures in the public sector to be transparent, independent of undue influence and ensure
equal treatment of persons, pp. 8 and 22-23.
55
The Working Group is led by the Police and includes representatives from the relevant ministries,
prosecution offices, the Court of Audit and the FIU amongst others. One deliverable is an international
conference held in May 2025 bringing together foreign and domestic experts in the field of protection of
national and EU financial interests, and the fight against corruption. Slovenian Government (2025b),
additional written input, p. 10, and country visit Slovenia, Government.
56
The CPC has since apologised for the detected malfunctions and has taken steps to rectify the situation.
CPC (2025d) and Country visit Slovenia, CPC.
12
house experts to manage these complex systems57
. A new CPC Deputy was appointed in
August 2024 although difficulties in recruitment persist given that overall staffing remains at
similar levels as in the past two years. While the CPC has continued its efforts to recruit more
staff, it still faces difficulties to find the right qualified candidates, a situation that civil
society continues to express concerns about58
.
The lobbying guidelines were updated to clarify the existing exemptions from the
obligation to register as a lobbyist. In December 2024, the CPC issued updated guidelines
on lobbying to bring them in line with a Supreme Court judgment of September 2024 and to
provide a more comprehensive explanation of the provisions of the Integrity and Prevention
of Corruption Act that govern lobbying activities. The updated guidelines clarify that elected
representatives of an interest organisation that do not have a (legal) representative specifically
provided for by law (e.g. associations, civil initiatives, housing communities) may carry out
lobbying activities without the need to register or report59
. The CPC noted low reporting
levels about lobbying contacts especially at local level whereas reporting by the ministries
and parliament works well. The CPC and stakeholders consider that amending the law to
align the respective reporting deadlines for contacts between interest representatives and
officials would improve the functioning and transparency of the lobbying system60
.
Rules on the content and method of submission of the annual report of political parties
were updated to ensure greater transparancy and clarity as regards their financing. The
rules on the annual reports of political parties were amended so as to align them with the
Political Parties Act revised in 202361
. The rules determine the content, forms and method of
submission of a political party’s annual report to the Agency for Public Legal Records and
Related Services and of its publication. The technical changes require parties’ accounts to
include amounts transferred to or received from affiliated parties and political foundations
operating in Slovenia or other Member States for projects of common interest and the
amounts spent to implement such projects. Moreover, these amounts are to be recorded
separately from their normal political activities and must be used only for the designated
purposes set out in a written agreement62
. The new rules are intended to enhance transparency
57
An agreement between the CPC and the Ministry of Digital Transformation (MDT), that took over
responsibility for the management of the public sector’s servers last year, has been deferred to 2026 from
August 2024 as the MDT has not yet adopted its leasing policy.
58
The technical upgrades are currently outsourced and will take place in phases. The CPC’s total 2025 budget
is around EUR 3.1 million. It operates with about 50% staff capacity. Slovenian Government (2025b),
written input pp. 10 and Country visit Slovenia, CPC and Transparency International.
59
Judgment of the Supreme Court, I U 1093/2019-54 of 4 September 2024. CPC (2024a), pp. 25-27.
Slovenian Government (2025b), written input, pp. 11-12, and Country visit Slovenia, CPC.
60
Country visit Slovenia, CPC and Transparency International. Currently, whereas lobbyists only need to
report their contacts annually, lobbied officials must do so within eight days of their contacts. As of April
2025, there were 85 registered lobbyists compared to 84 at the end of 2023. Of these, 36 sent reports on
lobbying activities performed in 2024. CPC (2025), p. 32. The 2025 Resolution on the Prevention of
Corruption (pp. 8-9 and 19) highlighted the absence of reporting on lobbying contacts as one of the major
challenges that need to be addressed. It calls for strict compliance with the rules on the part of both the
public and the private sectors.
61
The amendment was mainly necessary to comply with the 2023 amendments to the Political Parties Act.
2024 Rule of Law Report, Slovenia, p. 18.
62
Projects of common interest could include joint events and educational activities (seminars, consultations,
conferences, workshops, training courses, research or publishing activities and so on) that do not involve
the party’s regular operations. A party must also keep separate records and report separately on funds
transferred from its transaction account to another party or political foundation. Slovenian Government
(2025b), written input and additional written input, p. 14 and pp. 8-10 respectively.
13
and clarify what financial information parties should record and publish. In 2024, the Court
of Audit carried out six political party audits, where it found only minor technical breaches,
and will carry out three more in 2025. In April 2025, it finalised its report on the European
Parliament elections63
. Parliament is conducting an inquiry into suspected illegal political
party financing that allegedly involved state-owned enterprises and the misuse of public
money64
.
Despite awareness-raising efforts, few reports of corruption were made through
whistleblowing channels. The CPC’s second statistical report on the number of
whistleblowing reports received from internal and external reporting channels did not reveal
any information specifically on corruption. Throughout 2024, the CPC continued its outreach
and awareness-raising activities explaining how the Reporting Persons Protection Act
protects and supports whistleblowers in practice and the importance of whistleblowing
including for detecting and preventing corruption. Parliament did not receive any
whistleblower reports in 2024. The police registered only three reports none of which were
relevant to corruption or conflicts of interest. The Specialised State Prosecution Office has
not yet detected any positive effects on reporting or accusations of corruption criminal
offences deriving from the Act and maintains that it is not useful for criminal cases.
According to one civil society organisation, the law is still untested as it has not been in place
for very long and a ‘whistleblowing culture’ is still lacking65
.
Efforts to improve transparency and competition in public procurement continued.
Businesses’ attitudes towards corruption in the EU show that 28% of companies in Slovenia
(EU average 25%) think that corruption has prevented them from winning a public tender or
a public procurement contract in practice in the last three years66
. 53% of companies perceive
the level of independence of the public procurement review body (National Review
Commission) as very or fairly good67
. The Single Market and Competitiveness Scoreboard on
access to public procurement in Slovenia reports 44% of single bids for 2023 (EU average
29%). Most authorities and stakeholders continue to highlight public procurement as a high-
risk area68
. To enhance transparency, the Government is preparing an updated module on the
national eProcurement system that would give authorities the option to publish information
on contracts below the national thresholds for public procurement on a rolling basis in
addition to annual publication69
. During 2024, the CPC conducted investigations of
63
Country visit Slovenia, Court of Audit.
64
Country visit Slovenia, Parliament Secretariat. A report is expected by the end of 2025 or early 2026.
65
Slovenian Government, Police and Parliament (2025), written input, pp. 12, 2 and 21, respectively. Country
visit Slovenia, Specialised State Prosecution Office and Transparency International. As clarified by the
Ministry of Justice, the Whistleblower Act is not specifically oriented toward corruption, but toward the
reporting of any breach of law within the working environment. In addition, the reporting of criminal
offences, including corruption and the protection of witnesses in criminal proceedings is regulated in the
Criminal Procedure Code and Witness Protection Act.
66
Flash Eurobarometer 557 (2025). This is 3 percentage points above the EU average.
67
Figure 59, 2025 EU Justice Scoreboard.
68
Slovenian Government (2025b), written input, pp. 13-15. The objectives of the 2025 Resolution on the
Prevention of Corruption include the mitigation and prevention of corruption risks in public procurement,
including in the health and infrastructure sectors, pp. 7-8 and 25-28. Cases included the healthcare sector
and the purchase of property. The high proportion of single bids, bid-rigging and market divisions was
highlighted by civil society while businesses referred to problems with licensing at the local and municipal
level. Country visit Slovenia, CPC, Specialised State Prosecution Office, Police, Court of Audit,
Transparency International, and Business Associations.
69
Country visit Slovenia, Ministry of Public Administration.
14
misconduct in several large investment projects (e.g. purchase of real estate, acquisition of IT
equipment, concessions for water sources), and issued recommendations to the government
and respective ministries on handling corruption risks. In addition, the CPC continued to
carefully monitor state-owned enterprises, which are considered to be especially prone to
undue influence and conflicts of interest situations because of the close interaction between
the public and the private spheres70
. In December 2024, the CPC clarified the rules
preventing a public-sector body from engaging in business activity with a company involving
a family member of an office holder in that particular public-sector body71
. The National
Review Commission carried out several investigations into potential violations of
procurement in 26 hospitals and health-care entities and filed four cases for irregularities72
.
III. MEDIA PLURALISM AND MEDIA FREEDOM
The media regulator generally remains independent, while concerns exist regarding its
human and financial resources, including in relation to the envisaged new
responsibilities. The Media Pluralism Monitor 2025 (MPM) notes medium-low risk as for
the indicators regarding independence and effectiveness of the media regulatory authorities73
,
highlighting that concerns regarding the selection processes for the media regulator’s
(Agency for Communication Networks and Services, AKOS) main bodies (namely: the
Council and Director) persist, as both bodies are appointed by the Government. The limited
resources and AKOS’s mostly passive and low-profile approach to media regulation reflect
the internal strategies set by its leadership74
. Moreover, in light of the ongoing reform of the
media law and the new Mass Media Act that the Government submitted to Parliament in
December 2024, aimed to update media legal framework and implement the European Media
Freedom Act (EMFA)75
, the media regulator is expected to receive additional regulatory
powers76
, although as indicated by some stakeholders, some further challenges remain
regarding its level of human and financial resources77
. AKOS remains legally and
functionally distinct and independent from the Government78
. However, some further
concerns persist as the current mechanism of appointment of AKOS’s director and members
of the AKOS Council remains under the direct control of the Government, raising some
concerns among stakeholders regarding the level of political influence on the media
regulator79
. Moreover, the current human and financial resources of AKOS are assessed by
70
Country visit Slovenia, CPC, Specialised State Prosecution Office, and Transparency International. In
February 2025, the Business Club of Slovenian Entrepreneurs sent an open letter to the Prime Minister
calling out against what it terms as wide-spread corruption in Slovenia, especially in state-owned
enterprises. Business Club of Slovenian Entrepreneurs (2025).
71
CPC (2024a), pp. 10-12. The list of entities with restrictions on operations pursuant to the IPCA is publicly
available on the ERAR portal.
72
Country visit Slovenia, National Review Commission. The NRC was following-up on the CPC’s July 2023
recommendations concerning its analysis of corruption risks in public healthcare institutions.
73
Media Pluralism Monitor (2025), p. 10.
74
Liberties (2024), p. 557.
75
The reform of Mass Media Act was first announced by the Government in the second half of 2023, with
view to overhaul and update the media legal framework. 2024 Rule of Law Report, Slovenia, p. 21. The
proposed new Mass Media Law was removed from final reading in Parliament in May 2025 while the
legislative procedure is ongoing.
76
According to the envisaged media law reform AKOS would be equipped with the tasks, among others, in
the field of allocation of state advertising. Slovenian Government (2025b), written input, p. 22.
77
Media Pluralism Monitor (2025), p. 13.
78
2024 Rule of Law Report, Slovenia, p. 21.
79
Liberties (2025), p. 902. 2024 Rule of Law Report, Slovenia, p. 22.
15
some stakeholders as insufficient, given the increase in its regulatory powers and the tasks
foreseen under the ongoing reform of media legal framework, in addition to its existing
regulatory powers80
. AKOS funding has been separate from the state budget, relying instead
on a self-financing system based on contributions collected from the undertakings that
operate under its regulatory remit81
. However, new regulatory tasks related to digital services
and media are projected to be funded by the state budget, raising some concerns among
stakeholders regarding the predictability of the annual budget allocation82
.
The independence of public service media has further improved. The 2022 public service
media reform has been well-received and is seen as a success in maintaining the
independence of public service media83
. The establishment of a governance structure with
members who are not politically appointed has strengthened the independence of RTV
Slovenia84
. Programme creators of RTV Slovenia are independent and autonomous in their
professional work85
. In the assessment of the MPM, independence of public service media
scored within the medium-low risk band86
. However, in December 2024, journalists’
associations cautioned that the RTV Slovenia Council overstepped its authority and
responsibilities outlined in the RTV Act by providing obligatory guidelines to RTV
Slovenia’s management87
. Moreover, despite the positive developments in the public service
media, some stakeholders have continued to report challenges in implementing the new
governance structure, which also impacted the efficient functioning of both the RTV Council
and the Management Board88
.
Some progress has been achieved on ensuring the adequate funding for public service
media although challenges persist89. The Government is working on a legislative reform to
guarantee sustainable, independent, and politically neutral funding for public service media,
namely for both RTV Slovenia and Slovenian Press Agency (STA)90
. To address these
concerns, the Ministry of Culture in May 2025 submitted proposed amendments to the RTV
Slovenia Act for public consideration. The changes focus on the institution’s governance, the
scope of its public service, and its funding model. The aim is to enhance the efficiency of
RTV Slovenia’s management and ensure more stable public financing by tailoring it to the
80
In 2024, the size of the department enforcement of media regulation, overseeing radio, television and VOD
amounted to 12 employees, what is considered disproportionate to the scope of responsibilities, Liberties
(2025), p. 903. Country visit Slovenia, AKOS. As flagged by some stakeholders, the financial statement
with budgetary implications linked to the proposed new Mass Media Act did not specify the amount of
funding allocated for the new regulatory tasks of AKOS or the number of potential additional staff assigned
to the regulatory authority for this purpose. Liberties (2025), pp. 903-904.
81
2024 Rule of Law Report, Slovenia, p. 23.
82
Liberties (2025), p. 903.
83
Country visit Slovenia, Association of Journalists.
84
Amendments to the Radio Television Slovenia Act. Country visit Slovenia, Association of Journalists. The
changes in the perception of independence are reflected also by the increase in the public trust, 2024 Rule of
Law Report, Slovenia, p. 24.
85
Country visit Slovenia, RTV Management Board.
86
Media Pluralism Monitor (2025), p. 20.
87
Media Pluralism Monitor (2025), p. 24.
88
The challenges include the remaining lack of clarity in some aspects of the division of competences
between the RTV Council and RTV Management Board. Country visit Slovenia, RTV Management Board.
89
The 2024 Rule of Law Report recommended Slovenia to ’[e]nsure that rules or mechanisms are in place to
provide funding for public service media that is appropriate for the realisation of its public service remit
while guaranteeing its independence’.
90
Country visit Slovenia, Ministry of Culture, and Liberties (2025), p. 900.
16
changing inflation rates91
, to provide RTV Slovenia with the necessary resources to ensure
their financial viability and effective fulfillment of their public service mission92
. The
increase in RTV Slovenia’s license fee for 2025 was approved93
. Although the increase has
been deemed necessary, stakeholders have questioned its long-term effectiveness, arguing
that it serves only as a temporary solution. Public service media are still dealing with severe
financial difficulties, which affect their long-term viability and decisions regarding
programme planning. With an estimated funding gap of approximately EUR 11 million
anticipated for 2025, comprehensive and durable measures to address the issue are needed94
.
Moreover, in December 2024 the agreement on budgetary funding for STA in 2025 was
signed, guaranteeing an increase in funding for STA by 18.6% compared to 202495
.
Nevertheless, some concerns have been raised that any such increase is dependent on the
decision of the Government or Parliament, creating risks of undue influence96
. Overall, there
has been some progress on the 2024 Rule of Law Report recommendation to ensure sufficient
funding for public service media while guaranteeing their independence. However, in view of
the overall financial crisis of the public service media, further measures will be needed.
The private media remain affected by financial difficulties and risks to media pluralism.
The media market remains highly concentrated, including at the local market97
, with the
limited information on ultimate ownership98
. Despite legal provisions prohibiting daily
newspaper publishers from also owning or co-founding radio or television stations,
stakeholders have reported that such practices persist99
. Moreover, the concerns regarding the
transparency and fairness of the distribution of state advertising persist100
. There are also
indications suggesting that the media market will become even more concentrated in 2025101
.
Financial difficulties continue to have a significant impact on the media sector as a whole,
especially on the press media102
. MPM notes high risk bands regarding the transparency of
media ownership, plurality of media providers, media viability and editorial independence
from commercial and owners influence103
. The discussions in Parliament are ongoing as
regards the rules regarding assessment of media market concentrations104
. The Association of
Journalists considers the adoption of the new Mass Media Act as necessary, despite the
concerns expressed also as for the planned model of state subsidies105
. Some stakeholders
91
GOV.SI (2025).
92
Slovenian Government, written input, p. 22. Country visit Slovenia, Ministry of Culture.
93
The TV license fee was increased from EUR 12,75 to EUR 14,02 per month starting from January 2025,
after it has remained unchanged for 12 years. Country visit Slovenia, Ministry of Culture.
94
The labour and productions costs have increased due to inflation, while it has been emphasised that there is
a need for deep modernisation and digitalisation of RTV Slovenia. Country visit Slovenia, RTV
Management.
95
GOV.SI (2024).
96
Liberties (2025), p. 903.
97
Country visit Slovenia, AKOS.
98
Country visit Slovenia, Association of Journalists. Media Pluralism Monitor (2025), p. 7.
99
Liberties (2025), p. 905.
100
Media Pluralism Monitor (2025), p. 7.
101
Country visit Slovenia, Association of Journalists.
102
Country visit Slovenia, AKOS. Media Pluralism Monitor (2025), p. 7.
103
The Market Plurality area scored within the high-risk band, making the highest scoring area in the Slovene
monitoring in terms of risk bands. Media Pluralism Monitor (2025), p. 15. In general, market plurality
scores the risk band of 76 %.
104
The proposal of the new Mass Media Act envisages that the national competition authority, the AVK,
would be responsible for media concentration assessments.
105
STA (2025), Country visit Slovenia, Association of Journalists. The proposal is subject to ongoing
legislative procedure.
17
indicated that the difficult financial situation of media resulted in reductions of newsroom
staff, deteriorating working conditions of journalists, and that a broader trend of media
divestment is eroding media pluralism106
. The MPM highlights also risks of political control
over certain media outlets by political entities, undermining their editorial autonomy and
integrity of content107
. As raised by journalists, this could result in a lack of diverse content
and a decline in overall media quality at both national and local levels108
. As part of the
media law reform, the Government supports the adoption of a new Mass Media Act and
relevant amendments in other legislative acts, covering the necessary aspects of the European
Media Freedom Act, as part of the implementation process, addressing, among others, media
market concentrations and its impact on media pluralism, state advertising and aiming to
significantly increase the transparency of the media landscape109
.
The framework for accessing public information remains favourable. Slovenia has
ratified the Council of Europe Convention on Access to Official Documents110
. The legal
framework regulating the access to information and documents remains stable, as set out in
the Access to Public Information Access Act. Moreover, the media and journalists benefit
from an accelerated procedure pursuant to the Mass Media Act in relation to requests to
access to public information held by any public body111
. Overall, the risk as regarding
protection of right of information has been assessed as low by MPM112
.
Some further progress was made on the recommendation to improve the protection of
journalists, yet the challenges remain113. MPM flags medium-high risk for the protection of
freedom of expression and for journalistic profession, standards and protection114
. The
number of reported incidents concerning the safety of journalists has decreased while SLAPP
lawsuits and online harassment against journalists have continued, including at the local
level115
. The proposed new Mass Media Act currently under legislative procedure aimed at
implementing EMFA would contain provisions regarding strengthen protection for
journalistic sources as well as the prohibition to install intrusive surveillance software on
devices used by journalists116
. The transposition of anti-SLAPP Directive is also ongoing117
.
Since the 2024 Rule of Law Report, no new alerts have been recorded on the Council of
Europe’s Platform to promote the protection of journalism and safety of journalists118
,
although eleven new alerts have been reported in the Media Freedom Rapid Response
(MFRR) monitoring report, out of them, eight relating to verbal attacks, two related to
106
Country visit Slovenia, Association of Journalists, Union of Journalists.
107
Media Pluralism Monitor (2025), pp. 9, 18.
108
Country visit Slovenia, Association of Journalists and Union of Journalists.
109
Country visit Slovenia, Ministry of Culture.
110
The Council of Europe Convention on Access to Official Documents (CETS No. 205), also known as
the Tromsø Convention, entered into force on 1 December 2020.
111
Mass Media Act, Article 45.
112
Media Pluralism Monitor (2025), p. 12.
113
The 2024 Rule of Law Report recommended Slovenia to “[f]urther advance with the process of adopting
legislative and non-legislative safeguards to improve the protection of journalists, particularly online, taking
into account European standards on the protection of journalists”.
114
Media Pluralism Monitor (2025), p. 10.
115
Media Pluralism Monitor (2025), p. 11.
116
Country visit Slovenia, Ministry of Culture.
117
Country visit Slovenia, Ministry of Culture; Slovenian Government (2025b), written input, p. 23. The draft
anti-SLAPP bill was prepared by the Government and submitted for public consultation and expert
coordination on 10 December 2024.
118
Council of Europe, Platform to promote the protection of journalism and safety of journalists.
18
physical assaults, two related to attacks to property and two amounting to interference and
blocked journalistic activity119
. Concerns have also been raised about a systematic problem of
low reporting of SLAPP incidents by journalists120
and ongoing use of defamation laws
against them121
. The Association of Journalists considers that authorities’ efforts to secure
support from the Ministry of Culture for safety initiatives, including legal aid, training, and
protocols of cooperation with law enforcement authorities, have been present but insufficient,
while further efforts would be welcomed on protection and safety122
. Overall, while
challenges remain in practice and the legal provisions on strengthening the safeguards are
still to be adopted123
, there has been some further progress on the recommendation to
improve the protection of journalists.
IV. OTHER INSTITUTIONAL ISSUES RELATED TO CHECKS AND BALANCES
Over two-thirds of companies surveyed in Slovenia express confidence in the
effectiveness of investment protection. 69% of companies are very or fairly confident that
investments are protected by law and courts124
. As regards authorities relevant for economic
operators, 57% of companies perceive the level of independence of the national competition
authority (Slovenian Competition Protection Agency) as very or fairly good125
. A number of
judicial mechanisms are in place in the Supreme Court to ensure the implementation of their
judgments, which include the possibility to substitute annulled administrative acts. However,
these mechanisms do not include fines or disciplinary actions against the responsible
officials, nor the possibility to award direct or consequential damages or compensation126
.
On 1 January 2025, Slovenia had 4 leading judgments of the European Court of Human
Rights pending implementation, a decrease of 1 compared to the previous year127. At
that time, Slovenia’s rate of leading judgments from the past 10 years that had been
implemented was at 88% (compared to 86% in 2024; 12% remained pending), and the
average time that the judgments had been pending implementation was 1 year and 7 months
(compared to 1 year and 2 months in 2024)128
. The oldest leading judgment, pending
implementation for 3 years, concerns the authorities’ failure to introduce remedies that would
provide the applicants with a reasonable opportunity to challenge the Bank of Slovenia’s
2013-2014 decisions129
. As regards the respect of payment deadlines, on 31 December 2024
119
European Centre for Press and Media Freedom, Media Freedom Rapid Response – Slovenia.
120
Country visit Slovenia, Union of Journalists.
121
Country visit Slovenia, Association of Journalists.
122
Country visit Slovenia, Association of Journalists.
123
Slovenian Government (2025b), written input, p. 23, and country visit Slovenia, Ministry of Culture.
124
Figure 54, 2025 EU Justice Scoreboard. In Slovenia, 21% of companies perceive the frequent changes in
legislation or concerns about quality of law making process as the main reason for the perceived lack of
effectiveness of investment protection. Figure 55, 2025 EU Justice Scoreboard.
125
Figure 60, 2025 EU Justice Scoreboard.
126
Figure 49, 2025 EU Justice Scoreboard. The data presented reflect exclusively the mechanisms in place at
the level of the highest administrative jurisdiction; the same or other mechanisms may be in place at lower
instance administrative courts.
127
For an explanation of the supervision process, see the website of the Council of Europe.
128
All figures calculated by the European Implementation Network (EIN) and based on the number of cases
that are considered pending at the annual cut-off date of 1 January 2025. EIN (2025), written input, p. 8.
129
Judgment of the ECtHR, 49969/14, Pintar and Others v. Slovenia, pending implementation since 2021.
19
there were no cases awaiting confirmation of payments (same as in 2023)130
. On 16 June
2025, the number of leading judgments pending implementation had remained 4131
.
To address the Constitutional Court’s considerable caseload, the transfer of certain
types of cases to administrative courts was achieved by interpretation of legislative
changes. As noted in past Rule of Law Reports, for several years, the Constitutional Court
has been raising concerns about its considerable caseload, which prevents the Court from
dedicating more attention to the most constitutionally relevant cases132
. While Parliament
rejected the constitutional amendments which aimed to reduce the Constitutional Court’s
caseload133
, the Constitutional Court allowed the review of spatial planning acts before the
administrative courts134
to continue, even though it had ordered Parliament to resolve the
constitutionality issue within one year135
. In 2024, the average time needed to conclude a
constitutionality review before the Constitutional Court decreased to 472 days (600 in 2023)
while constitutional complaints took around 460 days on average (540 in 2023)136
. The oldest
pending cases were further reduced137
. In total, the backlog again decreased considerably (by
40%), also due to a lower number of incoming cases (by 35%)138
.
Following a call by the Constitutional Court, Parliament adopted amendments allowing
the Court to establish the incompatibility of office of its members. In May 2024, the
Commission for the Prevention of Corruption initiated misdemeanour proceedings against a
Constitutional Court judge due to a failure to report in relation to business restrictions, which
is on-going139
. Following this case and calls by the Constitutional Court to address the gap in
its ability to act in such circumstances140
, the Parliament President submitted amendments to
the Constitutional Court Act, which were adopted by Parliament on 25 March 2025. The
amendments explicitly state that the function of the Constitutional Court members is
incompatible with carrying out professional or other gainful activity, except when allowed by
130
Council of Europe (2025), p. 157.
131
Data according to the online database of the Council of Europe (HUDOC).
132
2023 Rule of Law Report, Slovenia, p. 30, and 2024 Rule of Law Report, Slovenia, p. 31.
133
Parliament decided in April 2025. Among the proposed changes were setting into the Constitution the
current list of privileged bodies that can request constitutional review, the gradual transfer of review of
local government issues and spatial planning acts to the administrative courts, and allowing the
Constitutional Court to select constitutional complaints and initiatives for constitutional review. 2024 Rule
of Law Report, Slovenia, pp. 31-32.
134
In 2021, Parliament adopted amendments to the Spatial Planning Act, allowing the review before the
administrative courts, unless a parallel procedure before Constitutional Court started.
135
The Constitution provides that the review of such acts should be before the Constitutional Court. In the
judgment published on 11 April 2025, the Constitutional Court stated that the transfer of those cases to
administrative courts is required also in view of an increasing need for factual assessments, as also required
by EU law, for which the Constitutional Court would be less appropriate, and in order to ensure the
effective judicial protection under EU law. Judgment of the Constitutional Court, U-I-474/22-15, 20 March
2025.
136
Constitutional Court (2025), pp. 112-116.
137
On 31 December 2024, a total of 79 cases older than two years remained pending. This is a notable
improvement, as at the end of 2021, there were 553 cases pending that were up to 5 years old.
Constitutional Court (2025), p. 116.
138
End 2024, the Court had 1 173 pending cases (1 931 end 2023). Constitutional Court (2025), p. 116.
139
This issue came up in April 2024 following uncertainties regarding the existing framework when it was
reported that one of the Constitutional Court members exercised ancillary professional activities in
academia as a sole trader (‘samostojni podjetnik - s.p.’). 2024 Rule of Law Report, Slovenia, p. 31.
140
The Constitutional Court suggested a mechanism similar to the one in the European Court of Human
Rights, where the judges themselves vote with a qualified majority on the alleged incompatibility of office
of a judge. Rule of Law Report, Slovenia, p. 31.
20
the law. The amendments allow the President of the Constitutional Court to adopt a decision
on incompatibility of an activity of the Court’s member, which can be challenged before the
Constitutional Court.
Legislative amendments would extend the competence of the Human Rights
Ombudsperson and maintain the parliamentary appointment procedure. The Human
Rights Ombudsperson is the National Human Rights Institution, accredited with A-Status141
.
In March 2025, the Government shared with the Ombudsperson the revised amendments to
the Human Rights Ombudsperson’s Act142
. Proposed amendments would extend the
Ombudsperson’s oversight to certain private law organisations, specifically those exercising
public powers, establish a special deputy for children’s rights (a Child Rights Ombudsman)
within the Ombudsperson’s office, grant the Ombudsperson a mandate to monitor human
trafficking, and extend the term of office of the Ombudsperson and the deputies - from six to
eight years143
. Efforts are also underway to organise monitoring of the Convention on the
Rights of Persons with Disabilities within the Ombudsperson’s office. These amendments
have been largely welcomed by the Ombudsperson, including that the draft amendments
maintain the appointment of the Ombudsperson by Parliament, and do not envisage the
transfer of the appointment to the President of the Republic as initially planned144
. However,
the Ombudsperson raised concerns with regard to the proposed change that the election in
Parliament would be carried out by a secret ballot (which would decrease the transparency)
and that the draft amendments do not explicitly establish the Ombudsperson’s power to
suggest that Slovenia ratifies or accedes to international human rights instruments145
, as
recommended by the UN, although the Ministry of Justice states this right exists under
general provisions of the existing law146
. In 2024, the Ombudsperson issued 95 new
recommendations (86 in 2023)147
. In addition, the Ombudsperson acting in the capacity of
National Prevention Mechanism issued further 294 recommendations to various institutions
(578 in 2023). In 2024, the Ombudsperson highlighted approximately 100 especially relevant
past recommendations that remain either unimplemented or partially implemented (80 in
2023).
The civic space in Slovenia continued to improve. The positive trend already highlighted in
past Rule of Law Reports regarding the improving situation for civil society continued, and
141
Accreditation by the Global Alliance of National Human Rights Institutions (GANHRI).
142
The Ombudsperson provided comments to the draft law and, in its letter of 25 March 2025, stated that it
would not be legitimate that the revision of framework continues while the selection procedure for a new
Ombudsperson is ongoing and the institution has only an acting head (since February 2025). The
Ombudsperson also raised concerns about the lack of transparency in the procedure for appointment and the
large discretionary power of the President of the Republic in the selection of a candidate. ENNHRI (2025),
pp. 422-425. On 18 June 2025, a proposed candidate for the Ombudsperson did not obtain the required 2/3
of votes of all members of Parliament.
143
Slovenian Government (2025b), written input, p. 25.
144
Country visit Slovenia, Ombudsperson. In 2024, the Ombudsperson raised concerns about the envisaged
transfer of the appointment of the Ombudsperson from Parliament to the President of the Republic, which
would not be appropriate in the Ombudsperson’s view, since the institution reports to Parliament, as is the
case for parliamentary ombudspersons. 2024 Rule of Law Report, Slovenia, pp. 32-33.
145
This was one of the recommendations from GANHRI Sub-Committee on Accreditation (SCA) Report,
December 2020, p. 24.
146
Country visit Slovenia, Ministry of Justice.
147
Human Rights Ombudsperson (2025).
21
the civic space in Slovenia has been upgraded to ‘open’148
. While the Government’s attitude
was reported as positive, there were some negative attitudes towards the civil society
organisations (CSOs) coming from certain public actors and media outlets owned by or
affiliated with certain political parties149
. The new Strategy for developing non-governmental
organisations until 2030 as well as the Strategy for developing volunteering until 2030 are
being developed150
. Their measures aim to ensure that CSOs, contribute to the realisation of
the principles of pluralism and democracy in society. As regards funding, in 2024 and
beginning 2025, several funding opportunities for CSOs were available at national level151
.
148
Rating given by Civicus, Slovenia; ratings are on a five-category scale defined as: open, narrowed,
obstructed, repressed and closed.
149
ENNHRI (2025), p. 147 and Liberties (2025), pp. 95, 900 and 922-923.
150
Public consultation ended in January 2025; Slovenian Government (2025b), written input, p. 27.
151
The awards aimed at CSOs and volunteering organisations for providing effective and quality services in
the amount of EUR 12,6 million, published in June 2024, were selected at the end of 2024, while a second
call to match funding for EU projects with the co-financing of non-reimbursable costs for
projects/organisations receiving EU or EFTA grants in the amount of EUR 5,3 million, were selected in
January 2025. Another call for development and professionalisation of non-governmental organisations and
volunteering in Slovenia was published beginning of June 2025, amounting to EUR 15,7 million. Slovenian
Government (2025b), written input, pp. 27-28, and Slovenian Government (2025a). Legal challenges by
some CSOs in relation to the annulled Spring 2023 public call for funding are still pending before courts.
Liberties (2025), p. 921, country visit Slovenia, CNVOS and Peace institute, and 2024 Rule of Law Report,
Slovenia, p. 34.
22
Annex I: List of sources in alphabetical order*
* The list of contributions received in the context of the consultation for the 2025 Rule of Law report
can be found at https://commission.europa.eu/publications/2025-rule-law-report-targeted-
stakeholder-consultation_en.
Association of judges (2024), Press release of 8 November 2024 https://sodnisko-drustvo.si/izjava-za-
javnost-vlom-in-pozig-hise-sodnika-almirja-kurspahica/.
Business Club of Slovenian Entrepreneurs (2025), Open letter to the Prime Minister, 20 February
2025 https://www.sbc.si/novice/2025/02/odprto-pismo-predsednika-sbc-joca-pececnika-premierju-
robertu-golobu.
Centre for Media Pluralism and Media Freedom (2025), Media Pluralism Monitor 2025, Country
report for Slovenia.
Commission for the Prevention of Corruption (2024a), Systemic Explanation on Limitation of
Business Activity of 27 December 2024.
Commission for the Prevention of Corruption (2024b), Systemic Explanation on Lobbying of 6
December 2024.
Commission for the Prevention of Corruption (2025a), Report for 2024, 10 June 2024
https://www.kpk-rs.si/storage/uploads/5a0a2713-69c1-4d8b-b251-c2acb2eee4d9/Letno-
poro%C4%8Dilo-2024_WEB.pdf.
Commission for the Prevention of Corruption (2025b), Annual report on the handling of
whistleblower protection cases for 2024, 2 April 2025 https://www.kpk-
rs.si/storage/uploads/97653c8d-fb1b-4729-aae3-3cc4bdc2bcf1/Skupno-letno-poro%C4%8Dilo-ZZPri-
2024.pdf.
Commission for the Prevention of Corruption (2025c), Press release: In view of the perceived
corruption risks in the appointment of the Director-General of Police, the Commission issues
recommendations, 30 March 2025, https://www.kpk-rs.si/sl/novice/vse-novice/zaradi-zaznanih-
korupcijskih-tveganj-pri-imenovanju-generalnega-direktorja-policije-komisija-izdala-priporocili.
Commission for the Prevention of Corruption (2025d), Press release, Dr. Robert Šumi: the errors
were expected and are being corrected promptly, 7 March 2025.
Commission for the Prevention of Corruption (2025e), Recommendations of the Government of the
Republic of Slovenia in the procedure for proposing and appointing the Director-General of the
Police, 28 February 2025 https://www.kpk-rs.si/storage/uploads/4dcc2137-f1ac-4930-8be7-
8e80d51b4593/Priporocilo_oz._pobuda_06210-301-2023-57_P.pdf
Commission for the Prevention of Corruption (2025f), Recommendations to the Officials’ Council in
the process of proposing and appointing the Director-General of the Police, 28 February 2025
https://www.kpk-rs.si/storage/uploads/25382d50-d252-4b94-80ce-
f649ac422f2e/Priporocilo_oz._pobuda_06210-301-2023-58_P.pdf
Commission for the Prevention of Corruption (2025g), Written contribution for the 2025 Rule of Law
Report.
Constitutional Court (2024), Judgment U-I-109/24, 20 November 2024 https://www.us-
rs.si/assets/Novice/sl_SI/46573/UI10924.pdf.
23
Constitutional Court (2025), Report for 2024, xx May 2025.
Council of Europe, Platform to promote the protection of journalism and safety of journalists.
European Centre for Press and Media Freedom, Media Freedom Rapid Response – Slovenia.
European Commission (2024), 2024 Rule of Law Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation
in Slovenia.
European Commission (2025), EU Justice Scoreboard 2024.
European Commission (2025), Flash Eurobarometer XXX on Businesses’ attitudes towards
corruption in the EU.
European Commission (2025), Special Eurobarometer XXX on Citizens’ attitudes towards corruption
in the EU.
European Public Prosecution Office (2025), Annual Report 2024,
https://www.eppo.europa.eu/assets/annual-report-2024/index.html.
European Public Prosecution Office (2025), Written input for the 2025 Rule of Law Report.
GOV.SI (2024), Press release of 23 December 2024, Signing the STA Contract, This government
guarantees financial independence and journalistic autonomy, https://www.gov.si/en/news/2024-12-
23-signing-the-sta-contract-this-government-guarantees-financial-independence-and-journalistic-
autonomy/.
GOV.SI (2025), Press release of 20 May 2025, Public hearing of the amendment to the RTV Slovenia
Act, https://www.gov.si/novice/2025-05-20-javna-obravnava-predloga-sprememb-in-dopolnitev-
zakona-o-rtv-slovenija/.
Human Rights Ombudsperson (2025), Additional written contribution for the 2025 Rule of Law
Report.
Judgment of the Administrative Court (2024), I U 1401/2023-85, 24 October 2024
https://sodnapraksa.si/?q=odlo%C4%8Dbe%20&_submit=i%C5%A1%C4%8Di&order=date&directi
on=desc&rowsPerPage=20&page=11&id=2015081111479817.
Judgment of the Constitutional Court, U-I-474/22-15, 20 March 2025 https://www.uradni-
list.si/glasilo-uradni-list-rs/vsebina/2025-01-0872.
Judgment of the European Court of Human Rights, Case of X and Others v. Slovenia, 19 December
2024 https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/?i=001-238568
Judgment of the Supreme Court, I U 1093/2019-54, 4 September 2024.
Judicial Council (2025), Press release of 21 March 2025 http://www.sodni-svet.si/?p=objave-095
Liberties (2024), Rule of Law Report, Slovenia.
Liberties (2025), Rule of Law Report, Slovenia.
OECD (2025), Press release of 19 February 2025, Slovenia must promptly strengthen independence of
investigations and implement longstanding recommendations, says OECD Working Group on Bribery
following High-Level mission in Ljubljana, https://www.oecd.org/en/about/news/press-
24
releases/2025/02/slovenia-must-promptly-strengthen-independence-of-investigations-and-implement-
longstanding-recommendations-says-oecd-working-group-on-bribery-following-high-level-mission-
in-ljubljana.html.
Slovenian Government (2025a), Additional written contribution for the 2025 Rule of Law Report.
Slovenian Government (2025b), Written input for the 2025 Rule of Law Report.
Slovenian Parliament (2025), Resolution 214-02/25-2 (RePKRS-1) of 28 March 2025 on the
Prevention of Corruption.
Slovenian Parliament (2025), Written input for the 2025 Rule of Law Report.
Specialised State Prosecutor (2025), Written input for the 2025 Rule of Law Report.
STA (2025), Journalists' Association appalled by media bill withdrawal,
https://english.sta.si/3428340/journalists-association-appalled-by-media-bill-withdrawal.
The Council of Europe (2020), Convention on Access to Official Documents (CETS No. 205).
Transparency International (2025), Corruption Perceptions Index 2024.
National Legislation
The Act on Amendments to the Criminal Procedure Act (ZKP-P) of 19 June 2024.
Art. 56a and Art. 58 of the ZIntPK
Act amending the Political Parties Act (Official Gazette, No. 78/2023)
25
Annex II: Country visit to Slovenia
The Commission services held virtual meetings in March and May 2025 with:
• Agency for Communication Networks and Services (AKOS)
• Association of Journalists
• Business associations: Advantage Austria & GZS
• Commission for the Prevention of Corruption
• Constitutional Court
• Court of Audit
• Energy Agency
• Faculty of Social Sciences (Prof. dr. Marko Milosavljević)
• Human Rights Ombudsperson Office
• Judges’ Association
• Judicial Council
• Ministry of Culture
• Ministry of Justice
• Ministry of Public Administration
• Ministry of the Interior
• National Bureau of Investigation (NPU) and General Police Directorate (Economic
Crime division)
• National NGO umbrella network (CNVOS)
• National Review Commission (for public procurement)
• Parliament Secretariat
• Peace Institute
• Radio-television Slovenia (RTV): Council (President Goran Forbici)
• Radio-television Slovenia (RTV): Management Board (President Natalija Gorščak)
• State Attorney General (dr. Ana Kerševan)
• State Prosecution (State Prosecutor General dr. Katarina Bergant, Supreme State
Prosecution Office, Specialised State Prosecution Office)
• State Prosecutorial Council
• Supreme Court
• Transparency International Slovenia
• Union of Slovenian Journalists
* The Commission also met the following organisations in a number of horizontal meetings:
• Amnesty International
• Araminta
• Civil Liberties Union for Europe
• Civil Society Europe
• European Civic Forum
• European Partnership for Democracy
• European Youth Forum,
• International Commission of Jurists
26
• International Federation for Human Rights (FIDH)
• JEF Europe
• Philea – Philanthropy Europe Association.
• Transparency International