# Slovenia - United States Department of State

- United States Welcomes Slovenia’s Signing of the Artemis Accords Office of the SpokespersonSlovenia became the 39th signatory to the Artemis Accords on April 19 in Ljubljana as part of the U.S.-Slovenia Strategic Dialogue. &nbsp;The Artemis Accords were established in 2020 by the United States and seven other countries to set out a practical set of principles to guide space exploration.&nbsp;State Secretary Matevž Frangež of the Ministry of the Economy, Tourism and Sport&nbsp;signed the Accords for Slovenia in the presence of Assistant Secretary of State for European and Eurasian Affairs James O’Brien. &nbsp;The United States and Slovenia share a close connection, rooted in shared democratic values, robust economic and trade ties, and a commitment to upholding the international rules-based order.&nbsp; Our participation together in the Artemis Accords strengthens these bonds.&nbsp;Slovenia joins 38 other nations –&nbsp;Angola, Argentina, Australia, Bahrain, Belgium, Brazil, Bulgaria, Canada, Colombia, Czech Republic, Ecuador, France, Germany, Greece, Iceland, India, Israel, Italy, Japan, Luxembourg, Mexico, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Nigeria, Poland, the Republic of Korea, Romania, Rwanda, Saudi Arabia, Singapore, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Ukraine, the United Arab Emirates, the United Kingdom, the United States, and Uruguay – in affirming the Accords’ principles for sustainable civil space activity.  The Department of State and NASA lead the United States’ outreach and implementation of the Accords.&nbsp;For more information, please visit https://www.state.gov/artemis-accords/.  For media inquiries, please contact OES-Press@state.gov.						Tags																													Artemis Accords																															Bureau of European and Eurasian Affairs																								Bureau of Oceans and International Environmental and Scientific Affairs																								Office of the Spokesperson																																														Science, Technology, and Innovation																																							Scientific and Technological Cooperation																															Slovenia																																Space
- Joint Statement on the Fourth U.S. – Slovenia Strategic Dialogue Office of the SpokespersonThe text of the following statement was released by the Governments of the United States of America and the Republic of Slovenia on the occasion of U.S. – Slovenia Strategic Dialogue.Begin TextThe governments of the United States and Slovenia held the fourth United States-Slovenia Strategic Dialogue in Ljubljana on April 19.  The annual Strategic Dialogue reaffirms the strength and importance of their bilateral relations based on shared democratic values and interests.State Secretary Sanja Štiglic and Assistant Secretary of State for European and Eurasian Affairs James O&#8217;Brien led this year&#8217;s discussions.  Representatives from the Slovenian Ministry of Foreign and European Affairs; Ministry of the Environment, Climate and Energy; Ministry of the Economy, Tourism and Sport; Ministry of Higher Education, Science and Innovation; Ministry of Defense; and the Government Information Security Office participated alongside representatives from the U.S. Department of State, Department of Defense, and NASA.On bilateral cooperation in the areas of economy, energy, science, and technology, the two sides reviewed positive trends and opportunities in bilateral trade and investment and recognized the importance of renewable and low-carbon energy and climate change mitigation and adaptation aimed at preventing future large-scale natural disasters, such as the devastating floods and wildfires that have affected both countries.Slovenia and the United States both promote clean energy, emphasize continued cooperation on energy security, and value a strong partnership on the long-term peaceful use of nuclear energy in Slovenia.  In particular, Slovenia expressed its appreciation for technical cooperation in the U.S.-led Project Phoenix on the responsible use of small modular reactor technology.Slovenia and the United States also expressed their interest in enhancing existing cooperation in science, innovation, and technology based on mutual partnership.  Both sides highlighted the all-round benefits of cooperation in research and advanced technologies, including space technologies and artificial intelligence.  At this year&#8217;s dialogue, Slovenia signed the Artemis Accords. Under the Artemis Accords principles, the United States and Slovenia reaffirm their shared commitment to a common vision of peaceful, sustainable, and transparent cooperation in the civil exploration and use of the Moon, Mars, comets, and asteroids.Both sides reaffirmed the importance of strengthening contacts between their respective societies, organizations, and citizens, including through short-term fellowship and visitor programs, such as the Young Transatlantic Innovation Leaders Initiative (YTILI) Regional Innovation Summit that the United States hosted in Ljubljana in 2023 and the EU-US Emerging Leaders Visitors Program (EVLP) hosted by Slovenia in 2024.  Both sides expressed interest in cooperation with regard to the Bled Strategic Forum (BSF) and committed to using this global platform to exchange views on the most pressing issues in the region and beyond.The two countries also reaffirmed their partnership to strengthen resilience and combat disinformation by signing a Memorandum of Understanding on Countering Foreign State Information Manipulation, committed to work in a global community of likeminded democracies to safeguard the information space.On cyber and digital issues, both Slovenia and the United States underscored their intent to promote shared values and responsible state behavior in cyberspace.  Discussions focused on improving cybersecurity and resilience, as well as on a shared recognition of current emerging cyber threats, with a particular focus on ransomware, countering disinformation, and the potential misuse of artificial intelligence (AI) in cybersecurity.  Both sides reaffirmed their commitment to further enhance global cyber resilience and implement cyber capacity building, supporting partners through mechanisms like the Western Balkans Cyber Capacity Centre.  Furthermore, the two countries concurred on the need for trustworthy, secure, ethical, and safe AI systems.  The U.S.-led UN General Assembly resolution on AI therefore serves as a good foundation for establishing clear international norms for AI in anticipation of the adoption of the Global Digital Compact at the UN Summit of the Future later this year.With regard to defense cooperation, Slovenia and the United States noted the important ongoing bilateral High-Level Defense Dialogue.  Both governments acknowledged the concrete and diverse long-standing cooperation at the bilateral and multilateral levels, especially in the field of defense policy, military exercises, education and training.Both sides underscored NATO&#8217;s unity and solidarity ahead of the 75th anniversary NATO Summit in Washington in July.  The Summit should send a strong message on burden-sharing, robust long-term support for Ukraine on its path to future membership in NATO, in line with the Vilnius Summit decision, ongoing active engagement in the Western Balkans, and enhanced cooperation with the European Union and Indo-Pacific partners.  As Slovenia marks 20 years of Alliance membership, NATO remains a pillar of our collective defense and both sides reaffirmed their commitment to continue working together as Allies.Slovenia and the United States committed to working closely together during Slovenia&#8217;s membership of the UN Security Council in 2024 and 2025.  Both countries reaffirmed their commitment to multilateralism, respect for international law, including the UN Charter, and the international rules-based order.  In the context of the UN Summit of the Future, they underlined the importance of preparing an ambitious, concise, action-oriented, and human rights-based Pact for the Future.On global and regional security issues, Slovenia and the United States discussed the situation in the Middle East, Ukraine, the Western Balkans, and the Indo-Pacific region.Slovenia and the United States stand firmly with Ukraine as it continues to defend its independence, sovereignty, and territorial integrity within its internationally recognized borders.  Both countries reaffirmed their abiding support to Ukraine as it defends its future and proceeds on the path of Euro-Atlantic integration.Slovenia and the United States expressed their intent to further strengthen their engagement in the Western Balkans to support the region&#8217;s progress on its European and Euro-Atlantic path and to contribute to a stable and resilient region.  Supporting the implementation of reforms and the reconciliation process is critical to ensuring prosperity for the people in the region.  As the region faces continuing brain drain, reconciliation is crucial for a positive perspective for young people.On the Middle East, the two countries underscored the urgent need to secure the release of all hostages and ensure safe, sufficient, and unhindered delivery of humanitarian aid into Gaza, and improve protections for civilians and humanitarian aid workers.  Both countries are united in their support for achieving a sustainable ceasefire and a two-state solution.  They are also committed to endeavors aimed at upholding navigational rights and freedoms in the Red Sea.Slovenia and the United States expressed a strong interest in further deepening their strategic partnership.  The next Strategic Dialogue will be held in Washington in 2025.End Text&nbsp;
- Slovenia HomeReportsBureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor2023 Country Reports on Human Rights Practices&#8230;Slovenia				hide	document.addEventListener("DOMContentLoaded", function(event) {	if(window.jQuery) {		jQuery( document ).ready(function() {			if (jQuery(".bc_middle").hasClass("collapse")) {				jQuery(".bc_ellipse").click(function(){					jQuery(".bc_hide").toggleClass("visible");					jQuery(".bc_middle").toggle();					jQuery(".bc_ellipse").toggle();					jQuery(".bc_content").toggleClass("noflex");					jQuery(".block_breadcrumbs_content").toggleClass("noflex");				});				jQuery(".bc_hide").click(function(){					jQuery(".bc_hide").toggleClass("visible");					jQuery(".bc_middle").toggle();					jQuery(".bc_ellipse").toggle();					jQuery(".bc_content").toggleClass("noflex");					jQuery(".block_breadcrumbs_content").toggleClass("noflex");				});			} else {				jQuery(".bc_ellipse").hide();			}		});	}});																							2023 Country Reports on Human Rights Practices: Slovenia																																					Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor																																																																																							Download Report																																																							Translations																																																																 In this section										/																							EXECUTIVE SUMMARY																																													EXECUTIVE SUMMARY																															Section 1. Respect for the Integrity of the Person																																																									a. Arbitrary Deprivation of Life and Other Unlawful or Politically Motivated Killings																																																																											b. Disappearance																																																																											c. Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman, or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, and Other Related Abuses																																																																			Prison and Detention Center Conditions																																																																																																																		d. Arbitrary Arrest or Detention																																																																			Arrest Procedures and Treatment of Detainees																																																																																																																		e. Denial of Fair Public Trial																																																																			Trial Procedures																																																								Political Prisoners and Detainees																																																																																																																		f. Transnational Repression																																																																											g. Property Seizure and Restitution																																																																											h. Arbitrary or Unlawful Interference with Privacy, Family, Home, or Correspondence																																																																																	Section 2. Respect for Civil Liberties																																																									a. Freedom of Expression, Including for the Members of the Press and Other Media																																																																			Internet Freedom																																																																																																																		b. Freedoms of Peaceful Assembly and Association																																																																											c. Freedom of Religion																																																																											d. Freedom of Movement and the Right to Leave the Country																																																																											e. Protection of Refugees																																																																																	Section 3. Freedom to Participate in the Political Process																																																									Elections and Political Participation																																																																																	Section 4. Corruption in Government																															Section 5. Governmental Posture Towards International and Nongovernmental Monitoring and Investigation of Alleged Abuses of Human Rights																															Section 6. Discrimination and Societal Abuses																																																									Women																																																																											Systemic Racial or Ethnic Violence and Discrimination																																																																											Children																																																																											Antisemitism																																																																											Trafficking in Persons																																																																											Acts of Violence, Criminalization, and Other Abuses Based on Sexual Orientation, Gender Identity or Expression, or Sex Characteristics																																																																											Persons with Disabilities																																																																											Other Societal Violence or Discrimination																																																																																	Section 7. Worker Rights																																																									a. Freedom of Association and the Right to Collective Bargaining																																																																											b. Prohibition of Forced or Compulsory Labor																																																																											c. Prohibition of Child Labor and Minimum Age for Employment																																																																											d. Discrimination (see section 6)																																																																											e. Acceptable Conditions of Work																																																																																																							EXECUTIVE SUMMARY				There were no significant changes in the human rights situation in Slovenia during the year.Significant human rights issues included credible reports of crimes involving violence or threats of violence targeting lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, or intersex persons.The government took credible steps to identify and punish officials who may have committed human rights abuses.																														Section 1.													 Respect for the Integrity of the Person												    																																																a. Arbitrary Deprivation of Life and Other Unlawful or Politically Motivated Killings										There were no reports that the government or its agents committed arbitrary or unlawful killings, including extrajudicial killings, during the year.																																				b. Disappearance										There were no reports of disappearances by or on behalf of government authorities.																																				c. Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman, or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, and Other Related Abuses										The constitution and law prohibited such practices, and there were no reports that government officials employed them. Impunity was not a significant problem in the security forces. The punishment for such treatment was from one to 12 years’ imprisonment.																Prison and Detention Center Conditions						According to the human rights ombudsperson and local nongovernmental organizations (NGOs), physical conditions were generally acceptable, but some overcrowding existed. The ombudsperson also reported a shortage of prison staff.Administration: There were no significant reports regarding prison or detention center conditions that raised human rights concerns.Independent Monitoring: The government permitted local and international human rights groups, media, and other independent international bodies, such as the International Committee of the Red Cross and the Council of Europe’s Committee for the Prevention of Torture, to monitor prison conditions. The human rights ombudsperson, together with eight human rights groups, visited all prisons. The government allowed designated NGOs and the human rights ombudsperson to monitor the treatment of prisoners.																										d. Arbitrary Arrest or Detention										The constitution and law prohibited arbitrary arrest and detention and provided for the right of any person to challenge the lawfulness of their detention in court. The government generally observed these requirements.																Arrest Procedures and Treatment of Detainees						Police generally made arrests with warrants issued by a prosecutor or judge based on evidence. Authorities could detain suspects for 48 hours before charging them. The law required authorities to inform suspects of their rights immediately after arrest and to advise detainees in writing within six hours (or within three hours for minor offenses) of the reasons for their arrest. Suspects were required to have prompt access to a judge to assess whether they qualified for release on bail or should remain incarcerated pending trial. Authorities generally released defendants on bail except in the most serious criminal cases. The law provided for prompt access to immediate family members and detention under house arrest.Upon arrest, detainees had the right to contact legal counsel of their choice and the right to counsel during interrogations, and the government protected these rights. While indigent defendants had the right to an attorney provided at public expense, there was no formal system for providing such legal counsel. The NGO Legal Information Center and the government’s Free Legal Aid Office made free counsel available to indigents. There were no reported cases of arbitrary of unlawful detention.																										e. Denial of Fair Public Trial										The constitution and law provided for an independent judiciary, and the government generally respected judicial independence and impartiality.																Trial Procedures						The constitution and law provided for the right to a fair public trial, and the judiciary generally enforced this right.						Political Prisoners and Detainees						There were no reports of political prisoners or detainees.																										f. Transnational Repression										Not Applicable.																																				g. Property Seizure and Restitution										The government had laws or mechanisms in place, but NGOs and advocacy groups reported that the government did not make significant progress on resolution of Holocaust-era claims, including for foreign citizens.The law permitted all persons who were citizens of the former Yugoslavia or Allied nations to recover property confiscated by fascist or Nazi occupying forces. Cases involving property confiscated after 1945-46 were subject to restitution procedures under the Criminal Procedure Act. Cases involving property that was nationalized were subject to restitution procedures under the Denationalization Act of 1991. The Denationalization Act required claimants to have had Yugoslavian citizenship at the time the property was confiscated, and excluded, with some exceptions, property confiscated before 1945. Some cases involving the restitution of property seized during the communist era (especially from 1946 to 1958) remained unresolved.Although some heirs of Holocaust victims could seek restitution of confiscated property through these laws and mechanisms, NGOs and advocacy groups reported the government did not make significant progress on the resolution of Holocaust-era claims. This included both former citizens who were required to renounce Yugoslavian citizenship as a condition for emigrating and Holocaust survivors from Yugoslavia and their heirs who did not return and never had Yugoslav citizenship. The World Jewish Restitution Organization (WJRO) engaged the government regarding Holocaust survivors and their heirs who were not eligible to file claims based on Slovenian law.There was no provision in law for restitution or compensation of heirless property. In 2018, the WJRO and Ministry of Justice agreed to launch a joint research project to compile as complete a historical record as possible of heirless, formerly Jewish-owned properties in the country. Ministry of Justice researchers concluded their research in 2019, but WJRO research remained under internal review at year’s end. The ministry agreed to a one-year timeline after completion of the joint research project to perform an assessment of the value of the heirless properties.Some remaining non-Jewish confiscated properties appeared to be unrecoverable because the parties occupying the sites were politically influential and thwarted attempts to reach a negotiated settlement. For example, since 1993 close ties between the Gornia Radgona Municipality and the company Radenska d.d., a major mineral water producer, stymied a foreign family’s claims to the Radenci Spa property located on the family’s ancestral lands. Although the Supreme Court rejected the family’s claim to the trademark in 2015, the litigants appealed to the Constitutional Court, which returned the case multiple times to lower courts where it remained pending at year end. Multiple cases for different land claims by the family were still being reviewed by administrative courts.The Department of State’s Justice for Uncompensated Survivors Today (JUST) Act Report to Congress, released in 2020, can be found on the Department’s website: .																																				h. Arbitrary or Unlawful Interference with Privacy, Family, Home, or Correspondence										The constitution and laws prohibited such actions, and there were no reports that the government failed to respect these prohibitions.																																					Section 2.													 Respect for Civil Liberties												    																																																a. Freedom of Expression, Including for the Members of the Press and Other Media										The constitution and law provided for freedom of expression, including for members of the press and other media, and the government generally respected this right. An independent media, an effective judiciary, and a functioning democratic political system combined to promote freedom of expression, including for media members.Freedom of Expression: The law prohibited the incitement to hatred, violence, and intolerance based on nationality, race, religion, gender, skin color, social status, political or other beliefs, sexual orientation, and disability in a way that could threaten or disrupt public order, typically requiring violence to occur for the prosecution of such incitement. The penal code also prohibited the expression of ideas of racial superiority and denial of the Holocaust.Violence and Harassment: RTV Slovenia journalists continued protests against staffing and program decisions of the public broadcaster’s leadership appointed under the previous government. They reported on cases of disciplinary action, threats of dismissal, and smearing of journalists, particularly against members of the striking committee.The web platform for journalists to report physical and verbal attacks listed a total of 15 reports during the year of alleged attacks against journalists by individuals or institutions, a decrease compared to the previous year.Censorship or Content Restrictions for Members of the Press and Other Media, Including Online Media: Independent media were active and expressed a wide variety of views without restriction. Instances of overt political pressure on the press remained isolated. In its 2023 Rule of Law Report, the European Commission stated that the situation of media freedom and pluralism continued to face challenges, but it noted positive developments with respect to a more favorable climate for media and the generally improved attitude of the government towards media. The Rule of Law Report pointed to new safeguards to improve the independence of the public media and noted initial steps the government took regarding protection of journalists. The commission raised concerns, however, over a lack of safeguards for the independence of the media regulator, online harassment, intimidation and smear campaigns against journalists, an increasing trend of strategic lawsuits against public participation (SLAPP) and the lack of an anti-SLAPP framework, and a regulatory gap for addressing the high concentration of media ownership and lack of transparency. Media analysts noted online threats led some journalists to practice self-censorship. They also observed that a lack of job security contributed to self-censorship.Libel/Slander Laws: The print and broadcast media, including online newspapers, journals, and book publishers, were subject to laws criminalizing hate speech, libel, and slander. The government did not use the law to retaliate against journalists or political opponents.Actions to Expand Freedom of Expression, Including for Members of the Press and Other Media: On March 17, the government established an advisory and monitoring body, the Strategic Council for the Prevention of Hate Speech. On July 19, the council issued a set of 57 recommendations to combat intolerance and hate speech in the media, the internet, politics, education and youth, and criminal law. The council was scheduled to meet again in 2024 to review the implementation of its recommendations.On May 26, amendments to the RTV Slovenia Act took effect following a Constitutional Court decision. In line with the changes aimed to depoliticize the public broadcaster, two previous governing bodies were replaced by a new RTV Slovenia Council, with its members being appointed by civil society groups and RTV Slovenia employees, and none by parliament.																Internet Freedom						The government did not restrict or disrupt access to the internet or censor online content.																										b. Freedoms of Peaceful Assembly and Association										The constitution and law provided for the freedoms of peaceful assembly and association, and the government generally respected these rights.																																				c. Freedom of Religion										See the Department of State’s International Religious Freedom Report at  https://www.state.gov/religiousfreedomreport/.																																				d. Freedom of Movement and the Right to Leave the Country										The constitution and law provided for freedom of internal movement, foreign travel, emigration, and repatriation, and the government generally respected these rights.																																				e. Protection of Refugees										The government cooperated with the Office of the UN High Commissioner for Refugees and other humanitarian organizations in providing protection and assistance to refugees, returning refugees, or asylum seekers as well as other persons of concern. According to the Asylum Information Database, beneficiaries of international protection and employed asylum seekers, like citizens, had difficulty obtaining a personal doctor due to a lack of such professionals in the country.Access to Asylum: The law provided for the granting of asylum or refugee status, and the government had established a system for providing protection to refugees.Due to an increase in numbers of asylum seekers and a backlog of cases, applicants were detained at asylum centers while waiting to file their applications for international protection. The lack of capacity to address large numbers of arrivals resulted in overcrowding, lower hygienic standards, and greater health risks. The government expanded capacity at existing facilities to address the increase in asylum seekers and refugees. By the end of October, police had processed more than 50,000 unauthorized entries into the country, with most individuals expressing an intention to apply for international protection. Due to the large number of applicants for international protection, accommodation facilities in the asylum center in Ljubljana were extremely overcrowded. According to the human rights ombudsperson, the conditions in the asylum center did not meet the minimum reception standards. The ombudsperson emphasized the rights of these individuals to dignity, privacy, and security. The director of the asylum center said that despite the overcrowding, it provided all individuals with food, clothing, and emergency medical care.The government did not have a systemic solution for the accommodation of children. Lack of access to information for asylum seekers staying in private housing was also a problem, according to NGOs.Asylum seekers outside EU resettlement and relocation programs often waited six months or longer for their cases to be adjudicated. On April 18, parliament passed a law allowing asylum seekers to enter the labor market three months after arriving in the country, compared to the previous wait of nine months. Experts raised concerns regarding gaps in trafficking victim identification. NGOs reported double standards in the government’s treatment of Ukrainians fleeing Russia’s invasion and asylum seekers from other parts of the world. Ukrainians fleeing the war were granted temporary protection beginning in 2022.On February 6, the Administrative Court ruled police deported two Pakistani citizens in January who were in the process of applying for refugee status. The court determined officials at the Center for Foreigners interviewed one of these individuals while he was detained and unable to consult with his representatives. NGOs accused the officials of tricking the individual into withdrawing his request for refugee status, by promising they would release him if he did so.Freedom of Movement: Local NGOs reported unjustifiable limitations on the movement of asylum seekers residing in government-operated reception facilities and asserted that the restrictions had no legal basis. Local NGOs reported that asylum seekers in reception facilities faced detention periods of up to two weeks while authorities processed their initial asylum requests.Durable Solutions: At the end of 2022, the government announced it would accept 50 Syrian and Afghan citizens from Turkey who were registered as refugees with the Office of the UN High Commissioner for Refugees and could be granted refugee status in Slovenia. Twenty-three Syrian citizens arrived in the country for resettlement in December. Twenty-seven Afghan citizens were expected to arrive in early 2024.The law did not provide for children to gain citizenship if they were born in the country to persons with international protection. The Ministry of Interior, however, ordered the Administrative Unit to grant citizenship to such children, who otherwise were de facto stateless.Temporary Protection: The government provided temporary protection (subsidiary protection) to individuals who might not qualify as refugees. In 2022, it launched a special temporary protection for persons displaced from Ukraine due to Russia’s unprovoked invasion. As of September 19, the government had granted temporary protection to 8,936 Ukrainians. Persons who received temporary protection had the right to accommodation, meals, health care, work, education, financial assistance, and legal assistance.																																					Section 3.													 Freedom to Participate in the Political Process												    																						The constitution and law provided citizens the ability to choose their government in free and fair periodic elections held by secret ballot and based on universal and equal suffrage.																										Elections and Political Participation										Abuses or Irregularities in Recent Elections: Parliamentary, presidential, and local elections in 2022 were widely reported to be fair and free of abuses and irregularities.																																					Section 4.													 Corruption in Government												    																						The law provided criminal and civil penalties for corruption by officials, and the government generally implemented the law effectively. There were numerous reports of government corruption.Corruption: Officials sometimes engaged in corrupt practices with impunity. Despite the country’s well-developed and comprehensive legal framework for identifying and combating corruption, critics asserted implementation and prosecution efforts remained inadequate. In January, parliament adopted whistleblower legislation that provided for free legal aid, unemployment benefits, and psychological counseling to individuals subjected to retaliation. The law also called for the identity of whistleblowers to be protected, with punishments for companies or individuals who disclosed the identity of someone who reported wrongdoing. Companies that retaliated against whistleblowers could be fined up to €60,000 ($64,860).Local anti-corruption experts stated corruption in the country was systemic, although only isolated cases were investigated. Corruption manifested itself through politically motivated staffing in state-owned enterprises, conflicts of interest, failure to report outside activities, bribes, and lack of transparency throughout the country’s political and economic spheres, particularly in public tenders and the fields of energy, construction, urban planning, and health care. Due to limited police capacity, only a small portion of alleged corrupt practices were investigated, and courts had a poor track record in trying corruption cases.In October, media outlets reported on widespread corruption at the state-owned Motorway Company of the Republic of Slovenia (DARS), with one individual claiming to have paid €90,000 ($97,290) in bribes to individuals linked with the previous government to secure contracts with DARS. Another person claimed they were approached by an individual who offered a tailored contract with DARS if he would give one of the parties then in government 5 percent of the contract. The head of DARS resigned in November but denied any wrongdoing.For additional information about corruption in the country, please see the Department of State’s Investment Climate Statement for the country, and the Department of State’s International Narcotics Control Strategy Report, which includes information on financial crimes.																											Section 5.													 Governmental Posture Towards International and Nongovernmental Monitoring and Investigation of Alleged Abuses of Human Rights												    																						A variety of domestic and international human rights groups generally operated without government restriction to monitor or investigate human rights conditions or cases and publish their findings. Government officials were often cooperative and responsive to the views of these groups.Government Human Rights Bodies: The constitution provided for an independent human rights ombudsperson to monitor violations of human rights. Individuals could file complaints with the ombudsperson to seek administrative relief in the case of a human rights violation by the government. The ombudsperson was effective, adequately resourced, reported to parliament annually on the human rights situation, and provided recommendations to the government. The Office of the Advocate of the Principle of Equality raised awareness of and helped prevent all types of discrimination but reported that a lack of resources and personnel limited its effectiveness.																											Section 6.													 Discrimination and Societal Abuses												    																																																Women										Rape and Domestic Violence: Rape of a person, regardless of gender, including spousal rape, and domestic violence were illegal. Sexual violence was a criminal offense, and the penalty for conviction was six months to five years’ imprisonment. The penalty for conviction of rape was one to 10 years’ imprisonment. Police generally investigated accusations of rape, and courts generally tried accused offenders.The law provided from three to 10 years’ imprisonment for conviction of committing aggravated, grievous, or particularly humiliating bodily harm. Upon receiving reports of spousal abuse or violence, police generally intervened and prosecuted offenders.Local NGOs reported police and courts did not effectively intervene in or prosecute cases of alleged domestic abuse. NGOs blamed the problem on deficient institutional cooperation; lengthy court proceedings; untrained investigators, prosecutors, and judges in matters of domestic violence; and poor information flow among authorities, institutions, and NGOs.A network of maternity homes, safe houses, and shelters provided care to women and children who were survivors of violence. The police academy offered annual training on domestic violence. Local NGOs reported women lacked equal access to assistance and support services and that free psychosocial assistance from NGOs was unavailable in many parts of the country. NGOs also highlighted most efforts were project-based and subject to grant money, rather than part of sustained government programming.Discrimination: The law provided the same legal status and rights for women as for men, and the government generally enforced those laws effectively.The law prohibited women from performing underground work in mines, with limited exceptions. The law did not prohibit women from working in any other profession. According to Eurostat, women’s earnings were approximately 97 percent of those of men. The government noted women were sometimes subjected to workplace prejudice and discriminatory treatment in technical professions. The government also noted that despite higher education levels, women were less likely to occupy leadership positions. Women were also more likely to be employed in temporary or part-time work.Reproductive Rights: There were no reports of coerced abortion or involuntary sterilization on the part of government authorities.By law, state-supported infertility treatment and biomedical fertilization procedures were available only for women and men living in a heterosexual marital or cohabiting relationship who were unable to become pregnant through sexual intercourse or by other treatments. Marital and cohabiting lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, or intersex (LGBTQI+) couples and single persons were not eligible for state-supported infertility treatment. The law did not restrict access to in vitro fertilization by a specific age but required that women be of an age suitable for childbirth. In vitro fertilization was not available or covered by health insurance for women aged 43 and older, forcing some women to have the procedure done in other countries.The government provided access to sexual and reproductive health services for survivors of sexual violence; emergency contraception and post-exposure prophylaxis were available as part of clinical management of rape.																																				Systemic Racial or Ethnic Violence and Discrimination										The country’s constitution recognized Hungarians (approximately 8,000 persons) and Italians (approximately 4,000 persons) as national minorities. The government also recognized Roma (approximately 10,000 to 12,000 persons) as an ethnic minority. Other minority populations were not officially recognized, including ethnic Germans, Albanians, Bosniaks, Croatians, Macedonians, Montenegrins, and Serbs. These communities called for the constitution to be amended to recognize them as official minorities with the right to designated parliamentary seats. Despite these calls for recognition, the Council of Europe raised no objections to the existing legal framework for recognizing minorities in the country.In January, the government passed hate crime legislation, mandating stricter punishments for crimes committed against a victim due to the victim’s nationality, race, religion, ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation, political beliefs, social position, or other personal circumstances.Discrimination against socially marginalized Roma persisted in some parts of the country. Organizations monitoring conditions in the Romani community noted that Roma faced difficulties securing adequate housing in traditional housing markets. The human rights ombudsperson reported elderly Roma were among the most vulnerable individuals and needed additional care and support services. Many Roma lived apart from other communities in illegal settlements lacking basic utilities and services, such as electricity, running water, sanitation, and access to transportation. Authorities stated the illegality of Romani settlements remained the largest obstacle to providing adequate public housing, water, and sanitation. By law only owners or persons with other legal claims to land, such as legal tenants, could obtain public services and utilities.One NGO estimated that only 2 percent of Roma in the southeastern part of the country worked in the formal economy. Employment in informal sectors made Roma vulnerable to labor law violations, particularly in terms of benefits and procedures for termination of employment. Employment discrimination against Roma was not limited to a specific sector.NGOs called on the government to adopt measures to improve access to housing, education, and employment for Roma. A government-established commission composed of representatives from the Romani community, municipalities, and the government to safeguard the rights of Roma continued to function. Representatives of the Romani community participated in a program designed to improve communication between police and individual Roma through discrimination-prevention training. The government provided medical equipment to health-care facilities and supported programs, workshops, and educational initiatives to establish best practices for health-care professionals working in Romani communities.The Ministry of Education encouraged the inclusion of Romani children in preschool education at least two years before the start of primary education by providing financial assistance to families that enrolled their children, including Romani assistants in kindergartens, and providing state subsidies to kindergarten departments with enrolled Romani children for additional staffing. The ministry cofinanced the salaries of Romani assistants in elementary schools. The ministry implemented five education and training programs for professionals, which included content aimed at the upbringing and education of Romani children.The government allocated €17.3 million ($18.9 million) during the year for programs to support and integrate the Romani community. These funds were allotted for health programs, education subsidies, infrastructure investments in Romani communities, Romani associations, and Romani cultural programming.																																				Children										Child Abuse: Child abuse was a criminal offense, and conviction carried a penalty of from three to eight years’ imprisonment. The government enforced the law effectively. Police were active with social media campaigns and appealed to citizens to report any violence against children and other vulnerable groups.Child, Early, and Forced Marriage: The minimum age for marriage was 18. With the approval of parents or legal guardians, centers for social service could approve the marriage of a person at age 16. The government enforced the law effectively. Forced marriage of individuals as young as 16 occurred in the Romani community, but were not registered with the government, so numbers were difficult to confirm.In March the Office for National Minorities led a professional lecture entitled “Recognition of early and forced marriages in the Romani community and action in these cases.” The program, led by police, NGOs, and social workers, instructed teachers, assistants, and counselors in and near Romani communities on how to recognize risks of forced marriages and how to respond in case of suspicion. Ministry of Interior officials also led a program for administrative unit officials to recognize potential risk factors and indicators of forced marriage.Sexual Exploitation of Children: The law prohibited the commercial sexual exploitation, sale, grooming, offer, or procurement of children for commercial sexual exploitation, including child sex trafficking, and practices related to child pornography. Penalties for convicted child sex traffickers ranged from three to 15 years in prison. The possession, sale, purchase, or propagation of child pornography was illegal. Penalties for conviction of violations ranged from six months to eight years in prison. The government enforced the law effectively. The law prohibited sexual violence, abuse of minors, and solicitation of children for sexual purposes. Conviction of statutory rape carried a sentence of three to eight years in prison. The law set the minimum age of consent for consensual sexual relations at 15. The government generally enforced the law.																																				Antisemitism										There were an estimated 400 persons of Jewish descent in the country. NGOs reported cases of antisemitic hate speech on social media. The Simon Wiesenthal Center accused an RTV Slovenia journalist of making antisemitic comments and called for his firing. On November 15, unidentified vandals spray painted a swastika followed by an equal sign and the Star of David on the door of the Jewish Cultural Center.For further information on incidents in the country of antisemitism, whether or not those incidents were motivated by religion, and for reporting on the ability of Jews to exercise freedom of religion or belief, please see the Department of State’s International Religious Freedom Report at  https://www.state.gov/religiousfreedomreport/.																																				Trafficking in Persons										See the Department of State’s Trafficking in Persons Report at  https://www.state.gov/trafficking-in-persons-report/.																																				Acts of Violence, Criminalization, and Other Abuses Based on Sexual Orientation, Gender Identity or Expression, or Sex Characteristics										Criminalization: No laws criminalized consensual same-sex sexual conduct between adults, cross-dressing, or other sexual or gender characteristic-related behaviors.Violence and Harassment: There were no reports that authorities condoned or perpetrated violence against LGBTQI+ persons.The Ministry of Labor, Family, Social Affairs, and Equal Opportunities and law enforcement authorities recorded incidents of violence against LGBTQI+ persons but did not track the number of cases. Local NGOs asserted that violence against LGBTQI+ persons was prevalent, but that survivors often did not report such incidents to police.In June, media outlets reported a woman wearing a rainbow flag was assaulted near the Ljubljana Pride Parade route. LGBTQI+ organizations and individuals reported multiple incidents of individuals throwing eggs at parade participants and posting videos burning rainbow flags. The NGO Pride Parade Association president claimed police did not adequately respond to attacks and reported instances of police officers discouraging LGBTQI+ victims from filing criminal reports. Another NGO reported police were investigating such crimes, but noted authorities were unable to pursue anonymous reports. It added that a designated police liaison to LGBTQI+ communities encouraged victims of anti-LGBTQI+ crimes to come forward. Several assaults were also reported at the Maribor Pride Parade in September.In July, the Parliamentary Commission for Petitions, Human Rights, and Equal Opportunities invited LGBTQI+ groups to a special session entitled “Homophobic and Transphobic Violence at Pride.” The commission condemned the incidents at the June Pride Parade and called on the Ministry of Labor, Family, Social Affairs, and Equal Opportunity to draft a national strategy for equality of LGBTQI+ persons.Discrimination: The law prohibited discrimination by state and nonstate actors based on sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, or sex characteristics. The law recognized LGBTQI+ individuals, couples, and their families and granted them rights equal to rights of other persons, with the exception of state-supported access to infertility treatment. The government enforced such laws effectively, but societal discrimination was widespread. In May, the Advocate for the Principle of Equality ruled against a gynecologist for refusing to treat a patient who was in a same-sex relationship. According to NGOs, transgender persons remained particularly vulnerable to societal discrimination and targeted violence. NGOs and LGBTQI+ individuals noted discrimination most commonly took the form of verbal insults against LGBTQI+ individuals, with transgender individuals most frequently targeted.Availability of Legal Gender Recognition: The law permitted persons to change their gender identity marker on legal and identifying documents to bring them into alignment with their gender identity. The law required a certified statement from a competent health-care provider or medical doctor diagnosing the individual with “transsexualism,” which the National Institute of Public Health classified as a mental disorder, and it did not allow for self-certification. There was no legal requirement for gender-affirming surgery or any other medical procedure before persons could legally change their gender identity. There were no legal provisions for a third/other gender option.Involuntary of Coercive Medical or Psychological Practices: So-called conversion therapy to change one’s sexual orientation or gender identity or expression occurred rarely, according to local NGOs.There were no reports of medically unnecessary and irreversible “normalization” surgeries performed on minors or adult intersex persons. In June, President Nataša Pirc Musar called for legislation prohibiting unnecessary surgeries on intersex minors.Restrictions of Freedom of Expression, Association, or Peaceful Assembly: There were no laws or other reported restrictions on individuals speaking or media reporting on LGBTQI+ matters, on the ability of LGBTQI+ individuals to assemble in public or private or to form associations, or on the ability of LGBTQI+ organizations to legally register or convene events. Multiple cities held Pride parades and other LGBTQI+ events in June and September without restrictions.																																				Persons with Disabilities										The law prohibited discrimination against persons with physical, sensory, intellectual, and mental disabilities; however, persons with disabilities could not access education, health services, public buildings, transportation, and information and communication on an equal basis with others. Local NGOs reported employers sometimes were prejudiced against persons with disabilities, but no cases of employment discrimination based on disability were reported during the year.The law mandated access to buildings and public transportation for persons with disabilities, but modification of public and private structures to improve access continued at a slow pace, and some public transportation stations and buildings, particularly older buildings, were not accessible, especially in rural areas.In March, the ombudsperson reported only three-quarters of the units in social work centers provided access for persons with disabilities. The report also found a lack of braille inscriptions and sign language or subtitled videos in public buildings. The ombudsperson highlighted these findings were not in compliance with the law which mandated such barriers to access be remedied by December 2025.The law provided social welfare assistance and early-childhood, elementary, secondary, and vocational education programs for children with disabilities. Children with physical, sensory, intellectual, and mental disabilities were entitled to tailored educational programs with additional professional assistance and resources. Depending on their individual needs, some children attended school (through secondary school) with peers without disabilities, while others attended separate schools. The law also provided vocational and independent living resources for adults with disabilities. The government continued to implement laws and programs to provide persons with disabilities access to education, employment, health services, buildings, information, communications, the judicial system, transportation, and other state services. The electoral law required all polling stations to be accessible to persons with disabilities. Voters with disabilities who were unable to reach a polling station on election day could alternatively vote by mail.																																				Other Societal Violence or Discrimination										The law specifically prohibited discrimination based on language or HIV-positive status. NGOs reported, however, that HIV-positive individuals often faced stigma and discrimination in access to health care.There were some reports of employment discrimination most often based on age, especially for work involving physical labor. Migrant workers had the same labor rights at citizens, but they faced discrimination.																																					Section 7.													 Worker Rights												    																																																a. Freedom of Association and the Right to Collective Bargaining										The law provided for the right of workers to form and join independent unions, bargain collectively, and conduct legal strikes. The law did not prohibit antiunion discrimination or require reinstatement of workers fired for union activity; however, courts had ruled that the right to unionize was protected in law. NGOs reported employers informally pressured employees to refrain from organizing or to disband their unions, particularly workers in the metal industry and transport sector.The law required unionization of at least 10 percent of workers in a sector before the sector could engage in collective bargaining. The law required unionization of at least 15 percent of workers in an organization before that union could engage in bargaining at the enterprise level. The law restricted the right to strike for police, members of the military, and some other public employees, requiring them to perform certain duties while on strike.The government respected freedom of association and the right to bargain collectively and the right to strike. Local NGOs estimated approximately 20 percent of the labor force belonged to a union and approximately 80 percent of the labor force was covered by a collective bargaining agreement.Local NGOs assessed that although penalties for violations were commensurate with those for analogous crimes, a shortage of labor inspectors impeded the government’s ability to effectively prevent, monitor, and deter violations of freedom of association, collective bargaining, and the right to strike for workers. Judicial and administrative procedures were not subject to lengthy delays or appeals. Penalties were sometimes applied against violators.																																				b. Prohibition of Forced or Compulsory Labor										See the Department of State’s Trafficking in Persons Report  https://www.state.gov/trafficking in-persons-report/.																																				c. Prohibition of Child Labor and Minimum Age for Employment										The law prohibited the worst forms of child labor. The minimum legal age of employment was 15. The law limited hours, mandated rest periods, prohibited working in hazardous locations, and specified adult supervision for workers younger than age 18. While no specific occupations were restricted, hazardous work locations specified by the law included those that were underground and underwater and those involving harmful exposure to radiation, toxic or carcinogenic agents, extreme cold, heat, noise, or vibrations. Penalties for child labor were not commensurate with those for other analogous serious crimes, such as kidnapping. Penalties for conviction of child labor law violations ranged from a monetary fine to one year in prison. Penalties for violations of child labor and minimum age laws were regularly applied against violators. Nevertheless, children younger than 15 in rural areas often worked during the harvest season.There were isolated reports of men, women, and children being subjected to forced labor in the construction sector and forced begging.																																				d. Discrimination (see section 6)																																														e. Acceptable Conditions of Work										Wage and Hour Laws: The national monthly gross minimum wage exceeded the poverty line. The law did not require premium pay for overtime, but collective agreements determined whether workers received premium pay for overtime. The law limited overtime to eight hours per week, 20 hours per month, and 170 hours per year.Occupational Safety and Health: Special commissions under the Ministry of Health and the Ministry of Labor, Family, Social Affairs, and Equal Opportunities set occupational safety and health (OSH) standards for workers that were appropriate for the main industries in the country. Workers could remove themselves from situations that endangered health or safety without jeopardizing their employment. The law required employers to protect workers injured on the job. If incapacitated, such workers could perform other work corresponding to their abilities, obtain part-time work, or receive occupational rehabilitation and wage compensation.Wage, Hour, and OSH Enforcement: The Ministry of Labor, Family, Social Affairs, and Equal Opportunities monitored minimum wage compliance and had inspection authority. Police were responsible for investigating violations of the law and proactively identified unsafe conditions. The government effectively enforced minimum wage, overtime, and OSH laws.According to NGOs and advocacy groups, penalties for wage and hour violations were commensurate with those for other similar crimes, and they were sometimes applied against violators. Exceptions included some cases involving migrant workers and asylum seekers, who faced conditions of exploitation. Most violations took place in the wood processing industry, the metal industry, construction, and bars and restaurants although the government actively enforced labor laws in these sectors. Workers facing hazardous working conditions included professional divers, mountain rescuers, sailors, construction workers, and miners. Workers employed in the construction and transport sectors, the wood industry, and exotic dancers faced exploitative working conditions.Penalties for OSH violations were generally commensurate with penalties for similar crimes such as negligence. Labor inspectors carried out some labor contract and OSH inspections, identified violations, and issued penalties. According to NGOs, the number of inspectors was insufficient to monitor conformance with labor contract or OSH laws, however inspectors had the authority to make unannounced inspections and initiate sanctions against abusers. The International Labor Organization and some NGOs reported an urgent need to increase the number of inspectors.The government estimated the informal workers accounted for 5.8 percent of the active labor force. The government enforced labor laws in the informal sector.																																				    							View report by:																				Afghanistan											Albania											Algeria											Andorra											Angola											Antigua and Barbuda											Argentina											Armenia											Australia											Austria											Azerbaijan											Bahrain											Bangladesh											Barbados											Belarus											Belgium											Belize											Benin											Bhutan											Bolivia											Bosnia and Herzegovina											Botswana											Brazil											Brunei											Bulgaria											Burkina Faso											Burma											Burundi											Cabo Verde											Cambodia											Cameroon											Canada											Central African Republic											Chad											Chile											China (Includes Hong Kong, Macau, and Tibet)											Colombia											Comoros											Costa Rica											Côte d&#8217;Ivoire											Croatia											Cuba											Cyprus											Czech Republic											Democratic Republic of the Congo											Denmark											Djibouti											Dominica											Dominican Republic											Ecuador											Egypt											El Salvador											Equatorial Guinea											Eritrea											Estonia											Eswatini											Ethiopia											Fiji											Finland											France											Gabon											Georgia											Germany											Ghana											Greece											Grenada											Guatemala											Guinea											Guinea-Bissau											Guyana											Haiti											Honduras											Hungary											Iceland											India											Indonesia											Iran											Iraq											Ireland											Israel, West Bank and Gaza											Italy											Jamaica											Japan											Jordan											Kazakhstan											Kenya											Kiribati											Kosovo											Kuwait											Kyrgyz Republic											Laos											Latvia											Lebanon											Lesotho											Liberia											Libya											Liechtenstein											Lithuania											Luxembourg											Madagascar											Malawi											Malaysia											Maldives											Mali											Malta											Marshall Islands											Mauritania											Mauritius											Mexico											Micronesia											Moldova											Monaco											Mongolia											Montenegro											Morocco											Mozambique											Namibia											Nauru											Nepal											New Zealand											Nicaragua											Niger											Nigeria											North Korea											North Macedonia											Norway											Oman											Pakistan											Palau											Panama											Papua New Guinea											Paraguay											Peru											Philippines											Poland											Portugal											Qatar											Republic of the Congo											Romania											Russia											Rwanda											Saint Kitts and Nevis											Saint Lucia											Saint Vincent and the Grenadines											Samoa											San Marino											Sao Tome and Principe											Saudi Arabia											Senegal											Serbia											Seychelles											Sierra Leone											Singapore											Slovakia											Slovenia											Solomon Islands											Somalia											South Africa											South Korea											South Sudan											Spain											Sri Lanka											Sudan											Suriname											Sweden											Switzerland											Syria											Taiwan											Tajikistan											Tanzania											Thailand											The Gambia											The Netherlands											Timor-Leste											Togo											Tonga											The Bahamas											Trinidad and Tobago											Tunisia											Turkey (Türkiye)											Turkmenistan											Tuvalu											Uganda											Ukraine											United Arab Emirates											United Kingdom											Uruguay											Uzbekistan											Vanuatu											Venezuela											Vietnam											Yemen											Zambia											Zimbabwe															Build A Custom Report																						On This Page				search													>																										EXECUTIVE SUMMARY																Section 1. Respect for the Integrity of the Person																																							a. Arbitrary Deprivation of Life and Other Unlawful or Politically Motivated Killings																																																						b. Disappearance																																																						c. Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman, or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, and Other Related Abuses																																																				Prison and Detention Center Conditions																																																																																				d. Arbitrary Arrest or Detention																																																				Arrest Procedures and Treatment of Detainees																																																																																				e. Denial of Fair Public Trial																																																				Trial Procedures																																												Political Prisoners and Detainees																																																																																				f. Transnational Repression																																																						g. Property Seizure and Restitution																																																						h. Arbitrary or Unlawful Interference with Privacy, Family, Home, or Correspondence																																																			Section 2. Respect for Civil Liberties																																							a. Freedom of Expression, Including for the Members of the Press and Other Media																																																				Internet Freedom																																																																																				b. Freedoms of Peaceful Assembly and Association																																																						c. Freedom of Religion																																																						d. Freedom of Movement and the Right to Leave the Country																																																						e. Protection of Refugees																																																			Section 3. Freedom to Participate in the Political Process																																							Elections and Political Participation																																																			Section 4. Corruption in Government																Section 5. Governmental Posture Towards International and Nongovernmental Monitoring and Investigation of Alleged Abuses of Human Rights																Section 6. Discrimination and Societal Abuses																																							Women																																																						Systemic Racial or Ethnic Violence and Discrimination																																																						Children																																																						Antisemitism																																																						Trafficking in Persons																																																						Acts of Violence, Criminalization, and Other Abuses Based on Sexual Orientation, Gender Identity or Expression, or Sex Characteristics																																																						Persons with Disabilities																																																						Other Societal Violence or Discrimination																																																			Section 7. Worker Rights																																							a. Freedom of Association and the Right to Collective Bargaining																																																						b. Prohibition of Forced or Compulsory Labor																																																						c. Prohibition of Child Labor and Minimum Age for Employment																																																						d. Discrimination (see section 6)																																																						e. Acceptable Conditions of Work																																																									Tags																					Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor																								Bureau of European and Eurasian Affairs																								Slovenia
- Assistant Secretary O’Brien’s Travel to Bulgaria, Romania, Switzerland, and Slovenia Office of the SpokespersonAssistant Secretary for European and Eurasian Affairs James C. O’Brien will travel to Sofia, Bulgaria; Bucharest, Romania; Bern, Switzerland; and Ljubljana, Slovenia April 15-19, 2024.  In Sofia, Assistant Secretary O’Brien will participate in the Black Sea Security Conference of the International Crimea Platform to underscore the United States’ commitment to a secure, prosperous, interconnected, and democratic future for the Black Sea region.In Bucharest, Assistant Secretary O’Brien will have bilateral meetings with senior officials.  While in Bern and Ljubljana, Assistant Secretary O’Brien will lead bilateral strategic dialogues.  During the trip, Assistant Secretary O’Brien will emphasize strengthening regional security and economic cooperation, energy security, and democratic resilience.
- NATO Accession Anniversaries for Bulgaria, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Romania, and Slovakia, Slovenia Antony J. Blinken, Secretary of StateOn behalf of the United States, I congratulate Bulgaria, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Romania, Slovakia, and Slovenia on the 20th anniversary of your accession to NATO.Twenty years ago, as you became Allies, we were inspired by your journeys – from enduring bitter tyranny and occupation to earning your freedom through courage and perseverance. Today, we mark your steadfast commitment to defend every inch of NATO territory and to uphold our shared democratic values.From the Baltic Sea to the Black Sea, across the Atlantic and the Adriatic, NATO is more united and capable than ever. On this important anniversary, we are proud to stand side-by-side with you as Allies defending our vision of the future.
- The United States Joins Multinational Declaration to Triple Nuclear Energy Capacity by 2050 to Support Global Climate and Energy Security Goals Office of the SpokespersonToday, U.S. Special Presidential Envoy for Climate John Kerry joined leaders and ministers from four continents to announce the Declaration to Triple Nuclear Energy at the U.N. Climate Change Conference in Dubai, United Arab Emirates (COP28).  The Declaration recognizes the key role of nuclear energy in achieving global net-zero greenhouse gas emissions by 2050 and keeping the 1.5-degree Celsius goal within reach.  The Declaration also highlights the need for secure supply chains and encourages shareholders of the World Bank, international financial institutions, and regional development banks to include nuclear energy in their lending policies. Endorsing countries include Armenia, Bulgaria, Canada, Croatia, Czech Republic, Finland, France, Ghana, Hungary, Jamaica, Japan, Moldova, Mongolia, Morocco, The Netherlands, Poland, Republic of Korea, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Sweden, Ukraine, United Arab Emirates, United Kingdom, and the United States.See the full text of the Declaration in the link .
- Emerging Technology Opportunities in Slovenia Bureau of Economic and Business AffairsTopic: Emerging Technology in SloveniaHost: Ambassador Jamie L. HarpootlianDate and Time: 11am ET Tuesday, October 24, 2023Description: Ambassador Jamie L. Harpootlian invites you to explore emerging opportunities in Slovenia’s thriving technology sector. Slovenia is strategically located to tap into the broader Central and Eastern European and Western Balkan markets and boasts a skilled and tech-savvy workforce. The Slovenian start-up sector attracts over $100 million in investments every year. Slovenia is home to fast-growing start-up companies in healthcare, sustainability, and emerging technologies, including artificial intelligence, virtual reality, and blockchain. Several Slovenian technology companies, including Outfit7, Zemanta, and Celtra, have recently attracted international investments.Ambassador Harpootlian will highlight opportunities in Slovenia’s technology sector.State Secretary at the Ministry of the Economy, Tourism, and Sport Matevž Frangež will present the government’s efforts to foster innovation and attract investment.Gregor Rebolj, cofounder of Silicon Gardens, one of Slovenia&#8217;s largest investment funds, will discuss the potential and opportunities in the country’s high-tech sector.
- Slovenia HomeReportsBureau of Economic and Business Affairs2023 Investment Climate Statements&#8230;Slovenia				hide	document.addEventListener("DOMContentLoaded", function(event) {	if(window.jQuery) {		jQuery( document ).ready(function() {			if (jQuery(".bc_middle").hasClass("collapse")) {				jQuery(".bc_ellipse").click(function(){					jQuery(".bc_hide").toggleClass("visible");					jQuery(".bc_middle").toggle();					jQuery(".bc_ellipse").toggle();					jQuery(".bc_content").toggleClass("noflex");					jQuery(".block_breadcrumbs_content").toggleClass("noflex");				});				jQuery(".bc_hide").click(function(){					jQuery(".bc_hide").toggleClass("visible");					jQuery(".bc_middle").toggle();					jQuery(".bc_ellipse").toggle();					jQuery(".bc_content").toggleClass("noflex");					jQuery(".block_breadcrumbs_content").toggleClass("noflex");				});			} else {				jQuery(".bc_ellipse").hide();			}		});	}});																							2023 Investment Climate Statements: Slovenia																																																																																												 In this section										/																							EXECUTIVE SUMMARY																																													EXECUTIVE SUMMARY																															1. Openness To, and Restrictions Upon, Foreign Investment																																																									Policies Towards Foreign Direct Investment																																																																											Limits on Foreign Control and Right to Private Ownership and Establishment																																																																			Sector-specific Restrictions:																																																								Business Facilitation																																																								Outward Investment																																																																																																																								2. Bilateral Investment and Taxation Treaties																															3. Legal Regime																																																									Transparency of the Regulatory System																																																																											International Regulatory Considerations																																																																											Legal System and Judicial Independence																																																																											Laws and Regulations on Foreign Direct Investment																																																																											Competition and Antitrust Laws																																																																											Expropriation and Compensation																																																																											Dispute Settlement																																																																			ICSID Convention and New York Convention																																																								Investor-State Dispute Settlement																																																								International Commercial Arbitration and Foreign Courts																																																																																																																		Bankruptcy Regulations																																																																																	4. Industrial Policies																																																									Investment Incentives																																																																											Foreign Trade Zones/Free Ports/Trade Facilitation																																																																											Performance and Data Localization Requirements																																																																																	5. Protection of Property Rights																																																									Real Property																																																																											Intellectual Property Rights																																																																																	6. Financial Sector																																																									Capital Markets and Portfolio Investment																																																																											Money and Banking System																																																																											Foreign Exchange and Remittances																																																																			Foreign Exchange																																																								Remittance Policies																																																								Sovereign Wealth Funds																																																																																																																		7. State-Owned Enterprises																																																																											Privatization Program																																																																																	8. Responsible Business Conduct																																																									Additional Resources																																																																											Climate Issues																																																																																	9. Corruption																																																									Resources to Report Corruption																																																																																	10. Political and Security Environment																															11. Labor Policies and Practices																															12. U.S. International Development Finance Corporation (DFC), and Other Investment Insurance or Development Finance Programs																															13. Foreign Direct Investment and Foreign Portfolio Investment Statistics																															14. Contact for More Information																																																					EXECUTIVE SUMMARY				Several factors make Slovenia an attractive location for foreign direct investment (FDI): modern infrastructure with access to important EU transportation corridors, a major port on the Adriatic Sea with access to the Mediterranean, a highly educated and professional workforce, proximity to Central European and Balkan markets, and membership in the Schengen Area, EU, and Eurozone.  With a small domestic market of just over two million people, Slovenia’s economy is heavily dependent on foreign trade and susceptible to international price and currency fluctuations as well as economic conditions among its major trading partners.In recent years, Slovenia’s economic growth rate has outpaced those of most other EU member states, and the country has enjoyed rising incomes, growing domestic consumption, falling unemployment, low inflation, and burgeoning consumer confidence.  Slovenia’s economy rebounded after the COVID-19 pandemic with a GDP growth rate of 8.1 percent in 2021, exceeding the eurozone average. However, due to rising inflation and energy prices – both exacerbated by the Russian invasion of Ukraine – Slovenia witnessed slower growth of 5.4 percent in 2022 and is expecting more modest growth of 1.8 – 2.6 percent until 2025.Despite a number of privatizations in the banking sector in 2019 and 2020, approximately 25 percent of Slovenia’s economy remains state-owned or state-controlled based on consultations with economic and financial experts. While estimates of the percentage of state involvement in the economy vary, most experts agree that it is among the highest among EU member states. There is widespread skepticism in some quarters toward privatization and foreign direct investment, despite general awareness of FDI’s importance to economic growth, job creation, and developing new technologies.  Potential investors in Slovenia may face significant challenges, including a lack of transparency in economic and commercial decision-making, time-consuming bureaucratic procedures, opaque public tender processes, regulatory red tape, and a heavy tax burden for high earners.According to Bank of Slovenia figures, FDI in Slovenia totaled EUR 18.4 billion (35.2 percentof GDP) in 2021, a 10.4 percent increase over the previous year.  This relatively large growth in investment flows is largely attributed to the easing of pent-up investment activity during the COVID-19 pandemic. The most important sources for direct foreign investment were Austria (24.9 percent), Luxembourg (11.9 percent), Switzerland (11.2 percent), Croatia (9.7 percent) and Germany (8.1 percent).  However, Bank of Slovenia data indicated U.S. companies accounted for 8.9 percent of total inward foreign direct investment (FDI) in 2021, EUR 96.1 million (USD 105.5 million) invested directly and an additional EUR 1.53 billion (USD 1.68 billion) invested indirectly through U.S. subsidiaries in other European countries.  This combined investment of EUR 1.63 billion (USD 1.79 billion) placed the United States as Slovenia’s third largest source of direct and indirect foreign investment, behind Austria (EUR 2.82 billion) and Germany (EUR 2.65 billion).  The most important sectors for FDI were manufacturing (31.8 percent), financial and insurance activities (21.3 percent), wholesale and retail trade and repair of motor vehicles and motorcycles (19.4 percent).Slovenia, in line with the European Union (EU), committed to reducing greenhouse gas emissions by at least 55 percent by 2030 (compared to 1990 levels) and achieving climate neutrality by 2050. Slovenia’s long-term climate strategy, approved in July 2021, includes a provision specifying that the country will use nuclear energy in the long term, clarifying the country’s energy future and committing to produce a large percentage of its energy supply domestically. In July 2021, the EU approved Slovenia’s national recovery and resilience plan, allowing funds up to EUR 2.5 billion (EUR 1.8 billion in grants and 700 million in loans) to be drawn from the EU Recovery and Resilience Facility.  42.5 percent of the funds are earmarked for green transition projects.Table 1: Key Metrics and RankingsMeasureYearIndex/RankWebsite AddressTI Corruption Perceptions Index202241 of 180http://www.transparency.org/research/cpi/overviewGlobal Innovation Index202233 of 132https://www.globalinnovationindex.org/analysis-indicatorU.S. FDI in partner country ($M USD, historical stock positions)2021USD 210https://www.bea.gov/data/economic-accounts/internationalWorld Bank GNI per capita2021USD 28,280http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GNP.PCAP.CD																																					1. Openness To, and Restrictions Upon, Foreign Investment						    																																																Policies Towards Foreign Direct Investment										The Slovenian Public Agency for the Promotion of Entrepreneurship, Internationalization, Foreign Investment and Technology (SPIRIT) promotes FDI and advocates for foreign investors in Slovenia, often in collaboration with diplomatic missions and business associations based in Slovenia.  Its mission is to enhance Slovenia’s economic competitiveness through technical and financial assistance to entrepreneurs, businesses, and investors.Foreign companies conducting business in Slovenia have the same rights, obligations, and responsibilities as domestic companies. The principles of commercial enterprise, including national treatment, apply to the operations of foreign companies as well. The Law on Commercial Companies and the Law on Foreign Transactions guarantee their basic rights.According to SPIRIT’s annual survey on foreign investors’ perceptions of Slovenia’s business environment, investors cite the high quality of Slovenia’s labor force as the deciding factor in choosing the country as an investment destination, followed by widespread knowledge of foreign languages, employees’ technical expertise, innovation potential, and strategic geographic position offering easy access to EU and Balkan markets.While generally welcoming greenfield investments, Slovenia presents a number of informal barriers that may prove challenging to foreign investors.  According to SPIRIT’s survey, the most significant disincentives to FDI are high taxes, high labor costs, lack of payment discipline, an inefficient judicial system, difficulties in firing employees, and excessive bureaucracy.  There are no formal limits on foreign investors’ ability to establish an investment or operate in the market.Foreign companies doing business in Slovenia and the local American Chamber of Commerce have also cited additional factors that adversely affect the local investment climate, including the lack of a high-level FDI promotion strategy, a sizable judicial backlog, difficulties in obtaining building permits, labor market rigidity, and disproportionately high social contributions and personal income taxes coupled with excessive administrative tax burdens.  Businesses have also reported a lack of transparency in public procurement, unnecessarily complex and time-consuming bureaucracy, frequent changes in regulation, relatively high real estate prices in some parts of the country, and confusion over lead responsibility or jurisdiction regarding foreign investment among government agencies. Slovenia is currently experiencing a severe labor shortage, with the unemployment rate at an all-time low. In response, in 2023, the government passed amendments to two laws affecting foreign workers, allowing foreign workers to switch employers more easily and removing red tape for employers to hire workers in health and social care. However, the government kept a controversial language requirement that requires workers and family members to pass a Slovenian language test to renew their residence permits – a requirement widely opposed by the business sector and NGO groups.Rigid procedures necessary to acquire work permits can be an impediment for foreign investors. It may take as long as two to three months to obtain a single work and residence permit, which is required for local employment. Applicants must submit their single permit application at an administrative unit or at the diplomatic or consular office in their home country.  The Ministry of Labor has established a fast-track procedure for foreigners registered as authorized persons or representatives of companies, managers of branch offices, and foreigners who are temporarily sent to work in organizational units for foreign legal persons (corporate entities) registered in Slovenia. More information on single work and residence permits and employment services is available here .																																				Limits on Foreign Control and Right to Private Ownership and Establishment										Both foreign and domestic private entities have the right to establish and own business enterprises and engage in different forms of remunerative activity. Slovenia has relatively few formal limits on foreign ownership or control. In May 2020, Slovenia enacted a screening mechanism for foreign investments that will remain in force until June 2023.The investment screening mechanism stipulates that foreign investments acquiring at least 10 percent of share capital or voting rights in Slovenian companies with activities involving critical infrastructure, critical technologies and dual use items, supply of critical inputs, access to sensitive information, the freedom and pluralism of the media, and certain projects and programs in the interest of the EU must seek approval from the Ministry of Economy, Tourism, and Sport. The ministry was also authorized to retroactively screen foreign direct investment transactions within the past five years. The application for such approval must be submitted to the ministry within 15 days from the date of the execution of the agreement. The Slovenian government envisages that the review process can take up to two months. Failure to comply to this new legislation may result in a fine ranging between EUR 50,000 and EUR 500,000 for companies based on their size and a fine of EUR 10,000 for individuals.In 2023, the Ministry of Economy, Tourism, and Sport initiated the process to update and permanently establish the investment screening mechanism within the Investment Promotion Act																Sector-specific Restrictions:						Professional services: There are limits on banking and investment services, private pensions, insurance services, asset management services, and settlement, clearing, custodial, and depository services provided in Slovenia by companies headquartered in non-EU countries. Companies from non-EU countries can operate freely only through an affiliate with a license granted by an appropriate Slovenian or EU institution.Gaming: There is a 20 percent cap on private ownership of individual companies.Air transport: Aircraft registration is only possible for aircraft owned by Slovenian or EU nationals or companies controlled by such entities. Companies controlled by Slovenian nationals or carriers complying with EU regulations on ownership and control are the only entities eligible for Air Operator’s Certificates (AOC) for performing airline services.Maritime transport: The law forbids majority ownership by non-EU residents of a Slovenian-flagged maritime vessel unless the operator is a Slovenian or other EU national.Other Investment Policy ReviewsSlovenia underwent an  OECD Investment Policy Review  and a  WTO Trade Policy Review  in 2002. The Economist Intelligence Unit and World Bank’s “Doing Business 2020” provide current economic profiles of Slovenia.						Business Facilitation						Individuals or businesses may adopt a variety of different legal and organizational forms to conduct economic activities. Businesses most commonly incorporate legally as limited liability companies (LLC or d.o.o.) and public limited companies (PLC or d.d.). Non-residents of the Republic of Slovenia must obtain  a Slovenian tax number  before beginning the process of establishing a business. Slovenia’s  Companies Act , which is fully harmonized with EU legislation, regulates the establishment, management, and organization of companies.Generally, bureaucratic procedures and practices for foreign investors wishing to start a business in Slovenia are sufficiently streamlined and transparent. Start-up costs for businesses are among the lowest in the EU. To establish a business in Slovenia, a foreign investor must produce capital of at least EUR 7,500 (USD 8,235) for a limited liability company and EUR 25,000 (USD 27,450) for a stock company. The investor must also establish a business address and file appropriate documentation with the courts. The entire process usually takes three weeks to one month, but may take longer in Ljubljana due to court backlogs.Individuals or legal entities may establish businesses through a notary, one of several VEM (Vse na Enem Mestu or “all in one place”) point offices designated by the Slovenian government, or online. A list of VEM points is available at  http://www.podjetniski-portal.si/ustanavljam-podjetje/vem-tocke/seznam-vstopnih-tock-vem .More information on how to invest and register a business in Slovenia is available at  https://www.sloveniabusiness.eu/business-environment/establishing-a-company  and  http://www.eugo.gov.si/en/starting/business-registration/ .						Outward Investment						Slovenia does not restrict domestic investors from investing abroad, nor are there any incentives for outward investments. The majority of Slovenia’s outward investments are in the Western Balkans. Croatia is the most popular destination for Slovenian outward investment, constituting 35 percent of Slovenia’s investments abroad, followed by Serbia (19 percent), Bosnia and Herzegovina (6.8 percent), Russia (6 percent), and North Macedonia (6 percent).																																		2. Bilateral Investment and Taxation Treaties						    																						Slovenia does not have a Bilateral Investment Treaty (BIT) with the United States. The list of Slovenia’s Bilateral Investment Treaties can be found in the Bank of Slovenia’s Direct Investment publication. In 2020, EU member states agreed to terminate Bilateral Investment Treaties with other EU members.Slovenia has a Bilateral Taxation Treaty and Social Security Totalization Agreement with the United States. The complete list of countries with which Slovenia has signed bilateral taxation treaties is available on the Ministry of Finance Website .Slovenia is a member of the OECD Inclusive Framework on Base Erosion and Profit Shifting and a party to the Statement on a Two-Pillar Solution to Address the Tax Challenges Arising from the Digitalisation of the Economy.																																		3. Legal Regime						    																																																Transparency of the Regulatory System										Accounting, legal, and regulatory procedures in Slovenia are transparent and consistent with international norms.Financial statements should be prepared by the Slovenian Institute of Auditors in accordance with the Slovenian Accounting Standards and International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS), as adopted by the EU. Annual reports of for-profit business entities are publicly available on the website of  AJPES , the Slovenian Business Database.There are three levels of regulatory authority: supra-national (Slovenia is a member of the EU), national, and sub-national (municipalities have limited regulatory power over local affairs, and regulations must comply with state regulations). Laws may be proposed by the government, member(s) of parliament, or through signatures of at least 5,000 voters.Slovenia adopted a comprehensive regulatory policy in 2013, focusing on measures aimed at raising the quality of the regulatory environment to improve the business environment and increase competitiveness.Slovenia’s Ministry of Public Administration is required by several legal and policy documents to solicit and include public stakeholder engagement in decision-making processes. Public authorities must solicit stakeholder engagement and inform the public about their work to the greatest extent possible.Government entities that propose regulations must invite experts and the general public to participate by publishing a general invitation, together with a draft regulation, on their websites. The experts and general public must respond by the deadline, ranging from 30 to 60 days from the day of its publication. In addition to the relevant ministry, the proposals are also published on government websites and on the Ministry of Public Administration’s  eDemocracy  portal.Through the eDemocracy web portal, citizens may actively cooperate in the decision-making process by expressing opinions and submitting proposals and comments on draft regulations. When possible, government entities take into consideration proposals and opinions on proposed regulations submitted by experts and the general public. If such opinions and proposals are not taken into consideration, those proposing the regulation must inform stakeholders in writing and explain the reasons.The public, however, is not invited to comment on proposed regulations when the nature of the issue precludes such consideration, such as in emergency situations and in matters relating to the national budget, the annual financial statement, the rules of procedure of the government, ordinances, resolutions, development and planning documents, development policies, declarations, acts ratifying international treaties, and official decisions.A regulatory impact assessment (RIA) is obligatory for all primary legislation; however, the quality of such assessments varies, and analyses are often only qualitative or incomplete due to the lack of an external body to conduct quality control. The quality of such assessments has improved, however, since the Ministry of Public Administration introduced its Small and Medium Enterprise (SME) test in 2012 to measure regulatory impacts on small and medium-sized businesses.The General Secretariat of the Republic of Slovenia is responsible for administrative oversight to ensure the government follows administrative procedures. There are no informal regulatory processes managed by non-governmental organizations or private sector associations.Slovenia’s executive branch initiates approximately 92 percent of primary laws, with regulations often developed rapidly. The government’s frequent use of urgent procedures (normally reserved for national emergencies) to pass legislation often limits the stakeholder engagement process.After the adoption of new legislation, the text is published in the Official Gazette of the Republic of Slovenia and online at  https://www.uradni-list.si/glasilo-uradni-list-rs . Slovenia lacks a systematic process to evaluate regulations after their implementation.To measure regulatory burdens on businesses, Slovenia adopted the Standard Cost Model, which has led to a significant reduction of such burdens. The United Nations awarded its Public Service Award to Slovenia in 2009 for its system of one-stop shops (the so-called “VEM points”) to incorporate and establish businesses. The introduction of e-government processes has simplified administrative procedures. The World Bank assigned Slovenia a score of 4.75 out of 5 on its  Global Indicators of Regulatory Governance  measure in 2018, while the International Budget Partnership gave Slovenia 66 points out of 100 on its  Open Budget Survey 2021 , assessing Slovenia’s budget transparency as sufficient with substantial information available.Slovenia meets the Department of State’s minimum requirements for fiscal transparency. In 2022, Slovenia’s budget and information on debt obligations were widely and easily accessible to the general public, including online. The budget was substantially complete and considered generally reliable. Slovenia’s supreme audit institution reviewed the government’s accounts and made its reports publicly available. The criteria and procedures by which the national government awards contracts or licenses for natural resource extraction were outlined in law and appeared to be followed in practice. Basic information on natural resource extraction awards was public.																																				International Regulatory Considerations										Slovenia joined the World Trade Organization (WTO) in 1995, and to date there have been no cases of Slovenia violating WTO rules. The law treats domestic and foreign investors equally. The government does not impose performance requirements or any condition for establishing, maintaining, or expanding an investment. As a WTO member country, Slovenia is required by the Agreement on Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT Agreement) to report to the WTO all proposed technical regulations that could affect trade with other member countries. Slovenia is a signatory to the Trade Facilitation Agreement (TFA) and has implemented all TFA requirements.As an EU member state, Slovenia applies two principles in its regulatory system: the supremacy of EU laws and the principle of direct effect. In areas subject to EU responsibility, EU laws override any conflicting member state laws. Direct effect enables Slovenians and other EU citizens to use EU laws in national courts against the government or private parties.																																				Legal System and Judicial Independence										Slovenia is a civil law jurisdiction with a codified system of law. It has a well-developed, independent legal system based on a five-tier (district, regional, appeals, supreme, and administrative) court system. These courts deal with a wide array of legal cases, including criminal, probate, domestic relations, land disputes, contracts, and other business-related issues. A separate social and labor court system, comprised of regional, appeals, and supreme courts, deals strictly with labor disputes, pensions, and other social welfare claims. As with most other European countries, Slovenia has a Constitutional Court which hears complaints alleging violations of human rights and personal freedoms. The Constitutional Court also issues opinions on the constitutionality of international agreements and state statutes and deals with other high-profile political issues. In 1997, Slovenia’s National Assembly established an administrative court to handle legal disputes among local authorities, between state and local authorities, and between local authorities and executors of public authority.In 1999, the National Assembly passed legislation to streamline legal proceedings and speed up administrative judicial processes. The law established a stricter and more efficient procedure for serving court documents and providing evidence. In commercial cases, defendants are required to file their defense within 15 days of receiving a notice of a claim.																																				Laws and Regulations on Foreign Direct Investment										In 2018, the National Assembly passed Slovenia’s Investment Promotion Act, defining the types of incentives, criteria, and procedures to promote long-term investment in Slovenia. The act establishes that domestic and foreign investors are equal and mandates priority treatment of strategic investments, defined as investments totaling EUR 40 million or more and creating 400 new jobs in manufacturing and services, while R&amp;D strategic investments are defined as totaling at least EUR 200 million and creating 200 new jobs. Under the law, a working group headed by the Ministry of Economy, Tourism, and Sport will assist strategic investors in obtaining necessary permits. The  Slovenia Business  website serves as a resource for investors to obtain relevant information on investment regulations and incentives.																																				Competition and Antitrust Laws										Slovenia’s Prevention of Restriction of Competition Act regulates restrictive practices, concentrations, unfair competition, regulatory restrictions of competition, and measures to prevent restrictive practices and concentrations that significantly impede effective competition. The law applies to corporate bodies and natural persons engaged in economic activities regardless of their legal form, organization, or ownership. The law also applies to the actions of public companies and complies with EU legislation. Slovenia’s competition and anti-trust laws prohibit restrictive agreements; direct or indirect price fixing; sharing markets or supply sources; limiting or controlling production, sales, technical progress, or investment; applying dissimilar conditions to different trading parties; or subjecting the conclusion of contracts to acceptance of supplementary obligations that, by their nature or according to commercial usage, have no connection with the subject of their contracts. Companies and entities whose domestic market share exceeds 40 percent for a single undertaking and 60 percent for two or more undertakings (joint dominance) are prohibited from abusing dominant market positions. Slovenian law defines a non-exhaustive list of dominant position abuses describing the most common practices. The government may, however, prescribe market restrictions by means of regulatory instruments and actions in cases of natural disasters, epidemics, or states of emergency; significant market disturbances due to a shortage of goods or disturbances in other fields that represent a risk to the safety and health of the population; or when necessary to satisfy product requirements, raw materials, and semi-finished goods of special or strategic importance to the defense of the nation.The fines for restrictive agreements and abuses of dominant positions may total as much as 10 percent of an undertaking’s annual turnover in the preceding business year. Those legally responsible for a legal entity or sole proprietorship may be subject to a fine of EUR 5,000-10,000, or EUR 15,000-30,000 for more serious violations.Slovenia’s Competition Protection Agency (CPA) supervises the implementation of the Restriction of Competition Act. The agency monitors market conditions to ensure effective competition, conducts procedures and issues decisions, and submits opinions to the National Assembly and the government. The CPA is also responsible for the enforcement of Slovenia’s antitrust and merger control rules. A judicial protection procedure may be initiated against decisions of the agency. Decisions on a judicial protection case will be made by the Supreme Court of the Republic of Slovenia with three judges sitting on a panel.An independent administrative authority, the CPA was established in 2013 through a reorganization of the former Slovenian Competition Protection Office, which was part of the Ministry of the Economy. Some private sector representatives expressed concern about the CPA’s susceptibility to outside influence and ability to reach timely decisions on complex cases, which added an element of unpredictability for some investors and their legal counsel.																																				Expropriation and Compensation										According to Article 69 of Slovenia’s Constitution, the government may take real property or limit rights to possess real property for public purposes in the public interest, in exchange for in-kind compensation or financial compensation under conditions determined by law. Article 7 of Slovenia’s Investment Promotion Act stipulates that, if the government deems an investment strategic, it may expropriate private property for construction in exchange for compensation, under conditions determined by law. In such cases, a special government task force monitors the investment and coordinates the acquisition of environmental and building permits.The current government is not involved in any expropriation-related investment disputes. National law offers adequate protection to all investments. However, legal disputes continue over private property expropriated by the former Yugoslav government for state purposes. Following its secession from Yugoslavia, Slovenia’s 1991 Denationalization Act established a process to “denationalize” these properties, return them to their rightful owners or their heirs, or pay just compensation if returning the property was not feasible. In some of these cases, the rightful owners and heirs are U.S. citizens.Since the 1993 deadline for filing claims, over 99 percent of denationalization cases have been closed, although only 88 percent of cases involving American owners and heirs have been resolved. Cases involving U.S. citizens have taken longer in part because the claimants generally do not live in Slovenia. In such cases, the Ministry of Justice must determine the nationality of the property’s former owners at the time the property was seized – a generally simple question for Slovenians who never acquired another citizenship, but more complicated in cases involving naturalized American citizens. In addition, some claims may involve property currently controlled by prominent and influential Slovenians, thereby creating additional informal obstacles to restitution.																																				Dispute Settlement																										ICSID Convention and New York Convention						Slovenia is a contracting state to the Convention on the Settlement of Investment Disputes between States and Nationals of Other States (ICSID) and a signatory to the New York Convention on Recognition of Foreign Arbitral Awards, which requires local courts to enforce international arbitration awards that meet certain criteria.						Investor-State Dispute Settlement						The government accepts binding international arbitration of disputes between foreign investors and the state. There have been no investment disputes involving a U.S. person within the past 10 years. Local courts are expected to enforce foreign arbitral awards issued against the government. To date, there has been no evidence of extrajudicial action against foreign investors.						International Commercial Arbitration and Foreign Courts						Slovenia is a signatory to the 1961 European Convention on International Commercial Arbitration. The Slovenian Arbitration Act is modeled after the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law’s model law.Slovenia’s regional court specializing in economic issues has jurisdiction over business disputes. However, parties may agree in writing to settle disputes in another court or jurisdiction. Parties may also agree to court-annexed mediation. Local courts recognize and enforce foreign arbitral awards and foreign court judgments.Parties may also exclude the court as the adjudicator of a dispute if they agree in writing to arbitration, whether ad hoc or institutional. In the former, applicable procedures and laws must be determined. In the case of institutional arbitration, Slovenian law requires a clear definition of the type of arbitration to be implemented.The Slovenian Chamber of Commerce’s Ljubljana Arbitration Center is an independent institution that resolves domestic and international disputes arising out of business transactions among companies. Arbitration rulings are final, and decisions are binding.																										Bankruptcy Regulations										Competition is lively in Slovenia, and bankruptcies are an established and reliable means of working out firms’ financial difficulties. By law, there are three procedural methods for dealing with bankrupt debtors. The first procedure, compulsory settlement, allows the insolvent debtor to submit a plan to the court for financial reorganization. Creditors whose claims represent more than 60 percent of the total amount owed may vote on the proposed compulsory settlement plan. If the settlement is accepted, the debtor is not obligated to pay the creditor any amount exceeding the payment agreed to in the confirmed settlement. The procedure calls for new terms, extended in accordance with the conditions of forced liquidation settlement (see below). Confirmed compulsory settlement agreements affect creditors who have voted against the compulsory settlement as well as creditors who have not reported their claims in the settlement procedure.Creditors or debtors may also initiate bankruptcy proceedings. In such instances, the court names a bankruptcy administrator who sells the debtor’s property according to a bankruptcy senate, the senate president’s instructions, and court-sponsored supervision. Generally, the debtor’s property is sold at public auction. Otherwise, the creditors’ committee may prescribe a different mode of sale such as collecting offers or placing conditions on potential buyers. The legal effect of the completed bankruptcy is the termination of the debtor’s legal status to conduct business, and distribution of funds from the sale of assets to creditors according to their share of total debt.In accordance with the Law on Commercial Companies, the state can impose forced liquidation on a debtor subject to liquidation procedures and legal conditions for ending its existence as a business entity. This would occur, for example, in cases in which an entity’s management has ceased operations for more than 12 months, if the court finds the registration void, or by court order.In 2013, the National Assembly adopted an amendment to the Financial Operations, Insolvency Procedures, and Compulsory Dissolution Act to simplify and speed up bankruptcy procedures and deleveraging.																																												4. Industrial Policies						    																																																Investment Incentives										Slovenia offers special tax incentives for high-tech sector investments that create jobs and are linked to research and development activities. In some economically depressed and underdeveloped regions (such as the Prekmurje region near the Hungarian border), Slovenia offers special facilities, services, and financial incentives to investors.As defined in Slovenia’s Investment Promotion Act, the government offers the following investment incentives: subsidies, loans, guarantees, subsidized interest rates, and purchase of land owned by municipalities at below-market prices.All companies registered in Slovenia can participate in government-financed or subsidized research and development programs, regardless of the origin of capital.																																				Foreign Trade Zones/Free Ports/Trade Facilitation										The Port of Koper is Slovenia’s only free trade zone (FTZ). Under Slovenia’s Customs Act, subjects operating in FTZs are not liable for payment of customs duties, nor are they subject to other trade policy measures until goods are released into free circulation.Slovenia has set aside land for greenfield investments. Most of the newly-developed industrial zones have direct access to well-developed infrastructure, including highways and rail service. Land prices vary greatly. For example, in the eastern Slovenia community of Lendava, one square meter of land costs roughly EUR 5, while prices in the vicinity of Ljubljana can run up to EUR 50 or more. Municipalities and the state often subsidize infrastructure and land costs as incentives to increase employment opportunities, reducing prices for fully-equipped land in industrial zones.Potential investors may access a full range of free services and concessions provided by local development agencies for start-ups. Such assistance may also include assistance in completing all necessary paperwork, securing permits, and in some cases organizing and financing construction in line with investor requirements. Interested investors may contact the U.S. Embassy in Ljubljana for further information.																																				Performance and Data Localization Requirements										Slovenia does not enforce any forced localization policies. The government does not oblige foreign investors to use domestic content in goods and technology, or to use local data storage.																																												5. Protection of Property Rights						    																																																Real Property										Administrative reforms implemented in 2011 and 2012 simplified property registration, while increased automation in Slovenia’s land registry reduced property registration delays by 75 percent. Slovenia has also made transferring property easier by introducing online procedures and reducing fees. Virtually all land has a clear title.The land registry court (local court) initiates the registration process for the entry of a title in the land registry. Amendments to the Land Registry Act adopted in 2009 and implemented in 2011 require submission to the court of proposals with appendices in electronic form. Submissions are tendered via a notary public or attorneys and real estate agencies acting on the applicant’s behalf. In some cases, applicants may submit registrations directly. Other amendments to the Land Registry Act have transferred responsibility from the courts to the notary for depositing original documents (e.g. contracts) attached to submissions, whereby the notary’s confirmation of authenticity renders the evidence value of the electronic version equal to that of the original. The amendments also enable free access via a web portal to the land registry records, including pending notations and land register extracts, neither of which were free prior to the reform.Land registry proposals are automatically assigned to the least-burdened local court. Once the proposal is filed with the land registry court, the registration process is initiated ex officio and the priority of entry is ensured with a land registry seal. The priority order takes effect the day the proposal has been filed. The buyer may theoretically dispose of the property as soon as the purchase agreement is signed and the buyer obtains (direct or indirect) possession of the property. Buyers whose title is not yet entered into the land registry but who have already taken possession of the property are recognized as proprietary possessor in good faith &#8211; the presumed owner. The presumed owner has the right to claim the return of a property in the event of its dispossession from a proprietary possessor in good faith who has the property with a weaker legal title. The buyer may claim the return of the purchase price, but has no claims under the law of property until the title is entered into the land registry. Since May 2011, the law requires submission of proposals in electronic format.																																				Intellectual Property Rights										Slovenia is not included in USTR’s Special 301 Report or Notorious Markets List.Slovenia has enacted advanced and comprehensive legislation for the protection of intellectual property rights (IPR) that fully aligns with EU directives. Slovenia negotiated its commitments under the World Trade Organization’s (WTO’s) Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) as a developing country and implemented the policy as of January 1996. Slovenia is a full member of the TRIPS Council and the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO). Slovenia has ratified the WIPO Copyright Treaty and the Cyber Crime Convention.Slovenia’s Intellectual Protection Office actively participates in the Council of Europe’s Intellectual Property Working Group, the Trademark Committee, and other EU bodies engaged in the formulation of new EU IPR legislation. The Copyright and Related Rights Act, as amended in 2015, 2016, and 2019, deals with all aspects of modern copyright and related laws, including traditional works and their authors, computer programs, audiovisual works, and rental and lending rights. The act also takes into account new technologies such as storage and electronic memory, original databases, satellite broadcasting, and cable re-transmission. Slovenia’s 2004 harmonization with EU legislation introduced a new system of collective management of IPR compliant with the latest directives.The 1994 Law on Courts gives the District Court of Ljubljana exclusive subject matter jurisdiction over IPR disputes. The aim of the law is to ensure specialization of judges and efficiency of relevant proceedings. For enforcement of TRIPS provisions, the law provides a number of civil legal sanctions, including injunctive relief and the removal of the infringement, seizure, and destruction of illegal copies and devices, publication of the judgment in the media, compensatory and punitive damages, border and customs measures, and the securing of evidence and other provisional measures without the prior notification and hearing of the other party. These infringements also constitute a misdemeanor charge, with fines ranging from EUR 400 to EUR 45,000 for legal persons and from EUR 40 to EUR 2,000 for supervisors of individual offenders, provided that the reported offenses are not criminal in nature. In criminal cases, Slovenia’s Criminal Code applies, which may result in fines or imprisonment. While laws regarding IPR are clearly defined, foreign investors have complained that the court system is too slow.Since the enactment of the Law on Copyright and Related Rights Act, there have been relatively few reported prosecutions regarding copyright infringements and violations. Slovenia has dedicated resources to training prosecutors and public authorities. Slovenia also continues to address the preservation of evidence in infringement procedures and border measures through amendments to existing legislation. The Ministry of Culture established the Intellectual Property Fund, the Slovenian Copyright Agency, and the Anti-Piracy Association of Software Dealers to combat the problem of piracy in a collective manner.The Law on Industrial Property grants and protects patents, model and design rights, trademark and service marks, and appellations of origin. The holder of a patent, model, or design right is entitled to exclusively profit from the protected invention, shape, picture, or drawing; exclusively market any products manufactured in accordance with the protected invention, shape, picture, or drawing; dispose of the patent, model, or design right; and prohibit the use of a protected invention, model, or design by any person without consent.The patent and trademark rights granted by the Law on Industrial Property take effect from the date of filing the appropriate applications. Patents are granted for 20 years from the date of filing, and model and design rights are granted for 10 years. Trademarks are granted for 10 years but may be renewed an unlimited number of times. The term of an appellation of origin is unlimited. All patents and trademarks are registered through the Intellectual Property Office, and all registers are open to the public. Patent and trademark applications filed in member countries of the International Union for the Protection of Industrial Property are afforded priority rights in Slovenia. The priority period is 12 months for patents and six months for model and design rights.Any person who infringes upon a patent or trademark right may be held liable for damages and prohibited from carrying on the infringing acts.The Ministry of Finance, through the Customs Authority, tracks and reports on seizures of counterfeit goods in accordance with the European Parliament decree 608/2013. All data on seized goods are stored on a central database at the European Commission. The Commission publishes an annual report on seized goods from all countries, available at  https://ec.europa.eu/taxation_customs/business/customs-controls/counterfeit-piracy-other-ipr-violations/ipr-infringements-facts-figures_en .The Law on Industrial Property also provides for the contractual licensing of patents, model and design rights, and marks. All license agreements must be in writing and specify the duration of the license, the scope of the license, whether the license is exclusive or non-exclusive, and the amount of remuneration for use of the patent, model and design rights, and marks.Compulsory licenses may be granted to another person when the invention is in the public interest or the patentee misuses rights granted under the patent. A misuse of a patent occurs when the patentee does not use or insufficiently uses a patented invention and refuses to license other persons to develop or make use of the protected invention, or imposes unjustified conditions on the licensee. If a compulsory license is granted, the patentee is entitled to compensation. Slovenian industrial property legislation fully complies with EU standards.For additional information about treaty obligations and points of contact at local IPR offices, please see WIPO’s country profiles at  http://www.wipo.int/directory/en/ .																																												6. Financial Sector						    																																																Capital Markets and Portfolio Investment										Capital markets remain relatively underdeveloped given Slovenia’s level of prosperity. Enterprises rarely raise capital through the stock market and tend to rely on the traditional banking system and private lenders to meet their capital needs.Established in 1990, the Ljubljana Stock Exchange (LSE) is a member of the International Association of Stock Exchanges (FIBV). In 2015, the Zagreb Stock Exchange acquired the LSE. However, the number of companies listed on the exchange is limited and trading volume is very light, with annual turnover similar to a single day’s trading on the NYSE. Low liquidity remains an issue when entering or exiting sizeable positions.In 1995, the Central Securities Clearing Corporation (KDD) was established to provide central securities custody services, clear and settle securities transactions, and maintain the central securities registry on the LSE electronic trading system. In 2017, KDD successfully aligned its procedures to that of the uniform European securities settlement platform TARGET2-Securities (T2S).  In 2019, Slovenia’s Securities Market Agency (ATVP) licensed KDD to operate under the EU’s Central Securities Depository Regulation (CSDR) and provide services as a Central Securities Depository (CSD), pursuant to Article 17 of the Regulation (EU) 909/2014 on improving securities settlement in the European Union and on central securities depositories.Established in 1994, the ATVP has powers similar to those of the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission and supervises investment firms, the Ljubljana Stock Exchange (LSE), the KDD, investment funds, and management companies. It also shares responsibility with the Bank of Slovenia for supervision of banking and investment services.Slovenia adheres to Article VIII of the International Monetary Fund’s Article of Agreement and is committed to full current account convertibility and full repatriation of dividends.The LSE uses different dissemination systems, including real-time online trading information via Reuters and the Business Data Solutions System. The LSE also publishes information on the Internet at  http://www.ljse.si/ .Foreign investors in Slovenia have the same rights as domestic investors, including the ability to obtain credit on the local market.																																				Money and Banking System										There is a relatively high degree of concentration in Slovenia’s banking sector, with 11 commercial banks, three savings banks, and two foreign bank branches in Slovenia serving two million people. All commercial banks are private as of January 2021, and most have foreign owners and shareholders. SID Bank (Slovenian Export and Development Bank), which supports Slovenian companies’ export activities and provides financing for economic development, remains state-owned. In 2008, the combined effects of the global financial crisis, the collapse of the construction sector, and diminished demand for exports led to significant capital shortfalls. Bank assets declined steadily after 2009 but rebounded in 2016 and have remained steady since then. Since the crisis, most banks have refocused their business activities towards SMEs and individuals/households, prompting larger companies to search for alternative financing sources. According to European Banking Federation data, Slovenia’s banking sector assets totaled EUR 48.3 billion (USD 53 billion) at the end of 2021, equaling approximately 92.8 percent of GDP. However, the figure still lags the total banking assets volume at the end of 2009, when banking sector assets equaled 146 percent of GDP.Slovenia’s banking sector was devastated by the 2009 economic crisis. Nova Ljubljanska Banka (NLB) and Nova Kreditna Banka Maribor (NKBM) faced successive downgrades by credit rating agencies due to the large numbers of nonperforming loans in their portfolios. In 2013, the government established a Bank Asset Management Company (BAMC) with a management board comprised of financial experts to promote stability and restore trust in the financial system. In exchange for bonds, BAMC agreed to manage the nonperforming assets of three major state banks, conducting three such operations from December 2013 through March 2014. The government also injected EUR 3.5 billion (USD 4.2 billion) into Slovenia’s three largest banks, NLB, NKBM, and Abanka. These measures helped recapitalize and revitalize the country’s largest commercial banks. In December 2022, the government closed BAMC, as originally planned, and its approximately EUR 500 million in remaining assets were transferred to the Slovenian Sovereign Holding.According to World Bank data, an estimated 2.1 percent of all Slovenian banking assets were non-performing as of the end of 2021. According to the Bank of Slovenia, the Slovenian banking sector’s exposure to non-performing loans was 0.98 percent, as of February 2023.NLB, the country’s largest bank, was privatized in 2019, although the government remains a major shareholder with a 25 percent plus one share stake. Of the remaining shares, more than fifty percent are spread among several international investors on fiduciary account at the Bank of New York, while a number of Slovenian institutional and private investors purchased the remainder. The country’s second largest bank, Nova Kreditna Banka Maribor (NKBM), was sold to an American fund (80 percent) and the European Bank of Reconstruction and Development (EBRD) (20 percent) in 2016. In 2020, NKBM acquired the country’s third largest state-owned bank, Abanka. As of January 2021, the banks have been fully merged. With a total asset of EUR 9.2 billion (USD 10.1 billion) and approximately 22 percent market share, NKBM is on par with the country’s largest commercial bank, NLB. In May 2021, Hungary’s OTP Bank signed a contract to acquire NKBM, with the deal receiving final approval from Slovenia’s Competition Protection Office in February 2023. OTP plans to fully integrate NKBM with its previously acquired SKB Bank by 2024.Following sanctions imposed as a result of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, the European Central Bank (ECB) assessed in February 2022 that Sberbank Europe and its two subsidiaries in Croatia and Slovenia were failing or likely to fail due to a deterioration in their liquidity situation. In March 2022, the Bank of Slovenia announced that the country’s largest bank, NLB, acquired Sberbank Slovenia, including its assets, liabilities, and clients. The Bank of Slovenia noted that the swift sale of Sberbank Slovenia helped preserve the banking sector stability in the country.Banking legislation authorizes commercial banks, savings banks, and stock brokerage firms to purchase securities abroad. Investment funds may also purchase securities abroad, provided they meet specified diversification requirements. The Slovenian government adopted in March 2021 a draft banking legislation, which transposed provisions of an EU directive on exempted entities, financial holding companies, mixed financial holding companies, remuneration, supervisory measures and powers, and capital conservation measures. The new legislation also addresses the 2019 Constitutional Court decision that invalidated a provision that exempted banks from worker representation requirements in corporate governance. Under the proposed legislation, workers will be entitled to at least one seat of a bank’s supervisory board, but these workers’ representatives must meet professional qualifications of the supervisory board. The banking legislation was passed by the National Assembly in June 2021.In February 2022, Slovenia’s National Assembly passed a bill that retroactively forced Slovenian banks to share the burden of exchange rate fluctuations beyond 10 percent on Swiss Franc loans issued between June 28, 2004, and December 31, 2010, imposing an estimated cost of more than EUR 300 million on banks. The bill also required banks to amend loan contracts within 60 days to include this foreign exchange rate cap or face penalties, including up to revocation of banking licenses. Banks and business associations broadly opposed the bill, expressing concern about the bill’s inconsistencies with existing EU and Slovenian laws and regulations, disproportionately high penalties for incompliance, and the retroactively nature of the bill that calls into question the sanctity of legal contracts in Slovenia. These groups worried that this precedent created unpredictability in the economy and negatively impacted the business climate in Slovenia. Soon after the bill was passed, nine banks with operations in Slovenia requested a constitutionality review.  In March 2022, the Constitutional Court stayed the enactment of the bill and, in December, annulled the legislation citing inconsistencies with existing EU and Slovenian laws. The Slovenian Bank Association claimed that the ruling was an affirmation of the rule of law in Slovenia.Despite Slovenia’s vibrant blockchain technology ecosystem and several global blockchain companies headquartered in the country, Slovenian banks have been slow to adopt blockchain technologies to process banking transactions.The Bank of Slovenia, established on June 25, 1991, is Slovenia’s central bank. The Bank of Slovenia has been a member of the European System of Central Banks (ESCB) since Slovenia joined the European Union in 2004. The Bank of Slovenia gave up responsibility for monetary policy to the Eurosystem when Slovenia adopted the euro as its currency in 2007. As a member of the Eurosystem, the Bank of Slovenia coordinates with other EU central banks to implement the common monetary policy, manage foreign exchange reserves, ensure the smooth functioning of payment systems, and issue euro banknotes.Slovenian law allows non-residents to open bank accounts in Slovenia on presentation of a passport, a Slovenian tax number, and a foreign tax number. Company owners must be present to open a business bank account.Slovenia’s takeover legislation is fully harmonized with EU regulations. In 2006, Slovenia implemented EU Directive 2004/25/ES by adopting a new takeover law. The law was amended in 2008 to reflect Slovenia’s adoption of the euro as its currency. The law defines a takeover as a party’s acquisition of 25 percent of a company’s voting rights and requires the public announcement of a potential takeover offer for all current shareholders. The acquiring party must publicly issue a takeover offer for each additional acquisition of 10 percent of voting rights until it has acquired 75 percent of voting rights. The law also stipulates that the acquiring party must inform the share issuer whenever its stake in the target company reaches, surpasses, or drops below five, 10, 20, 25, 33, 50, or 75 percent. The law applies to all potential takeovers.It is common for acquisitions to be blocked or delayed, and drawn out negotiations and stalled takeovers have hurt Slovenia’s reputation in global financial markets. In 2015, the privatization of Slovenia’s state-owned telecommunications company, Telekom Slovenije, failed in large part due to political attempts to discourage the sale of a state-owned company. Slovenia’s biggest retailer, Mercator, faced similar challenges in 2014 when a lengthy and arduous process and strong domestic opposition preceded its eventual sale to a Croatian buyer. The U.S.-owned Central European Media Enterprises dropped its politically controversial sale of Slovenian media house Pro Plus to then-U.S. owned United Group in January 2019 after the Competition Protection Agency failed to issue a ruling on the proposed acquisition despite reviewing the case for more than 18 months. The government has also struggled to meet its commitment to open Slovenia’s economy to international capital markets.Twelve insurance companies, two re-insurance companies, three retirement companies, and five branches of foreign firms operate in Slovenia. The three largest insurance companies in Slovenia account for over 60 percent of the market, with the largest, state-owned Triglav d.d., controlling 35 percent of the market. Foreign insurance companies together accounted for 22 percent of the market. Insurance companies primarily invest their assets in non-financial companies, state bonds, and bank-issued bonds.Since 2000, there have been significant changes in legislation regulating the insurance sector. The Ownership Transformation of Insurance Companies Act, which seeks to privatize insurance companies, has stalled on several occasions due to ambiguity over the estimated share of state-controlled capital. Although plans for insurance sector privatization have been under discussion since 2005, there has been no implementation.Slovenia currently has three registered health insurance companies and a variety of companies offering other kinds of insurance. Under EU regulations, any insurance company registered in the EU can market its services in Slovenia, provided the insurance supervision agency of the country where the company is headquartered has notified the Slovenian Supervision Agency of the company’s intentions.																																				Foreign Exchange and Remittances																										Foreign Exchange						Slovenia adheres to Article VIII of the IMF Article of Agreement and is committed to full current account convertibility and full repatriation of dividends. To repatriate profits, joint stock companies must provide evidence of the settlement of tax liabilities, notarized evidence of distribution of profits to shareholders, and proof of joint stock company membership (Article of Association). All other companies must provide evidence of the settlement of tax liabilities and the company’s act of establishment.For the repatriation of shares in a domestic company, the party must submit its act of establishment, a contract on share withdrawal, and evidence of the settlement of tax liabilities to the authorized bank.Slovenia replaced its previous currency, the Slovenian tolar, with the euro in January 2007. The Eurozone has a freely floating exchange rate.						Remittance Policies						There are no restrictions on inward or outward remittance transactions. The Bank of Slovenia is responsible for monitoring and regulating remittances.						Sovereign Wealth Funds						Slovenia does not have a sovereign wealth fund.																										7. State-Owned Enterprises										Private enterprises compete on the same terms and conditions as public enterprises with respect to access to markets, credit, and other business operations.State-owned and partially state-owned enterprises (SOE) are present across most industries in Slovenia.  The state has never undergone a wholesale privatization program and has retained significant ownership shares in many large companies since independence.  According to a 2017 OECD report on SOEs, 37 companies with a total value of USD 12.5 billion and employing 47,000 people were majority state owned. In 2020, an OECD report assessed that privatization has progressed slowly, with the Slovenian Sovereign Holdings (SSH) maintaining controlling shares in most SOEs. Most state-owned companies are in the energy, transportation, public utilities, telecommunications, insurance, and financial sectors, although the government successfully completed the privatization of the three largest state-owned banks by 2020.  Other economic sectors, including retail, entertainment, tourism, and manufacturing, include important firms that are either wholly state-owned or in which the state maintains a controlling interest by virtue of holding the largest single block of shares.In general, SOEs do not receive a greater share of contracts or business than private sector competitors in sectors that are open to private and foreign competition.  SOEs acquire goods and services from private and foreign firms.  SOEs must follow strict government procurement agreements which require transparent procedures available to all firms.  Private firms compete under the same terms and conditions with respect to market share, products, and incentives.  All firms have the same access to financing. Slovenian SOEs are active both in domestic and international markets, including in the United States. However, the United States, generally is not a major export market nor a large investment destination for SOEs.SOEs are subject to the same laws as private companies and must fully comply with all legal obligations.  They must submit to independent audits and publish annual reports if required (for example, if the SOE is listed on the stock exchange or the size of the company meets a certain threshold).  Reporting standards are comparable to international financial reporting standards.Slovenia is an active participant in the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) Working Party on State Ownership and Privatization Practices and adheres to the OECD Guidelines on Corporate Governance for SOEs.Following OECD recommendations, the government established the Capital Asset Management Agency (AUKN) in 2010 to increase transparency and promote more efficient management of SOEs.  In 2013, authorities transformed the AUKN into the Slovenian Sovereign Holding (SSH), which is charged with simplifying and shortening the administrative process of privatizing state assets.  SSH took over all AUKN portfolios as well as the portfolios of two other smaller state-owned funds.  More than 95 percent of SSH funds are invested domestically.  SSH is an independent state authority that reports to the National Assembly.  It provides the National Assembly with annual reports regarding the previous year’s implementation of the Annual Plan of the Corporate Governance of Capital Investments.  The government then adopts the Annual Plan of the Corporate Governance of Capital Investments based on SSH’s proposal.A list of SSH’s SOEs is available at  https://www.sdh.si/en-gb/asset-management/list-of-assets .																																				Privatization Program										Foreign investors may participate in the public-bidding processes on an equal basis.  However, interested parties often describe the bidding process as opaque, with unclear or unenforced deadlines.In 2015, the government prepared an asset management strategy that classified state-owned assets as strategic, important, or portfolio assets.  In companies classified as strategic, the state will maintain or obtain at least a 50 percent plus one share.  In companies classified as important, the state will maintain a controlling share (25 percent plus one share).  In companies classified as portfolio, it is not mandatory for the state to maintain a controlling share.  The government reclassified the list of companies in 2017.SSH publishes online the latest list of state stakes for sale. It is available in Slovenian at  https://www.sdh.si/sl-si/prodaje-nalozb  .																																												8. Responsible Business Conduct						    																						The concept of Responsible Business Conduct (RBC) has become increasingly popular among Slovenia’s business community, but the due-diligence approach is not yet commonly recognized. However, to raise their public profiles and improve their images among the public, larger international companies have increasingly undertaken activities such as sponsoring sports teams and community events in the name of corporate social responsibility. Larger Slovenian companies have also focused on developing environmentally-friendly images by implementing green technologies and adhering to high environmental standards.In January 2023, Slovenia adopted a Whistleblower Protection Act, bringing it in line with EU directives. The law stipulates reporting mechanisms for whistleblowers and protection against retaliation and provides authority for the government to fine companies up to EUR 60,000 for violations. Businesses must also comply with the Ministry of Intererior’s October 2020 handbook for employers on preventing and recognizing forced labor.As an OECD member, Slovenia adheres to the OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises and encourages foreign and local enterprises to follow generally accepted RBC principles, including the United Nations Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights. Slovenia’s Ministry of Economy, Tourism and Sport is the  National Contact Point  for the OECD Guidelines.Slovenia effectively and fairly enforces domestic laws pertaining to human rights, labor rights, consumer protection, environmental protections, and other laws and regulations to protect individuals from adverse business impacts. Independent NGOs, labor unions, and business associations promote and monitor RBC and are able to conduct their work freely. The government adopted a National Action Plan on Business and Human Rights in November 2018 to strengthen activities to ensure that human rights are respected in business activities throughout the value chain and encourage cooperation between government, businesses, unions, NGOs, and other stakeholders. Slovenia is not a signatory to the Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative or the Voluntary Principles on Security and Human Rights, but adheres to the OECD Due Diligence Guidance for Responsible Mineral Supply Chains.Slovenia is a signatory of The Montreux Document on Private Military and Security Companies since 2012.																										Additional Resources										Department of StateCountry Reports on Human Rights Practices;Trafficking in Persons Report;Guidance on Implementing the &#8220;UN Guiding Principles&#8221; for Transactions Linked to Foreign Government End-Users for Products or Services with Surveillance Capabilities;U.S. National Contact Point for the OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises; and;Xinjiang Supply Chain Business Advisory Department of the TreasuryOFAC Recent ActionsDepartment of LaborFindings on the Worst Forms of Child Labor Report;List of Goods Produced by Child Labor or Forced Labor;Sweat &amp; Toil: Child Labor, Forced Labor, and Human Trafficking Around the World and;Comply Chain.																																				Climate Issues										Slovenia, in line with the European Union (EU), committed to reducing greenhouse gas emissions by at least 55 percent by 2030 (compared to 1990 levels) and achieving climate neutrality by 2050.Slovenia’s long-term climate strategy, approved in July 2021, includes a provision specifying that the country will use nuclear energy in the long term, clarifying the country’s energy future and committing to produce a large percentage of its energy supply domestically. In July 2021, the EU approved Slovenia’s national recovery and resilience plan, allowing funds up to EUR 2.5 billion (EUR 1.8 billion in grants and 700 million in loans) to be drawn from the EU Recovery and Resilience Facility.  42.5 percent of the funds are earmarked for green transition projects.Slovenia is currently updating its National Energy and Climate Plan (NECP), last adopted in 2020. The new NECP is expected to be announced in mid-2023. The Slovenian government recently committed to increase renewable energy capacity in Slovenia, especially solar energy. In February 2022, the Slovenian government adopted a bill requiring government identification of priority locations for solar and wind farms installation. The bill cites rooftops, parking lots, and vacant spaces in industrial and agricultural zones as possible locations. The bill also canceled restrictive zoning obligations that hampered future renewable energy projects.																																												9. Corruption						    																						Slovenia has no bribery statute comparable to the U.S. Foreign Corrupt Practices Act. However, Chapter 24 of the Slovenian Criminal Code (SCC) provides statutory provisions for criminal offenses in the economic sector. Corruption in the economy may take many forms, including collusion among private firms or public officials using influence to appoint patrons to the boards of SOEs.The SCC calls for criminal sanctions against officials of private firms for forgery or destruction of business documents, unauthorized use or disclosure of business secrets, insider trading, embezzlement, acceptance of gifts under certain circumstances, money laundering, and tax evasion.Articles 241 and 242 of the SCC make it illegal for a person performing a commercial activity to demand or accept undue rewards, gifts, or other material benefits that will ultimately result in harm or neglect to a business organization.Under Article 261 of the SCC, public officials cannot request or accept a gift to perform or omit an official act within the scope of their official duties. The acceptance of a bribe by a public official may result in a fine or imprisonment of no less than one year, with a maximum sentence of five years. The law also stipulates the seizure of the accepted gift or bribe.Article 262 holds the gift’s donor accountable, making it illegal for natural persons or legal entities to bribe public officials with gifts. Violation of this article carries a sentence of up to three years. In cases in which the gift giver discloses the attempted bribery before it is detected or discovered, punishment may be reduced.The State Prosecutor’s Office is responsible for the enforcement of anti-bribery laws. The number of cases of actual bribery is small and generally limited to instances involving inspection and tax collection. The Prosecutor’s Office has reported that obtaining evidence is difficult in bribery cases, making it equally difficult to prosecute. In 2010, the government established the Commission for the Prevention of Corruption (CPC), an independent state body with a broad mandate to investigate corruption, prevent breaches of ethics, and ensure the integrity of public officials. The CPC is not part of Slovenia’s law enforcement or prosecution system, and its employees do not have traditional police powers. However, the CPC has broad legal powers to access and subpoena financial and other documents, question public servants and officials, conduct administrative investigations, and direct law enforcement bodies to gather additional information and evidence within the limits of their authority. The CPC may also issue fines for violations.In 2011, to combat Slovenia’s ongoing problems with corruption and non-transparent procedures in public procurement, authorities established a new government-wide Public Procurement Agency under the Ministry of Justice to carry out all public procurements over established EU thresholds, including goods and services above EUR 40,000 (USD 44,029) and projects above EUR 80,000 (USD 88,058). In June 2012, the Ministry of Finance took over the agency’s duties and employees. In 2016, the Directorate for Public Procurement was established under the Ministry of Public Administration to oversee public procurements. By law, the National Review Commission provides non-judicial review of all public procurements.Corruption remains an ongoing problem, although its prevalence is relatively limited and there is no evidence that corruption has been an obstacle to FDI. However, U.S. companies continue to report challenges in some sectors, such as a strong preference for incumbent vendors and tenders written in a way to favor a predetermined winner.Such practices prevent U.S. companies from competing on a level playingfield in the public procurement process. The small size of Slovenia’s political and economic elite contributes to a lack of transparency in government procurement and widespread cronyism in the business sector. Several prominent national and local political figures have been charged or tried for corruption in public procurements. Slovenia convicted its first senior public official for accepting a bribe in 2001 and its first member of parliament in 2010. In 2008, investigators accused several public officials, including the prime minister, of accepting bribes from the Finnish defense contractor Patria related to an armored personnel carrier procurement. Although three defendants, including a former prime minister, were convicted in 2013, the convictions were annulled on appeal.In February 2021, four orthopedic surgeons and a salesperson were convicted and sentenced to prison in one of the largest healthcare corruption trials in Slovenia.  The court found that the doctors received a bribe in exchange for continuing to use medical supplies made by a particular producer. The court decision is currently under appeal, but the case marks one of the first convictions for corruption in the national healthcare system.In August 2022, a corruption trial over the EUR 1.4 billion coal generator project began, with several Slovenian and foreign individuals charged with abuse of office and money laundering. Although costs were initially estimated to be EUR 650 million, the total investment for the project increased to EUR 1.4 billion due to poor management and cost overruns. Prosecutors accuse former executives of of receiving commissions totaling nearly EUR 900,000 while enabling Alstom to gain more than EUR 284 million in material benefits.Most recently, in March 2023, Ministry of Health announced an audit into public procurement practices revealed several irregularities in the development of tender requirements, vendor selection, and record keeping at Slovenia’s largest hospital.  The audit found preferential treatment for certain vendors as well as a lack of gift policy for staff engaged in the public procurement process.  In addition, the audit highlighted the lack of competition, noting that more than 20 percent of tenders had only one bid.  Later in March, the ministry suspended a EUR 40 million public tender for MRI machines due to allegations of favoritism in the preparation of the public procurement contract.  Several companies alleged the technical requirements were designed specifically for devices supplied by one vendor. The National Bureau of Investigation and the Commission for the Prevention of Corruption are investigating the allegations. Ministry of Health announced it will issue a new tender that would delay the procurement of MRI machines until next year.The CPC has instituted a new system for tracking corruption in public procurement at the municipal level and has uncovered numerous violations since implementation. The CPC also operates with a broad mandate to prevent and investigate breaches of ethics and integrity involving holders of public office. The president of Slovenia appoints the leadership of CPC, which reports to the National Assembly.Slovenia ratified the UN Anticorruption Convention in 2008.Slovenia is a party to the OECD Convention on Combating Bribery of Foreign Public Officials in International Business Transactions.																										Resources to Report Corruption										Contact at the government agency or agencies that are responsible for combating corruption:Robert ŠumiPresidentCommission for the Prevention of Corruption56 Dunajska cesta1000 Ljubljana, SloveniaTel: +386 1 400 5710Fax: +386 1 400 8472E-mail: anti.korupcija@kpk-rs.siWeb:  www.kpk-rs.si/en Contact at &#8220;watchdog&#8221; organization:Neža GrasselliPresidentTransparency International SloveniaVožarski pot 12, 1000 LjubljanaTel +386 1 3207325info@transparency.si Assistance for U.S. Businesses: The U.S. Department of Commerce offers several services to U.S. businesses seeking to address business-related corruption issues. For example, it may assist U.S. companies in conducting due diligence as part of the company’s overarching compliance program when choosing business partners or agents overseas. The U.S. Foreign Commercial Service may be reached through its offices in major U.S. and foreign cities, or through its website at  http://www.trade.gov/cs .The Departments of Commerce and State provide worldwide support for qualified U.S. companies bidding on foreign government contracts through the Commerce Department’s Advocacy Center and State’s Office of Commercial and Business Affairs. U.S. companies may report problems encountered in seeking such foreign business opportunities, including alleged corruption by foreign governments or competitors, to appropriate U.S. officials at the U.S. Embassy and the Department of Commerce Trade Compliance Center’s “Report a Trade Barrier” website at  http://tcc.export.gov/Report_a_Barrier/index.asp .Guidance on the U.S. FCPA: The Department of Justice’s (DOJ) FCPA Opinion Procedure enables U.S. firms and individuals to request a statement on the Justice Department’s present enforcement intentions under the FCPA’s anti-bribery provisions regarding any proposed business conduct. The details of the opinion procedure are available on DOJ’s Fraud Section Website at  http://www.justice.gov/criminal/fraud/fcpa . Although the Department of Commerce has no enforcement role with respect to the FCPA, it supplies general guidance to U.S. exporters who have questions about the FCPA and international developments concerning the FCPA. For further information, see the website of the Office of the Chief Counsel for International Counsel, U.S. Department of Commerce, at  https://ogc.commerce.gov/. 																																												10. Political and Security Environment						    																						Except for its brief, 10-day war of independence from Yugoslavia in 1991, there have been no significant incidents of political violence in Slovenia since independence.																																		11. Labor Policies and Practices						    																						Prior to the COVID-19 pandemic and ensuing economic upheaval, Slovenia’s unemployment rate had fallen steadily since 2014 and reached a ten-year low of 4.5 percent at the end of 2019. Although inflation prior to the crisis remained low at about two percent, private sector contacts reported increasing difficulties in finding qualified staff, which might be expected to put upward pressure on wages and salaries. The government’s COVID-19 stimulus measures focused on preserving jobs, mitigating the brunt of the impact of the pandemic on the labor market. In 2020, the unemployment rate rose slightly to 4.97 percent. As a result of strong economic recovery, in 2022, unemployment rate fell to 4 percent, a record low for Slovenia.Slovenia fully harmonized its labor legislation with the EU in 2004. In line with this legislation, Slovenia maintains strict rules on issuing work permits to non-EU applicants. The 2001 Employment of Aliens Act introduced a quota system for work permits and simplified the procedure for obtaining such permits for foreigners who have worked and lived in Slovenia for an extended period.Slovenia’s wage-setting practice follows the “social partners” model, designed to contain upward pressure by centralizing wage decisions. In practice, however, high wage expectations have pushed Slovenia’s wage levels above those of its neighbors in the Western Balkans. Despite these pressures, Slovenia’s well-educated labor force and position as a productive transition economy allows it to remain competitive in niche markets.In 2003, Slovenia adopted an Employment Relationship Act that defines a full-time workweek as 36 to 40 hours (made up of six to eight-hour days, including a 30-minute lunch break). The act increases protections for critical working groups (including women and children) and eases the conditions under which an employer may terminate employees. Amendments to the act adopted in 2013 further eased the conditions for termination of employment. In December 2020, a provision allowing employers to unilaterally terminate workers once formal conditions for retirement were met was included in the government’s COVID-19 stimulus package and passed in the National Assembly. Slovenia’s labor force performs well in higher value-added activities that utilize its skilled technicians and engineers at a competitive cost. Despite the introduction of policies offering greater labor market flexibility, however, labor market rules and regulations remain quite rigid, and investors find that laying off workers is more difficult than in the United States.Low unemployment and demands from public sector unions have placed upward pressure on wages. In November 2015, the National Assembly endorsed a motion sponsored by trade unions to exempt bonuses for night, weekend, and holiday work from the minimum wage and force employers to pay these wages separately. In January 2023, the Slovenian government announced a 12.85 percent increase in the minimum wage for 2023, reaching EUR 1,203.36 . In addition, the public sector trade union negotiated an agreement in October 2022 that will see a 4.5 percent pay raise for 2023 and a 4 percent increase in 2024. Health and social care sector workers negotiated a separate agreement that will introduce pay increases ranging from 4 percent to 26 percent, depending on the grade of the employee.In November 2019, the National Assembly adopted changes to the retirement law to remove differential treatment for men and women and encourage older workers to remain in the job market.																																		12. U.S. International Development Finance Corporation (DFC), and Other Investment Insurance or Development Finance Programs						    																						Slovenia signed a bilateral agreement with the U.S. Overseas Private Investment Corporation (OPIC) in 1994. Although OPIC and its successor Development Finance Corporation (DFC) continue to offer several investment finance and insurance programs in Slovenia, including loan guarantees, direct loans, and political violence and expropriation insurance, American businesses trading or investing in the country typically do not turn to these sources for political risk insurance or loans at competitive rates given that Slovenia is a politically stable EU member with a relatively high GDP.The U.S. Export-Import Bank offers short-, medium-, and long-term public and private sector programs in Slovenia. In 1999, the Slovenian Export Corporation (SEC) and the U.S. Export-Import Bank signed a memorandum on cooperation in financing, insuring, and reinsuring exports to Southeast European countries. In 2007, the SEC restructured to become SID Bank (the Slovenian Export and Development Bank). More information is available on its website  http://www.sid.si/ .																																		13. Foreign Direct Investment and Foreign Portfolio Investment Statistics						    																						Table 2: Key Macroeconomic Data, U.S. FDI in Host Country/EconomyHost Country Statistical source*USG or international statistical sourceUSG or International Source of Data:BEA; IMF; Eurostat; UNCTAD, OtherEconomic DataYearAmountYearAmountHost Country Gross Domestic Product (GDP) ($M USD)2021$61.802021$61.75https://data.worldbank.org/country/sloveniaForeign Direct InvestmentHost Country Statistical source*USG or international statistical sourceUSG or international Source of data:BEA; IMF; Eurostat; UNCTAD, OtherU.S. FDI in partner country ($M USD, stock positions)2021$1142021$210BEA data available athttps://www.bea.gov/international/di1usdbal  Host country’s FDI in the United States ($M USD, stock positions)2021$2052021$DBEA data available athttps://www.bea.gov/international/di1fdibal  Total inbound stock of FDI as % host GDP202135%202133%UNCTAD data available athttps://unctad.org/topic/investment/world-investment-report *Bank of Slovenia; published in October 2022N.B.: The Bank of Slovenia (BoS), in its official data, lists U.S. FDI at approximately EUR 96 million in 2021, or 0.5 percent of total inward FDI.  However, this amount does not reflect significant investments by U.S. firms not listed as U.S. in origin by the BoS, as U.S. funds are often routed through third-country subsidiaries.  In 2017, the BoS began reporting FDI according to the ultimate investing country or originating country of capital.  It estimated that EUR 1.63 billion euros or 8.9 percent of Slovenia’s total FDI originated in the United States in 2021, putting the United States only behind Austria (15.3%) and Germany (14.4%) as a source of foreign investment in Slovenia.D &#8211; Data suppressed to avoid disclosure of data of individual companies.Table 3: Sources and Destination of FDIDirect Investment from/in Counterpart Economy DataFrom Top Five Sources/To Top Five Destinations (US Dollars, Millions)Inward Direct InvestmentOutward Direct InvestmentTotal Inward20,807100%Total Outward8,881100%Austria5,18124%Croatia3,07534%Luxembourg2,48611%Serbia1,69919%Switzerland2,34111%Bosnia-Herzegovina6046%Croatia2,0819%Russian Federation5305%Germany1,6878%North Macedonia5195%&#8220;0&#8221; reflects amounts rounded to +/- USD 500,000.Source: IMF’s Coordinated Direct Investment Survey (2021): https://data.imf.org/regular.aspx?key=61227424 Comment: IMF data are consistent with Bank of Slovenia data.																																		14. Contact for More Information						    																						Onejin WuEconomic &amp; Commercial Officer31 Presernova Street, Ljubljana, Slovenia+386 1 200 5668Email:  DoingBusinessinSlovenia@state.gov 																										    							View report by:																				Albania											Algeria											Andorra											Angola											Antigua and Barbuda											Argentina											Armenia											Australia											Austria											The Bahamas											Azerbaijan											Bahrain											Bangladesh											Barbados											Belarus											Belgium											Belize											Benin											Bolivia											Bosnia and Herzegovina											Botswana											Brazil											Brunei											Bulgaria											Burkina Faso											Burma											Burundi											Cabo Verde											Cambodia											Cameroon											Canada											Chile											China											Colombia											Costa Rica											Côte d’Ivoire											Croatia											Cyprus											Czechia											Democratic Republic of the Congo											Denmark											Djibouti											Dominica											Dominican Republic											Ecuador											Egypt											El Salvador											Equatorial Guinea											Eritrea											Estonia											Eswatini											Ethiopia											Fiji											Finland											France and Monaco											The Gambia											Gabon											Georgia											Germany											Ghana											Greece											Grenada											Guatemala											Guinea											Guyana											Haiti											Honduras											Hong Kong											Hungary											Iceland											India											Indonesia											Iraq											Ireland											Israel											Italy											Jamaica											Japan											Jordan											Kazakhstan											Kenya											Kosovo											Kyrgyz Republic											Laos											Latvia											Lebanon											Lesotho											Liberia											Libya											Lithuania											Luxembourg											Macau											Madagascar											Malawi											Malaysia											Maldives											Mali											Malta											Marshall Islands											Mauritania											Mauritius											Mexico											Micronesia											Moldova											Mongolia											Montenegro											Morocco											Mozambique											Namibia											Nepal											Netherlands											New Zealand											Nicaragua											Niger											Nigeria											North Macedonia											Norway											Oman											Pakistan											Palau											Panama											Papua New Guinea											Paraguay											Philippines											Peru											Poland											Portugal											Qatar											Republic of the Congo											Romania											Rwanda											Saint Kitts and Nevis											Saint Lucia											Saint Vincent and the Grenadines											Samoa											Sao Tome and Principe											Saudi Arabia											Senegal											Serbia											Seychelles											Sierra Leone											Singapore											Slovakia											Slovenia											Somalia											South Africa											South Korea											South Sudan											Spain											Sri Lanka											Suriname											Sweden											Switzerland											Taiwan											Tajikistan											Tanzania											Thailand											Timor-Leste											Togo											Trinidad and Tobago											Tunisia											Türkiye											United Arab Emirates											Uganda											Ukraine											United Kingdom											Uruguay											Uzbekistan											Vietnam											West Bank and Gaza											Zambia											Zimbabwe															Build A Custom Report																						On This Page				search													>																										EXECUTIVE SUMMARY																1. Openness To, and Restrictions Upon, Foreign Investment																																							Policies Towards Foreign Direct Investment																																																						Limits on Foreign Control and Right to Private Ownership and Establishment																																																				Sector-specific Restrictions:																																												Business Facilitation																																												Outward Investment																																																																																	2. Bilateral Investment and Taxation Treaties																3. Legal Regime																																							Transparency of the Regulatory System																																																						International Regulatory Considerations																																																						Legal System and Judicial Independence																																																						Laws and Regulations on Foreign Direct Investment																																																						Competition and Antitrust Laws																																																						Expropriation and Compensation																																																						Dispute Settlement																																																				ICSID Convention and New York Convention																																												Investor-State Dispute Settlement																																												International Commercial Arbitration and Foreign Courts																																																																																				Bankruptcy Regulations																																																			4. Industrial Policies																																							Investment Incentives																																																						Foreign Trade Zones/Free Ports/Trade Facilitation																																																						Performance and Data Localization Requirements																																																			5. Protection of Property Rights																																							Real Property																																																						Intellectual Property Rights																																																			6. Financial Sector																																							Capital Markets and Portfolio Investment																																																						Money and Banking System																																																						Foreign Exchange and Remittances																																																				Foreign Exchange																																												Remittance Policies																																												Sovereign Wealth Funds																																																																																				7. State-Owned Enterprises																																																						Privatization Program																																																			8. Responsible Business Conduct																																							Additional Resources																																																						Climate Issues																																																			9. Corruption																																							Resources to Report Corruption																																																			10. Political and Security Environment																11. Labor Policies and Practices																12. U.S. International Development Finance Corporation (DFC), and Other Investment Insurance or Development Finance Programs																13. Foreign Direct Investment and Foreign Portfolio Investment Statistics																14. Contact for More Information																						Tags																					Bureau of Economic and Business Affairs																								Bureau of European and Eurasian Affairs																								Slovenia
- Slovenia’s National Day Antony J. Blinken, Secretary of StateOn behalf of the United States of America, I offer our best wishes to the people of Slovenia as you honor your Statehood Day.Congratulations once again on your election to the UN Security Council for 2024-2025. I am confident Slovenia will meaningfully contribute to the maintenance of international peace and security. This milestone builds on your emergence as a vibrant democracy, a champion of good governance and rule of law, and a regional leader in promoting security and Euro-Atlantic integration in the Western Balkans.Building on our shared values as partners and NATO Allies, we grow stronger together because of our cooperation on important issues like clean and reliable energy and expanding the economic ties between our countries. I look forward to ensuring that our deep friendship continues to strengthen in the year ahead.
- Slovenia HomeReportsOffice to Monitor and Combat Trafficking in Persons2023 Trafficking in Persons Report&#8230;Slovenia				hide	document.addEventListener("DOMContentLoaded", function(event) {	if(window.jQuery) {		jQuery( document ).ready(function() {			if (jQuery(".bc_middle").hasClass("collapse")) {				jQuery(".bc_ellipse").click(function(){					jQuery(".bc_hide").toggleClass("visible");					jQuery(".bc_middle").toggle();					jQuery(".bc_ellipse").toggle();					jQuery(".bc_content").toggleClass("noflex");					jQuery(".block_breadcrumbs_content").toggleClass("noflex");				});				jQuery(".bc_hide").click(function(){					jQuery(".bc_hide").toggleClass("visible");					jQuery(".bc_middle").toggle();					jQuery(".bc_ellipse").toggle();					jQuery(".bc_content").toggleClass("noflex");					jQuery(".block_breadcrumbs_content").toggleClass("noflex");				});			} else {				jQuery(".bc_ellipse").hide();			}		});	}});																							2023 Trafficking in Persons Report: Slovenia																																					Office to Monitor and Combat Trafficking in Persons																																																																																																				 In this section										/																							SLOVENIA (Tier 2)																																													SLOVENIA (Tier 2)																															PRIORITIZED RECOMMENDATIONS:																																																																																		PROSECUTION																																																																																		PROTECTION																																																																																		PREVENTION																																																																																		TRAFFICKING PROFILE:																																																																																																								SLOVENIA (Tier 2)				The Government of Slovenia does not fully meet the minimum standards for the elimination of trafficking but is making significant efforts to do so. The government amended its anti-trafficking law, drafted updated guidance for labor inspectors to identify victims, and following a concerning case of alleged labor trafficking, hired new labor inspectors and trained labor inspectors on victim identification. The government also increased funding to victim services, cooperated with EU member states in law enforcement efforts, and continued raising awareness among children and adolescents in schools. However, these efforts were not serious and sustained compared with efforts during the previous reporting period, even considering the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic, if any, on its anti-trafficking capacity. The government investigated and prosecuted slightly more alleged traffickers than in the previous reporting period, but it did not convict any traffickers for the second consecutive year. NGOs continued to assert the government did not prosecute labor traffickers because authorities instead pursued cases as administrative labor code violations, resulting in lesser penalties and little deterrence. While funding for victim assistance and training on victim identification increased, the government identified fewer victims, and lack of proactive victim identification efforts resulted in the government not identifying any labor trafficking victims – despite reports of labor trafficking allegations – and no asylum seeker trafficking victims despite the risk of trafficking among this group. The government did not report awarding restitution or compensation to any victims. Therefore Slovenia was downgraded to Tier 2.																																					PRIORITIZED RECOMMENDATIONS:						    																																															Vigorously investigate and prosecute both sex and labor trafficking crimes and seek adequate penalties for convicted traffickers, which should involve significant prison terms.Improve efforts to proactively identify victims, especially children, males, and victims of labor trafficking.Prioritize investigation and prosecution of labor traffickers and improve coordination between labor inspectors and police.Ensure labor trafficking is investigated and prosecuted as a trafficking crime and not pursued as an administrative labor code violation.Increase training to all front-line officials on victim identification for labor trafficking and consider a partnership with NGOs for labor trafficking victim identification.Increase efforts of prosecutors to systematically request restitution for victims in criminal trials, including for both EU and non-EU citizen victims, and increase victim access to the state fund for crime victims.Allow formal victim identification by and referral from entities other than the police, including civil society, social workers, and health care professionals.Amend the definition of trafficking under Slovenian law to align more closely with the definition under international law.Enforce the elimination of recruitment fees charged to workers and ensure any recruitment fees are paid by employers.Establish a process to ensure systematic provision of care and designated facilities for child victims of trafficking, including enhanced training of caregivers and foster care parents.Appoint a national rapporteur to provide independent review of government anti-trafficking efforts.Establish a specialized police unit dedicated to investigating human trafficking, with sufficient resources, to ensure the prioritization of trafficking investigations.Increase survivor engagement, including by establishing accessible mechanisms for receiving and providing compensation for survivor input when forming policies, programs, and trainings.Increase efforts to pursue financial crime investigations in tandem with human trafficking cases.																																												PROSECUTION						    																																															The government decreased law enforcement efforts. Article 113 of the criminal code criminalized sex trafficking and labor trafficking and prescribed penalties ranging from one to 10 years’ imprisonment for offenses involving an adult victim and three to 15 years’ imprisonment for those involving a child victim or other aggravating factors. These penalties were sufficiently stringent and, with respect to sex trafficking, commensurate with those prescribed for other serious crimes, such as rape. However, inconsistent with the definition of trafficking under international law, article 113 established the use of force, fraud, or coercion as an aggravating factor rather than an essential element of the crime. In January 2023, the government amended article 113 to include forced begging as a form of trafficking and added a provision explicitly noting that government officials are also subject to the penalties prescribed under article 113.Police conducted investigations involving 10 potential trafficking cases, compared with eight case investigations in 2021. Prosecutors initiated criminal proceedings against 25 sex trafficking suspects and no legal entities, a slight increase compared with prosecutions initiated against 18 individual trafficking suspects and two legal entities in 2021. The government reported investigating suspects for labor trafficking; however, it did not prosecute any suspects for labor trafficking during the reporting period. For the second consecutive year, the government did not convict any traffickers. Pandemic-related mitigation measures in 2020 and 2021 continued to cause significant delays in judicial proceedings and court hearings; however, the government did not report how many cases were backlogged. Media reported a case of alleged labor trafficking, involving a carwash where employers allegedly confiscated foreign national employees’ passports and threatened them; media also alleged labor inspectors notified the traffickers before labor inspections. As a result, the chief labor inspector resigned in August 2022 and the labor minister announced reforms to the inspectorate, and the government hired nine labor inspectors, bringing the total to 92 by the end of 2022, an increase from the previous reporting period. The government reported its investigation into the labor trafficking case and the allegations of government complicity were ongoing at the close of the reporting period. The government did not report any prosecutions or convictions of government employees complicit in human trafficking crimes. NGOs reported judges dismissed trafficking charges in cases with indicators of sex trafficking, but later noted prosecutors appealed the decision and prosecution was ongoing in two of three cases. The government provided extensive training on anti-trafficking for 442 police officers, prosecutors, and criminal investigators; 103 labor inspectors; and 75 social workers, legal guardians, and other government officials during the reporting period; compared with 58 police officers, 19 investigators, and 42 other officials during the previous reporting period. While the government did not have a specialized anti-trafficking investigation unit, each of the eight police districts had at least one officer responsible for coordinating trafficking investigations, creating a de facto nationwide coordination network. However, NGOs expressed concern that police units responsible for investigating human trafficking were overburdened and understaffed; NGOs urged the government to establish dedicated police units to investigate and prioritize human trafficking. Several NGOs noted concerns regarding poor coordination between labor inspectors and police, which may have hindered the identification of labor trafficking cases. NGOs assessed authorities pursued possible labor trafficking cases as administrative labor code violations, resulting in lesser penalties and little deterrence.The government maintained police attachés in Austria, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatia, North Macedonia, and Serbia to assist in coordination of international cases. In September 2022, the government participated in a joint operation with 19 countries to target criminal networks using online platforms to recruit victims for sexual exploitation and trafficking, with particular emphasis on refugees from Ukraine; the operation resulted in 45 potential victims identified, 25 of whom were Ukrainian. In October 2022, the government also coordinated with 34 European countries in law enforcement actions focused on sex trafficking, forced begging, and forced criminality, resulting in the arrest of 115 suspected traffickers and identification of 910 potential victims. Additionally, the government, in cooperation with other EU member states and EUROPOL, investigated a criminal gang for alleged sex trafficking of victims from the Balkans to multiple EU countries. Finally, the prosecutor’s office reported working with the Greek Ministry of Justice and the EU Agency for Criminal Justice Cooperation on a labor trafficking case from 2019 where the alleged perpetrator was a foreign diplomat; the case remained ongoing at the close of the reporting period.																																												PROTECTION						    																																															The government decreased victim protection efforts. In 2022, the government identified three confirmed sex trafficking victims and 14 potential victims, a significant decrease compared with 40 confirmed victims and two potential victims identified in 2021. The three identified victims were adult women, two from Venezuela and one from Colombia. Experts continued to raise concerns regarding gaps in victim identification as the government again did not identify any child or asylum-seeker trafficking victims during the reporting period. The government referred and provided assistance to all three victims during the reporting period. The three victims entered the crisis housing program and then the safe accommodation program. This was an increase compared with two victims assisted in the crisis housing and safe accommodation programs in the prior reporting period. The government allocated €133,320 ($142,440) for housing victims in 2022, a slight increase compared with €119,208 ($127,360) in 2021, and comparable to funding in prior years. Government officials continued to utilize the national Manual for Identification of Victims of Trafficking in Persons. In April 2022, the government drafted updated guidelines for labor inspectors to identify victims; at the close of the reporting period the guidelines remained awaiting finalization and approval. The majority of victims continued to be proactively identified by police, and coordination between police and NGOs was strong; however, observers reported ongoing concerns regarding the under-identification of labor trafficking victims and the tendency for officials to overlook cases of labor trafficking. While both government officials and civil society could “detect” trafficking victims, only the police could formally identify victims, and formal identification by police was required for access to long-term care. Victims could request interviews with NGOs prior to meeting with law enforcement, and NGOs could accompany victims to interactions with law enforcement. Following victim identification, government regulations required police to refer victims to one of two government-funded NGOs that had formal cooperation agreements with the government to ensure adequate provision of care to victims. However, as in the previous reporting period, experts noted a lack of uniform implementation of victim referral procedures for some vulnerable groups like undocumented migrants and asylum-seekers. Police stated identifying asylum-seekers as trafficking victims was difficult in part because asylum seekers were often only in Slovenia a few days, while in transit to other EU countries. NGOs noted continued strong cooperation with police on the identification of sex trafficking victims, with NGO care-providers included in police interactions with commercial sex establishments to assist in victim identification; however, authorities did not report cooperating with such NGOs in similar operations intended to identify labor trafficking victims.The government continued to partially fund two NGOs, supplemented by private donations, which provided victims trafficking-specific crisis support and safe housing. Both NGOs were among a wider range of organizations providing services such as counseling, medical care, psycho-social support, legal representation during investigations and court proceedings, and filing of documentation for residency status. The law allowed non-EU foreign victims a 90-day reflection period during which they could remain in Slovenia while recovering and considering whether to cooperate with law enforcement in investigations. All victims, both citizens and foreign nationals, could receive crisis housing for a maximum of 30 days, after which they could enter safe accommodation for 60 days regardless of cooperation with law enforcement. Officials prepared individual assistance and protection programs for victims admitted into the safe housing accommodation. However, after 90 days, to continue to receive safe accommodation and long-term care, the law required victims receive a temporary residence permit based on either law enforcement cooperation in criminal proceedings or qualification under the “personal circumstances” amendment. A temporary residence permit for “personal circumstances” could be issued for a maximum of one year, with an option for a one-year extension. However, the government did not allow victims to work during this period. Victims cooperating in criminal proceedings could temporarily stay for 180 days or longer, if needed, for the trial of the trafficker, but had limited options to extend their stay after the conclusion of criminal proceedings. The government did not report issuing any temporary residence permits to trafficking victims during the reporting period.Both Slovenian and foreign victims had access to the same protection services and had free movement in and out of shelters. GRETA expressed concern in the past over unaccompanied child victims disappearing from public care, urging the development of more suitable accommodations for children with fully trained staff or foster parents. Although the government did not identify any child trafficking victims during the reporting period, it provided in-kind contributions for a foreign government-funded pilot project that opened a children’s facility in May 2022 to provide victim support, welfare assessments, and child-friendly criminal justice procedures for unaccompanied children and child victims of abuse, including trafficking. In 2022, the government did not budget for the operation of the facility, due to the existing foreign government funding.When participating in pretrial and criminal proceedings, victims had a right to interpretation services and a protective escort, although the government did not report how many victims received these services. All victims that entered the government’s crisis and safe accommodation program could apply for free legal aid. On March 28, 2023, the government passed amendments to the Act on Employment, Self-Employment, and Work of Foreigners granting asylum seekers the ability to legally work three months after arriving in Slovenia – which likely decreased asylum seekers’ vulnerability to labor trafficking – where previously asylum seekers were unable to legally work for nine months while awaiting their asylum case adjudication. The 2018 GRETA report urged improving the process of providing comprehensive information to victims in a language they could understand to assess their options, including participation in programs to resist re-victimization. NGOs still noted there were insufficient professional interpreters fully trained in translating the details of rights of potential trafficking victims for asylum intake proceedings. Some victims were reluctant to speak with social workers and counselors about their situations, given the same interpreters assisted in the different contexts of law enforcement investigations and court proceedings on their case.Only citizens of EU countries were eligible to apply for compensation from the state fund for crime victims; however, the government did not award compensation to any victims during the reporting period. Additionally, prosecutors did not request restitution for any victims in criminal proceedings; historically, prosecutors typically did not do this, although there were no legal barriers to prevent it, instead requiring victims to seek damages themselves in a separate civil court case. NGOs urged prosecutors to systematically request restitution for victims at criminal trials. All victims could seek damages by filing a civil suit, although most victims did not pursue compensation due to legal costs, victim re-traumatization, and the desire to avoid additional court proceedings. Upon government seizure of a trafficker’s assets, victims could file a claim for restitution or damages; however, if the victim failed to file the claim, the trafficker’s assets were subsumed into the government’s budget. Under the witness protection act, victims could provide testimony via video or written statements, and courts kept victim identities confidential.																																												PREVENTION						    																																															The government increased prevention efforts. The Ministry of Interior’s (MOI) national coordinator for counter trafficking in persons continued to head the Interdepartmental Working Group (IWG) and the government elevated the national coordinator position to the level of State Secretary. The IWG included NGO, police, and MOI representatives and met seven times during the reporting period to organize and coordinate awareness efforts, including two extraordinary sessions to strengthen public information campaigns and coordination in response to the influx of Ukrainian refugees. The MOI’s Anti-Trafficking Service Office continued to provide comprehensive support for investigators and victim service providers. The government adopted a new anti-trafficking NAP for 2023-2024 focused on trainings, awareness activities, safe accommodation, and assistance. Slovenia remained without an official independent national anti-trafficking rapporteur, a key GRETA recommendation. The government provided €10,200 ($10,900) for prevention efforts, including awareness raising projects in 2022, compared with zero during the last reporting period. The MOI continued to employ one dedicated staff member to raise awareness among children and adolescents by continuously providing workshops held in all primary and secondary schools. In partnership with an NGO, the government continued its awareness raising campaigns, with 111 workshops reaching approximately 2,000 primary and secondary school children, a large increase compared to 44 workshops reaching 750 primary and secondary school children in the prior reporting period. The government continued to host a website, in both English and Slovenian, which raised awareness of forced labor and labor exploitation through its manual for companies and employers; provided information on investigations and prosecutions; included a mechanism for contacting NGOs; and provided a portal for anonymous reporting of potential trafficking crimes. The government also continued to fund two NGO hotlines, available in several languages, offering assistance to both domestic violence and trafficking victims; the hotlines did not report the number of trafficking-related calls received, but did report one call led to police referring five potential victims in Spain to Spanish law enforcement.During the reporting period, Slovenia granted temporary protection status to more than 8,000 Ukrainian refugees. This status provides social benefits, access to education, and work permits. The government continued to issue warnings to refugees fleeing Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine regarding their vulnerability to human trafficking; increased public awareness campaigns, in coordination with NGOs; published materials in Ukrainian; and strengthened its police presence in the field.Slovenian law prohibited contract switching and the charging of placement or recruitment fees to workers, as well as passport and wage withholding. Migrant workers were able to change employers without delay or prior government permission, which may have decreased their vulnerability to trafficking. However, while the law allowed employers to pay recruitment fees, in practice, NGOs assessed the government did not effectively enforce the law and employers frequently passed these fees on to workers through salary deductions and other means. NGOs noted labor trafficking received insufficient attention and resources for effective investigations by the government. NGOs previously asserted authorities pursued many labor trafficking cases as administrative labor code violations, resulting in lesser penalties and decreased deterrence. Furthermore, authorities often prosecuted and shut down the legal entity or company rather than prosecuting the perpetrator; the perpetrator subsequently established another company under a new name and continue to exploit victims in labor trafficking. When some, but not all criteria for labor trafficking were met, the government reported that prosecutors may have pursued the criminal charge under article 196, of violation of fundamental rights of workers. While labor inspectors did not have the authority to identify trafficking victims, inspectors completed 78 inspections based on suspicion of trafficking in persons; however, inspectors did not refer any victims of labor trafficking to prosecutors. For one week in June 2022, police, labor inspectors, and the financial administration held joint activities to prevent forced labor. As a result, police detected alleged forced labor cases involving potential victims from Bangladesh. Asylum centers and an MOI-funded NGO continued to screen all new migrant and asylum arrivals for trafficking indicators, but the government did not report identifying any trafficking victims. The government signed an anti-trafficking cooperation agreement with the Republic of North Macedonia in March 2022, as part of larger efforts for cooperation with authorities across southeastern Europe; however, concrete action towards its implementation had yet to occur. The government did not make efforts to reduce the demand for commercial sex acts. The government reported training its peacekeepers on human trafficking.																																												TRAFFICKING PROFILE:						    																																															As reported over the past five years, human traffickers exploit domestic and foreign victims in Slovenia, and to a lesser extent traffickers exploit victims from Slovenia abroad. Slovenes as well as foreign workers and undocumented migrants from countries such as Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Kosovo, North Macedonia, Romania, Serbia, Slovakia, and Ukraine are vulnerable to labor trafficking, including forced begging or domestic servitude in a variety of sectors including construction, transportation, hospitality, and domestic service. Sometimes these persons are in transit to Western Europe, particularly Austria, Germany, or Italy, where traffickers exploit them in forced labor. Ukrainian refugees, predominantly women and children, fleeing Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine, are vulnerable to trafficking. Authorities reported sex traffickers targeted Ukrainian refugee women at a government-run accommodation facility. Temporary work agencies continue to exploit workers, which sometimes amounts to labor trafficking. Asylum seekers remain particularly at risk of trafficking in Slovenia. Traffickers exploit women and children from Slovenia and Eastern European, Western Balkan, Southeast Asian, and Latin American countries in sex trafficking within Slovenia; and many also transit to Western Europe, primarily Germany and Italy, where they are at risk of sexual and labor exploitation. Ethnic Roma are particularly vulnerable to trafficking, especially forced begging, in Slovenia.																																				    							View report by:																				Afghanistan											Albania											Algeria											Angola											Antigua and Barbuda											Argentina											Armenia											Aruba											Australia											Austria											Azerbaijan											The Bahamas											Bahrain											Bangladesh											Barbados											Belarus											Belgium											Belize											Benin											Bhutan											Bolivia											Bosnia and Herzegovina											Botswana											Brazil											Brunei											Bulgaria											Burkina Faso											Burma											Burundi											Cabo Verde											Cambodia											Cameroon											Canada											Central African Republic											Chad											Chile											China											Colombia											Comoros											Costa Rica											Cote d&#8217;Ivoire											Croatia											Cuba											Curaçao											Cyprus											Czech Republic											Democratic Republic of the Congo											Denmark											Djibouti											Dominican Republic											Ecuador											Egypt											El Salvador											Equatorial Guinea											Eritrea											Estonia											Eswatini											Ethiopia											Fiji											Finland											France											Gabon											The Gambia											Georgia											Germany											Ghana											Greece											Guatemala											Guinea											Guinea-Bissau											Guyana											Haiti											Honduras											Hong Kong											Hungary											Iceland											India											Indonesia											Iran											Iraq											Ireland											Israel, West Bank and Gaza											Italy											Jamaica											Japan											Jordan											Kazakhstan											Kenya											Kosovo											Kuwait											Kyrgyzstan											Laos											Latvia											Lebanon											Lesotho											Liberia											Libya											Lithuania											Luxembourg											Macau											Madagascar											Malawi											Malaysia											Maldives											Mali											Malta											Marshall Islands											Mauritania											Mauritius											Mexico											Micronesia, Federated States of											Moldova											Mongolia											Montenegro											Morocco											Mozambique											Namibia											Nepal											Netherlands											New Zealand											Nicaragua											Niger											Nigeria											North Korea											North Macedonia											Norway											Oman											Pakistan											Palau											Panama											Papua New Guinea											Paraguay											Peru											Philippines											Poland											Portugal											Qatar											Republic of the Congo											Romania											Russia											Rwanda											Saint Lucia											Saint Vincent and the Grenadines											Saudi Arabia											Senegal											Serbia											Seychelles											Sierra Leone											Singapore											Sint Maarten											Slovakia											Slovenia											Solomon Islands											Somalia											South Africa											South Korea											South Sudan											Spain											Sri Lanka											Sudan											Suriname											Sweden											Switzerland											Syria											Taiwan											Tajikistan											Tanzania											Thailand											Timor-Leste											Togo											Tonga											Trinidad and Tobago											Tunisia											Turkey											Turkmenistan											Uganda											Ukraine											United Arab Emirates											United Kingdom											United States											Uruguay											Uzbekistan											Vanuatu											Venezuela											Vietnam											Yemen											Zambia											Zimbabwe																										On This Page				search													>																										SLOVENIA (Tier 2)																PRIORITIZED RECOMMENDATIONS:																																																	PROSECUTION																																																	PROTECTION																																																	PREVENTION																																																	TRAFFICKING PROFILE:																																																							Tags																					Bureau of European and Eurasian Affairs																																Human Trafficking																															Office to Monitor and Combat Trafficking in Persons																								Slovenia