COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT 2025 Rule of Law Report Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Slovenia Accompanying the document Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions 2025 Rule of Law Report The rule of law situation in the European Union
Date: 2025-07-08
Institutions: European Commission, Secretariat-General
Subjects: Slovenia, administrative transparency, corruption, democracy, freedom of the press, human rights, independence of the judiciary, pluralism in the media, rule of law, whistleblowing

EN 

  EN 

   EUROPEAN COMMISSION  Strasbourg, 8.7.2025  SWD(2025) 924 final  COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT 2025 Rule of Law Report                             Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Slovenia Accompanying the document Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions 2025 Rule of Law Report                               The rule of law situation in the European Union {COM(2025) 900 final} - {SWD(2025) 901 final} - {SWD(2025) 902 final} - {SWD(2025) 903 final} - {SWD(2025) 904 final} - {SWD(2025) 905 final} - {SWD(2025) 906 final} - {SWD(2025) 907 final} - {SWD(2025) 908 final} - {SWD(2025) 909 final} - {SWD(2025) 910 final} - {SWD(2025) 911 final} - {SWD(2025) 912 final} - {SWD(2025) 913 final} - {SWD(2025) 914 final} - {SWD(2025) 915 final} - {SWD(2025) 916 final} - {SWD(2025) 917 final} - {SWD(2025) 918 final} - {SWD(2025) 919 final} - {SWD(2025) 920 final} - {SWD(2025) 921 final} - {SWD(2025) 922 final} - {SWD(2025) 923 final} - {SWD(2025) 925 final} - {SWD(2025) 926 final} - {SWD(2025) 927 final} - {SWD(2025) 928 final} - {SWD(2025) 929 final} - {SWD(2025) 930 final} - {SWD(2025) 931 final}  
 
 
ABSTRACT 

The  Slovenian  justice  system  saw  positive  developments,  with  safeguards  for  judicial 
independence and autonomy of prosecutors as regards parliamentary inquiries having entered 
into force. The level of remuneration of judges and state prosecutors has increased, and work 
is  ongoing  to  strengthen  the  rules  related  to  their  protection.  Amendments  to  the  judicial 
legislation  introducing  safeguards  to  the  disciplinary  framework  and  the  appointment 
procedure for Supreme Court judges, as well as reforming the judicial map are in discussion 
before  Parliament.  Plans  to  amend  the  procedure  of  promotion  and  appointment  of 
prosecutors  are  envisaged  to  address  staffing  challenges  in  State  Prosecution  Offices. 
Digitalisation  efforts  continue,  and  a  full  transition  to  electronic  communication  remains  a 
priority.  The  efficiency  gains  in  recent  years  have  not  prevented  backlogs  from  further 
increasing  and  length  of  trials  remain  a  challenge  particularly  in  money  laundering  and 
corruption  cases,  but  measures  taken  by  the  Supreme  Court  resulted  in  an  increase  of  the 
number of resolved cases. 

A new anti-corruption strategy and action plan were adopted. Efforts towards establishing a 
track  record  of  investigations,  prosecutions  and  final  judgments  in  corruption  offences 
continued.  The  Commission  for  the  Prevention  of  Corruption  called  for  more  transparency 
and integrity  in  the appointment of high-level  officials  such as the Police Director-General. 
The lobbying guidelines were updated to clarify the existing exemptions from the registration 
obligation. Transparency and clarity were improved in the updated rules on the submission of 
the  annual  reports  of  political  parties.  The  technical  capabilities  of  the  Commission  for  the 
Prevention of Corruption improved although concerns remain on staff recruitment. Efforts to 
improve transparency and competition in public procurement continued. 

The media regulator generally remains independent, while concerns exist regarding its human 
and  financial  resources,  including  in  relation  to  the  envisaged  responsibilities.  The 
independence of public service media has further improved. Some steps were made to ensure 
the adequate funding for public service media, such as a proposed revision of the financing 
model,  although  challenges  persist.  The  private  media  remain  affected  by  financial 
difficulties  and  risks  to  media  pluralism.  The  framework  for  accessing  public  information 
remains favourable.  Some further steps were taken to  improve the protection of journalists, 
yet the challenges remain. 

To address the Constitutional Court’s considerable caseload, the transfer of certain types of 
cases  to  administrative  courts  was  achieved  by  interpretation  of  legislative  changes. 
Legislative amendments would extend the competence of the Human Rights Ombudsperson 
and allow the Constitutional Court to establish the incompatibility of office of its members. 
The civic space in Slovenia continued to improve and has been upgraded to ‘open’. 

1 

 
 
 
RECOMMENDATIONS 

Overall,  concerning  the  recommendations  in  the  2024  Rule  of  Law  Report,  Slovenia  has 
(made): 

•  Fully  implemented  the  recommendation  to  finalise  the  legislative  process  to  amend  the 
rules on parliamentary inquiries with adequate safeguards for independence of judges and 
state prosecutors, taking into account European standards on judicial independence.  
•  Significant  progress  on  taking  further  measures  to  ensure  that  the  reform  of  judicial 
appointments contains adequate safeguards for judicial independence, taking into account 
European standards on judicial independence. 

•  Fully  implemented  the  recommendation  to  finalise  the  measures  to  increase  the 
remuneration of judges and state prosecutors, taking into account European standards on 
resources and remuneration for the justice system. 

•  Fully  implemented  the  recommendation  to  complete  the  adoption  of  the  new  anti-
corruption strategy and action plan and begin implementation, and some further progress 
on  taking  measures  to  ensure  a  track  record  of  investigations,  prosecutions  and  final 
judgments in corruption offences, including in high-level cases. 

•  Some  further  progress  on  the  recommendation  to  further  advance  with  the  process  of 
adopting  legislative  and  non-legislative  safeguards  to  improve  the  protection  of 
journalists, particularly online, taking into account European standards on the protection 
of journalists. 

•  Some progress on ensuring that rules or mechanisms are in place to provide funding for 
public service media that is appropriate for the realisation of its public service remit while 
guaranteeing its independence. 

On this basis, and considering other developments that took place in the period of reference, 
and  in  addition  to  recalling  the  relevant  commitments  made  under  the  Recovery  and 
Resilience Plan, it is recommended to Slovenia to: 

•  Take  further  measures  to  ensure  a  track  record  of  investigations,  prosecutions  and  final 

judgments in corruption offences, including in high-level cases.  

•  Further advance with the process of adopting legislative and non-legislative safeguards to 
improve  the  protection  of  journalists,  taking  into  account  European  standards  on  the 
protection of journalists. 

•  Complete reforms to ensure that the rules or mechanisms are in place to provide funding 
for public service media that is appropriate for the realisation of its  public service remit 
while guaranteeing its independence. 

2 

 
 
 
 
 
 
I. 

JUSTICE SYSTEM1  

Independence  

The level of perceived judicial independence in Slovenia continues to be average among 
both the general public and companies. Overall, 56% of the general population and 55% of 
companies perceive the level of independence of courts and judges to be ‘fairly or very good’ 
in  20252.  The  perceived  judicial  independence  among  the  general  public  has  significantly 
increased in  comparison with  2024  (45%), as  well as in comparison with  2021 (47%). The 
perceived judicial independence among companies has significantly increased in comparison 
with 2024 (40%) as well as in comparison with 2021 (43%).  

inquiries  are  now 

Safeguards  for  judicial  independence  and  autonomy  of  prosecutors  as  regards 
parliamentary 
the  2024 
recommendation3. Amendments to the Parliamentary Inquiries Act in July 2024, introduced 
safeguards for judicial independence and autonomy of prosecutors. The legislation allows a 
request  to  the  Constitutional  Court  to  decide  on  the  constitutional  conformity  of  any 
parliamentary  inquiry,  including  in  relation  to  judicial  independence  and  autonomy  of 
prosecutors4.  As  the  amendments  entered  into  force  on  4  January  20255,  the  2024  Rule  of 
Law Recommendation has been fully implemented. 

implementing 

force, 

fully 

in 

Proposed  amendments  to  the  Judicial  Council  Act  and  a  new  Judges  Act  aim  to 
overhaul  the  disciplinary  framework  for  judges.  Following  the  public  consultation  in 
autumn 2023, the Government on 16 May 2025 submitted to Parliament the amendments to 
the Judicial Council Act which focus on the transparency and judicial review in elections of 
judge-members of the Council, and on more detailed provisions on withdrawal and recusal, 
with  the  aim  of  preventing  potential  conflicts  of  interests  and  ensure  the  impartiality  of 
Judicial  Council  members,  both  in  disciplinary  matters  and  judicial  appointments6.  The 
amendments would also limit the term of office of Council members to a single six-year term. 
The  procedural  changes  in  the  Judicial  Council  Act  concern  the  regulation  of  disciplinary 
prosecutors, the suspension of judges during disciplinary proceedings, and the legal remedy 
against  a  disciplinary  decision.  The  amendments  also  envisage 
the 
unconstitutionality of certain provisions on disciplinary proceedings by removing the Judicial 
Council’s power to initiate disciplinary proceedings regarding judges7. A new ground for the 

to  address 

1  An overview of the institutional framework for all four pillars can be found here.  
2   Figures 50 and 52, 2025 EU Justice Scoreboard and Figures 51 and 53,  2024 EU Justice Scoreboard. The 
level  of  perceived  judicial  independence  is  categorised  as  follows:  very  low  (below  30%  of  respondents 
perceive judicial independence as fairly good and very good); low (between 30-39%), average (between 40-
59%), high (between 60-75%), very high (above 75%). 

3    The  2024  Rule  of  Law  Report  recommended  Slovenia  to  ‘[f]inalise  the  legislative  process  to  amend  the 
rules on parliamentary inquiries with adequate safeguards for independence of judges and state prosecutors, 
taking into account European standards on judicial independence’. 

4    This  request  may  be  made  by  one  third  of  all  deputies  (who  have  not  submitted  the  request  for  the 
parliamentary  inquiry),  the  Judicial  Council  or  the  State  Prosecutorial  Council.  Until  the  decision  of  the 
Court, the proposed parliamentary inquiry may not be established. 

5    The entry into force was delayed due to an initiative to hold a referendum on the amendments. In November 
2024, the Constitutional Court held that a referendum would not be permissible as the amendments aim at 
addressing  the  unconstitutionality  established  in  two  Constitutional  Court  judgments.  Judgment  of  the 
Slovenian Constitutional Court, U-I-109/24, Slovenian Parliament, written input, pp. 19-20, and 2024 Rule 
of Law Report, Slovenia, p. 4. 

6    Country visit Slovenia, Judicial Council. 
7   2024 Rule of Law Report, Slovenia, pp. 4-5. 

3 

 
 
 
termination of the mandate of a Judicial Council member is envisaged, namely the member’s 
appointment as the president or vice-president of a court, in view of the Council’s extensive 
competences regarding the selection, appointment, and dismissal of court presidents and vice-
presidents. On 16 May 2025, the Government submitted to Parliament the new Judges Act, 
which  would  provide,  on  the  initiative  by  the  judiciary,  for  a  more  precise  definition  of 
disciplinary  offences  and  clearer  procedures  for  the  evaluation  of  the  judicial  work  by  a 
special body and as the basis for a judge’s promotion.   

A refocus towards safeguards in the appointment of Supreme Court judges constitutes 
significant  progress  on  the  recommendation  concerning  the  judicial  appointments 
reform8.  Previous  Rule  of  Law  Reports  noted  a  lack  of  adequate  safeguards  for  judicial 
independence  in  the  reform  of  judicial  appointments9.  In  2024,  due  to  lack  of  quorum,  the 
Parliament’s  Constitutional  Commission  did  not  continue  the  process  of  the  constitutional 
revision  regarding  appointment  of  judges,  which  had  been  initiated  with  the  aim  of 
transferring  the  power  to  appoint  first-time  judges  from  Parliament  to  the  President  of  the 
Republic10. On 16 May 2025, the Government submitted to Parliament the new Judges Act 
which would transfer the power to appoint Supreme Court judges (if the candidate is already 
a  judge)  from  Parliament  to  the  Judicial  Council.  The  revised  procedure  would  allow  for 
judicial  review  of  the  appointment  of  Supreme  Court  judges  and  the  appointment  decision, 
would  also  need  to  be  reasoned.  Additionally,  the  proposed  amendments  to  the  Judicial 
Council  Act  aim  at  strengthening  the  guarantees  in  the  selection  procedure  for  judges 
conducted by the Judicial Council11. However, Parliament would keep the power to appoint 
the Supreme Court President, which would not be, as envisaged previously, transferred to the 
Judicial Council, and the Supreme Court expressed concerns about Parliament’s influence in 
the  appointment  process12.  Considering  that  the  proposed  legislative  amendments  contain 
adequate safeguards in judicial appointment of Supreme Court judges, there was significant 
progress on the 2024 Rule of Law Report recommendation.  

Work  is  ongoing  to  strengthen  rules  on  protection  measures  for  judges  and  state 
prosecutors. In 2024, incidents involving judges and state prosecutors13 led to a reflection on 
whether  the  regulations  are  appropriate  to  ensure  their  protection.  In  November  2024,  the 
Ministry  of  Justice  established  an  interdepartmental  working  group  consisting  of  the 
representatives  of  ministries,  the  police,  the  judiciary  and  state  prosecution  to  develop 
systemic solutions for enhancing protection14. Its objective is, amongst others, to review, by 

8   The 2024 Rule of Law Report recommended Slovenia to ‘[t]ake further measures to ensure that the reform 
of  judicial  appointments  contains  adequate  safeguards  for  judicial  independence,  taking  into  account 
European standards on judicial independence’. 

9   2024 Rule of Law Report, Slovenia, pp. 6-7. In the past, Parliament rejected several candidates for Supreme 
Court judges (three between 2018 and 2022 alone) or a candidate for the President of the Supreme Court (in 
2010). 2023 Rule of Law Report, Slovenia, p. 6. 

10   The proposed changes to the composition of the Judicial Council also stalled. Slovenian Parliament, written 

input, p. 20.  

11    See  previous  paragraph.  The  amendments  envisage  that  the  Council’s  decision  on  the  selection  of  a 
candidate  for  a  vacant  judicial  position  should  contain  an  assessment  of  the  fulfilment  of  all  criteria  and 
reasoning why the selected candidate meets them, or why the selected candidate meets the criteria best. 

12   Country visit Slovenia, the Ministry of Justice and the Supreme Court. 
13   These security incidents included an arson attack on a court president’s private house, alleged irregularities 
in how the Police exercised protective measures over a state prosecutor at the Specialised State Prosecution 
Office, and statements made by protesters about judges and the State Prosecutor General in front of a court 
during a hearing. Association of judges condemned the arson attack. Association of judges (2024). 

14   Country visit Slovenia, Ministry of Justice. 

4 

 
 
 
the  end  of  2025,  the  regulations  on  protection  measures,  legal  safeguards,  and  personal 
assistance,  evaluate  systemic  responses  to  severe  security  incidents  against  officials,  and 
formulate proposals for systemic improvements in judicial officials’ protection. The Ministry 
of  the  Interior  is  preparing  amendments  to  the  Regulation  on  the  protection  of  certain 
persons,  which  would  change  the  protocol  regulating  cooperation  between  the  Police,  the 
protected  judge/state  prosecutor  (and  their  superiors),  the  adjustment  period  for  a  protected 
person, the conditions for revoking protection, and regarding the jurisdiction of the superior 
of  the  protected  person  in  the  protection  process.  In  December  2024,  the  Parliament 
Committee on Justice addressed the attacks on the judiciary and efforts to discredit it, as well 
as the responsibility of politicians to respect the judiciary and uphold the rule of law15.  

Quality  

implemented 

Full  transition  to  electronic  communication  in  administrative,  civil  and  commercial 
cases remains a priority, while pilot trials are planned for criminal cases. Advanced case 
management tools are used for all courts and by the Supreme Court to assist in the allocation 
of  resources.  The  electronic  communication  tools  show  only  small  improvements,  while 
advances  could  be  made  particularly  in  the  State  Prosecution  Offices,  and  before  courts  in 
criminal, civil and administrative cases16. In 2025, the full transition to e-communication in 
administrative, civil and commercial cases for all courts and participants in court proceedings 
remained a priority task for the Ministry of Justice and the Supreme Court, and several tools 
were  being 
to  equip  19  courts  with 
in  2025.  The  Ministry  aims 
videoconferencing  systems  by  mid-2026,  enabling  remote  hearings.  It  is  also  developing  a 
solution  for  e-authentications  with  a  centralised  register.  In  2024,  a  speech-to-text 
application,  aiming  to  address  staffing  challenges,  was  implemented  in  all  courts.  The 
introduction of electronic communication in criminal cases remains a priority as well, despite 
delays  in  upgrading  IT  systems  of  State  Prosecution  Service  and  the  Supreme  Court.  The 
Ministry of Justice established a working  group in  2024, tasked to  identify and address  the 
delays. The transfer of e-documents between the police units and prosecution service is being 
tested,  and  all  police  units  would  be  included  in  202517.  The  application  for  viewing  and 
annotating  electronic  court  cases  is  currently  in  use  in  district  courts  in  insolvency  cases, 
while its use in civil and criminal procedure was being tested in  beginning of 2025. All the 
staff at the Administrative Court have been trained for transition to the transition to electronic 

15   Among its conclusions, it strongly condemned the protests held in front of a court organised with the intent 

of exerting pressure on the judiciary. Parliament (2025), written input, p. 16. 

16   2025  EU  Justice  Scoreboard.  In  2024,  apart  from  the  improvements  in  machine-readability  of  judicial 
decisions (Figure 48), no change was made in the digitalisation of justice compared to the situation in 2023. 
Figures  40-48,  2025  EU  Justice  Scoreboard.  Since  September  2024,  filing  of  electronic  applications  and 
documents via the e-Justice portal, including electronic communication, is also possible in judicial redress 
procedures  of  former  holders  of  qualifying  liabilities  of  banks.  Slovenian  Government  (2025b),  written 
input, p. 7. 

17   However, the plan to start pilot testing of e-communication between prosecution service and district court in 
Kranj  was  postponed  from  January  to  autumn  2025  (in  2025,  additional  testing  and  adjustment  of  e-
communication between the Supreme Court and the Supreme State Prosecution Office took place). As part 
of RRF, the eSpis application has begun additional upgrades to enable integration with judicial procedure 
systems  and  to  ensure  electronic  access  for  participants  and  their  legal  representatives  to  electronic  case 
files.  A  new  security  scheme  is  being  implemented,  and  the  e-Justice  portal  –  through  which  parties  and 
their legal representatives carry out electronic actions in digitally supported court procedures – is also being 
updated. Slovenian Government (2025a). 

5 

 
 
 
communication, planed in autumn 202518. The implementation of real-time subtitling of court 
hearings  for  hearing  impaired  users  is  planned  for  2025,  as  well  as  an  IT  solution  for 
recording  and  managing  financial  obligations  in  the  judiciary  for  the  criminal  and  later  for 
other judicial proceedings.  

Proposed amendments on judicial map reform would merge first instance District and 
Local  Courts.  As  stated  in  past  Rule  of  Law  Reports,  the  split  between  the  first  instance 
courts  has  long  been  identified  as  affecting  the  efficiency  of  the  courts,  and  the  previous 
attempts to conclude this reform have not been successful19. On 16 May 2025, Government 
submitted  to  Parliament  the  new  Courts  Act  which  would  merge  District  and  Local  Courts 
(and keep 11 District Courts only, making all first instance judges into District Court judges), 
while  retaining  the  geographical  distribution  of  court  units20.  The  primary  objective  is  to 
equalise the workload across the eleven judicial districts, thereby enhancing the efficiency of 
courts.  The  proposed  law  also  emphasises  the  responsibility  of  court  presidents  for  the 
effective  functioning  of  the  court21.  The  Judicial  Council  has  stated  its  support  for  this 
optimisation but warned of two past unsuccesful reforms which negatively affected the length 
of court proceedings22. With regard to the network of local courts, the Judicial Council found 
that an analysis would be appropriate to determine whether any of them should be abolished, 
as some operate with only one or two judges but with a larger number of public servants who 
could be more effectively reassigned to other courts. 

With  the  increases  in  the  level  of  remuneration  of  judges  and  state  prosecutors  the 
recommendation  is  fully  implemented23.  Following  a  Constitutional  Court  judgment  in 
June  202424,  the  Government  increased  the  salaries  of  judges  and  state  prosecutors  by 

18   In  June 2025,  testing of  electronic  serving  to  public  bodies  was  nearing  its  end.  A  significant  part of  the 
digitalisation  investments  is  co-funded  from  the  Recovery  and  Resilience  Facility  (Target  no.  105), 
requiring the authorities to finalise them by June 2026. The Supreme Court continues to upgrade and further 
develop IT tools to facilitate the decision-making process such as the collaborative virtual sessions (eSEJE), 
the internal search engine and the smart query (DoR) to identify and classify submissions and assess them 
against  past  decision.  By  mid-2026,  the  Supreme  Court  is  set  to  establish  the  national  Central 
Documentation Digitalisation Centre (CDDC), which would take over the process of digitalising documents 
from  all  courts,  while  the  Supreme  State  Prosecutor's  Office  should  fully  implement  the  AI  tool  Virtual 
Assistant to facilitate  the decision-drafting process and set up the  Green Meeting Room system to enable 
teleworking. Slovenian Government (2025a), and Slovenian Government (2025b), written input, p. 7. 
19    Currently, the court system has 55 first instance courts (44 Local Courts and 11 District Courts). 2024 Rule 
of Law Report, Slovenia, p. 10. As a partial remedy, the 2009 and 2015 reforms brought Local Courts under 
the stronger control of District Courts in order to even-out the caseload and reduce jurisdictional conflicts. 
2020 Rule of Law Report, Slovenia, p. 5. 

20    Local  Courts  would  be  transformed  into  external  departments,  which  would  continue  to  operate  in  their 
local environments. The law also provides for an evaluation of the district court network after two  years of 
operation. On 16 May 2025, the Government submitted to Parliament amendments to the State Prosecution 
Office Act, which would  align the status of prosecutors with the new  framework for judges (unified title, 
rights, and responsibilities). 

21    Court  presidents’  key  task  would  be  to  ensure  efficient  operation,  balanced  workload  among  judges,  and 
timely  case  resolution.  The  proposed  law  would  introduce  mandatory  regular  internal  audits  of  the  court 
administration every three years, would shorten the term of court presidents (from six to five years) with the 
possibility of one reappointment at the same court, and would enables the suspension of a court president. 

22    Country visit Slovenia, Judicial Council. 
23    The  2024  Rule  of  Law  Report  recommended  Slovenia  to  ‘[f]inalise  the  measures  to  increase  the 
remuneration  of  judges  and  state  prosecutors,  taking  into  account  European  standards  on  resources  and 
remuneration for the justice system’. 

24    The  level  of  remuneration  of  judges  and  state  prosecutors  was  largely  unchanged  since  2012.  The  2024 

Rule of Law Report, Slovenia, pp. 8-9.  

6 

 
 
 
12.35%  starting  from  January  202425.  Additionally,  as  part  of  the  larger  public  salaries 
reform, a new Common Foundations of the Public Sector Salary System Act was adopted in 
October  2025,  which  led  to  the  higher  salary  grade  classifications  of  judges  and  state 
prosecutors. The salary increases started in January 2025 and will be implemented gradually 
until  January  2028  for  all  public  employees,  including  for  judges  and  state  prosecutors.  In 
addition, an automatic indexation mechanism was introduced into the law: if no agreement is 
reached through negotiations, salary grades will be by law automatically adjusted by 80% of 
the  increase  in  the  cost  of  living.  Representatives  of  the  judiciary  nevertheless  noted  that 
compared  to  the  legislative  and  the  executive  branch,  salaries  are  still  lower  in  the  judicial 
branch26. Considering that the salaries of judges and state prosecutors were increased and that 
an  automatic  indexation  mechanism  was  introduced,  the  2024  Rule  of  Law  Report 
recommendation was fully implemented. 

Plans  to  amend  the  procedure  of  promotion  and  appointment  of  prosecutors  are 
envisaged  to  address  staffing  challenges  in  State  Prosecution  Offices.  As  noted  in  the 
2021  and  2022  Rule  of  Law  Reports,  State  Prosecution  Offices  experienced  staffing 
shortages due to  unjustifiable delays in  appointments of state prosecutors, which were later 
resolved27. However, due  to  the prolonged appointment and promotion procedures for state 
prosecutors, lasting 12 months on average, the negative effects of past delays continue and, at 
the end of 2024, only 216 out of 268 state prosecutor posts were occupied, only 3,8% more 
than at the end of 202328. According to the procedure, the Government approves not only the 
appointment  of  new  state  prosecutors,  but  also  promotion  into  a  higher  position  (e.g.  from 
local  state  prosecutor  to  district  state  prosecutor)  –  following  a  proposal  from  the  State 
Prosecutorial Council. Consequently, a procedure to appoint a new state prosecutor following 
the  promotion  of  an  existing  state  prosecutor  could  last  up  to  two  years  in  total29. 
Amendments to the State Prosecution Office Act are envisaged for 2026 that would transfer 
the  power  to  promote  state  prosecutors  from  the  Government  to  the  State  Prosecutorial 
Council, shortening the procedures30. 

Efficiency 

The  efficiency  gains  in  recent  years  have  not  prevented  backlogs  from  further 
increasing and the length of trials remain a challenge, particularly in money laundering 
and  corruption  cases.  Based  on  2023  comparative  data,  the  justice  system  continued  to 
function  efficiently  overall,  except  in  administrative  cases,  where  courts  continued  to 
experience challenges in managing the increasing caseload31. In 2024, according to the latest 
Supreme Court data, in total, all courts received 4% more cases and resolved 4% more cases 
than in 2023, which continued to reverse the past positive trends and again slightly increased, 

25    Slovenian Government, written input, p. 1. 
26    For example, in January 2025, the salary of a first instance (local court) judge was about  14% lower than 
the starting salary of a member of Parliament (by January 2028, the salary of the first instance judges would 
be  9%  lower,  if,  following  the  judicial  map  reform,  all  local  court  judges  would  become  district  court 
judges),  while  the  salary  of  a  Supreme  Court  judge  was  about  8%  higher  than  that  of  a  minister  (to  be 
equalised by January 2028). Country visit Slovenia, Ministry of Public Administration, Judicial Council and 
Association of Judges, and Slovenian Government (2025a). 

27    2023 Rule of Law Report, Slovenia, pp. 4-5. 
28    Slovenian Government (2025b), written input, p. 4 and country visit Slovenia, State Prosecutor General and 

State Prosecutorial Council.  

29    Country visit Slovenia, State Prosecutor General and State Prosecutorial Council.  
30    Country visit Slovenia, Ministry of Justice and State Prosecution Office. 
31   Figures 1 – 14, 2025 EU Justice Scoreboard.  

7 

 
 
 
by  3%,  the  total  backlog  of  cases  at  the  end  of  202432.  This  continued  slight  decrease  in 
efficiency could be seen in most courts, except in local, labour and social courts. In 2024, the 
average  length  of  proceedings  at  first  instance  courts  slightly  increased  in  civil  cases  but 
remained stable in commercial cases and decreased in criminal cases33. The time needed for 
the first instance courts to conduct the first hearing stagnated, taking up to 21 months in civil 
and 16 months in commercial cases34. At first instance criminal courts, the average length in 
2023  increased  in  money  laundering  offences  (926  days)  and  decreased  in  corruption 
offences  (526  days)  –  remaining  the  third  and  second  longest  in  the  EU35.  The  continued 
increase  in  the  administrative  courts’  caseload  in  administrative  courts  (by  7%  in  2024, 
compared to 2023) has led to a further increase in pending cases (by 6% end 2024), despite a 
further 7% increase in resolved cases and increased efficiency of judges. At the first-instance 
Administrative  Court,  the  average  length  of  proceedings  decreased  (by  1  month)  to  15.8 
months36. 

Measures taken by the Supreme Court resulted in an increase in the number of resolved 
cases. The Supreme Court identified a shortage of court staff, new competences assigned to 
courts by the legislation (especially in  administrative courts), complex procedural  rules and 
inadequate  courthouses  as  the  main  factors  affecting  the  performance  of  the  courts37.  It 
identified measures which seek to ensure that the number of resolved cases in courts remains 
at least at the level of previous years. Proposals include the unification of case registration in 
all  courts,  increased  support  for  court  operations  by  the  Ministry  of  Justice,  and  some 
legislation  changes.  In  commercial  cases,  it  found  that  pending  cases  are  due  to  higher 
number of incoming cases and increased complexity of cases, including high value of claims 
and  specialised  exclusive  competences.  Proposed  activities  include  transfer  of  cases  to  less 
burdened  courts,  unification  of  case  registration  and  implementation  of  case-weighting, 
additional judges and assistance from other courts. The work of the Administrative Court is 
closely  monitored.  The  Supreme  Court  has  set  ambitious  timeframes  for  all  courts  to 
encourage  them  to  resolve cases  more  efficiently and  is  also  developing unified criteria for 
quality  of  work  of  courts,  encompassing  formal  court  management  measures  and  best 
practices. In 2024, timeframes for some procedures have already been fully met (particularly 
at  appellate  courts  of  general  jurisdiction  and  social  disputes).  Following  the  gradual 
implementation of measures, the number of resolved cases started to increase (by 4% in 2024 
in total, compared to 2023)38.  

32   Supreme Court (2025), written input. 
33   In 2024, the average length at district courts was 25,7 months in large value civil cases (about two years in 
2023), 13 months in litigious commercial cases, and 20,7 months in more serious criminal cases (21,2 in 
2023, and 18,5 months in 2022). Country visit Slovenia, Supreme Court. 

34   Values for first instance district courts. 
35   Average length in money laundering cases was 631 days in 2023 and 1 043 days in 2022, while in bribery 

cases it was 889 days in 2023 and 793 days in 2022. Figures 21 and 22, 2025 EU Justice Scoreboard. 

36   Supreme Court (2025), written input, and Slovenian Government (2025a). 
37    Country visit Slovenia, Supreme Court. 
38    Supreme Court (2025), written input. 

8 

 
 
 
 
 
II. 

ANTI-CORRUPTION FRAMEWORK  

The  perception  among  experts,  citizens  and  business  executives  is  that  the  level  of 
corruption in the public sector is relatively low. In the 2024 Corruption Perceptions Index 
by  Transparency  International,  Slovenia  scores  60/100  and  ranks  13th  in  the  EU  and  36th 
globally39.  This  perception  has  been  relatively  stable  over  the  past  5  years40.  The  2025 
Special  Eurobarometer  on  Corruption  shows  that  85%  of  respondents  consider  corruption 
widespread  in  their  country  (EU  average  69%)  and  33%  of  respondents  feel  personally 
affected by corruption in their daily lives (EU average 30%). As regards businesses, 84% of 
companies consider that corruption is widespread (EU average 63%) and 42% consider that 
corruption  is  a  problem  when  doing  business  (EU  average  35%).  Furthermore,  26%  of 
respondents find that there are enough successful prosecutions to deter people from  corrupt 
practices  (EU  average  36%),  while  13%  of  companies  believe  that  people  and  businesses 
caught for bribing a senior official are appropriately punished (EU average 33%)41. 

The  recommendation  to  adopt  the  new  anti-corruption  strategy  and  action  plan  was 
fully  implemented42.  The  new  Resolution  on  the  prevention  of  corruption  was  adopted  by 
Parliament  on  28  March  2025.  The  Resolution  takes  a  strategic  and  ‘whole-of-society’ 
approach,  covering  the  public  and  private  sectors,  civil  society,  media,  and  the  public.  It 
provides  sector-  and  policy-specific  objectives  to  mitigate  corruption  risks,  increase 
transparency,  integrity  and  accountability,  and  strengthen  the  enforcement  of  rules  on 
conflicts of interest, lobbying, political party financing, public procurement, public spending 
and whistleblower protection. It sets out that appointments to public sector and state-owned 
bodies must be free from undue influence, that the effectiveness of the prosecution of corrupt 
practices must be improved, and that cooperation between supervisory institutions and public 
sector  cooperation  with  civil  society  must  be  strengthened.  The  Commission  for  the 
the 
Prevention  of  Corruption  (CPC)  adopted 
Implementation  of  the  Resolution  on  23  June  2025.  The  Action  Plan  includes  concrete 
measures to address the strategy’s broader and more strategic objectives, including those with 
high  corruption risks, and with  specific timelines for their implementation. Amendments to 
the Action Plan over time will be possible to reflect evolving risks. In March 2025, a working 
group was set up to determine whether the Integrity and Prevention of Corruption Act (IPCA) 
requires  updating43.  In  view  of  these  developments,  the  2024  Rule  of  Law  Report 
recommendation has been fully implemented. 

the  corresponding  Action  Plan  for 

Some further progress was made towards establishing a track record of investigations, 
prosecutions  and  final  judgments  in  corruption  offences44.  In  2024,  several  open  and 
major  investigations  from  previous  years  were  concluded  by  the  police,  which  overall 

39   The level of perceived corruption is categorised as follows: low (above 79); relatively low (between 79-60), 

relatively high (between 59-50), high (below 50). 

40   In 2020, the score was 60, while in 2023 the score is 60. The score significantly increases/decreases when it 
changes  more  than  five  points;  improves/deteriorates  (changes  between  4-5  points);  is  relatively  stable 
(changes from 1-3 points) in the last 5 years. 

41   Data from Special Eurobarometer 561 (2025) and Flash Eurobarometer 557 (2025). 
42   The 2024 Rule of Law Report recommended Slovenia to ‘complete the adoption of the new anti-corruption 

strategy and action plan and begin implementation’. 

43   The  Action  Plan  is  conceived  as  a  living  document.  The  CPC  must  report  on  implementation  annually. 
Slovenian Government (2025b), written input, p. 10. Country visit Slovenia, Ministry of Justice, Ministry of 
Public Administration, Parliament Secretariat, the CPC and Transparency International. 

44   The  2024  Rule  of  Law  Report  recommended  Slovenia  ’to  take  measures  to  ensure  a  track  record  of 
investigations, prosecutions and final judgments in corruption offences, including in high-level cases’. 

9 

 
 
 
transmitted  to  the  state  prosecution  offices  many  more  corruption  cases  and  crimes  with 
elements of corruption (695 cases) compared to 2023 (212 cases)45. Looking at the six main 
corruption offences, in 2024 the State Prosecution Office managed to reduce the backlog of 
unresolved criminal notifications (181; 375 in 2023), although there were considerably fewer 
indictments  and  convictions46  and  no  foreign  bribery  cases  were  reported  or  investigated47. 
While  no  judgments  have  been  delivered  since  2020  in  high-level  corruption  cases, 
investigations  and  prosecutions  are  progressing  in  some  high-level  cases48.  Operational 
cooperation and training between  the Specialised State Prosecutor’s Office and the General 
Police  Directorate  on  the  investigation  of  corruption  offences  intensified49.  Following  the 
2024 internal peer review that found deficiencies in the effectiveness of prosecutions of local 
officials,  mainly  relating  to  abuse  of  functions  and  misuse  of  public  financing  resources,  a 
specialised  working  group  was  established  to  develop  and  share  best  practices,  develop 
uniform or comparable approaches to the conduct of pre-trial proceedings. Targeted training 
of  state  prosecutors  started  in  December  202450.  At  the  same  time,  the  state  prosecution 
reported that their capacity to access information and to collect evidence on natural persons, 
including banking information, in an efficient way has been impacted by the changes to the 
Criminal  Procedural  Code  enacted  last  year,  as  a  judicial  decision  is  now  required  for  the 
acquisition of such data, which may also affect international cooperation51. On 16 May 2025, 
the  Government  submitted  to  Parliament  amendments  to  the  State  Prosecution  Office  Act, 
which aim to contribute to more effective prosecution of corruption by facilitating the filling 
of state prosecutor’s post at the Specialised State Prosecutor’s Office . Cooperation between 
the  European  Public  Prosecutor’s  Office  and  the  national  prosecution  offices  continues  to 
work  well52.  In  light  of  these  developments,  there  has  been  some  further  progress  in  the 
implementation of the recommendation made in the 2024 Rule of Law Report. 

45   These  data  concern  ten  offences,  among  them  six  classical  corruption  offences,  as  well  as  two  offences 
relating to abuse of position and two relating to electoral process. They involved 130 natural persons and 16 
legal persons. Slovenian Government and Police Economic Crime Division (2025), written input, p. 21, and 
p.  1,  respectively,  and  country  visit  Slovenia,  Ministry  of  Interior,  Police  and  NBI,  and  Prosecution 
Services.  

46   In  2024,  state  prosecutors  requested  investigative  judges  to  conduct  12  investigations  (89  in  2023)  and 
launched 13 indictments (33 in 2023) on corruption. Courts adjudicated 15 corruption cases at first instance 
(29 in 2023), handed down 11 convictions (21 in 2023), 3 acquittals (4 in 2023) and 1 dismissal (4 in 2023), 
and  imposed  4  prison  sentences  (12  in  2023)  and  7  conditional  sentences  (8  in  2023).  Slovenian 
Government (2025b), written input, p. 18. 

47   The  OECD  Working  Group on  Bribery  carried out  a  high-level  mission  to  Slovenia  in  February  2025  to 

discuss its concerns relating to the implementation of the OECD Anti-Bribery Convention. OECD (2025).  

48   These include an ongoing trial involving a former Prime Minister concerning a controversial land purchase, 
a  criminal  investigation  into  a  criminal  complaint  against  the  current  Prime  Minister  in  relation  to 
irregularities  in  political  interference  in  the  appointment  of  the  former  Police  Director-General  (who 
resigned in January 2025) and a criminal pre-trial procedure concerning the procurement of premises by the 
ex-Minister  of  Justice.  Slovenian  Government  (2025b),  written  input  pp.  18-21;  Country  visit  Slovenia, 
Specialised State Prosecution Office and the Police.  

49   Slovenian Government (2025b), written input, pp. 10 and 21-22.  
50    Country visit Slovenia, State Prosecutor General. 
51   Country visit Slovenia, State Prosecutor General, Supreme State Prosecution Office and Specialised State 
Prosecution Office. The 2024 amendments to the Criminal Procedure Act limit the possibility for Police and 
prosecutors to access certain financial or communications data. As explained by the Ministry of Justice, the 
changes to the Criminal Procedure Act regarding the collection of banking information of natural persons 
implement the  judgment of the Constitutional Court U-I-144/19_3  of 6 July 2023.  See also 2024 Rule of 
Law Report, Slovenia, p. 15 and related footnotes.  

52   EPPO  (2025),  written  input,  pp.  53-55.  In  2024,  none  of  the  EPPO  investigations  in  Slovenia  concerned 

corruption offences, EPPO (2025), Annual Report 2024, p.55.  

10 

 
 
 
to  change  and 

Recommendations  were  issued  to  improve  the  transparency  and  integrity  in  the 
appointment  of  high-level  officials  including  the  Police  Director-General.  In  November 
2024,  an  Administrative  Court  judgment  found  irregularities  in  the  procedure  for  the 
appointment of the Police Director-General in September 2023, who subsequently resigned in 
January 202553. The Commission for the Prevention of Corruption (CPC) concluded its own-
initiative  investigation  into  a  possible  infringement  of  the  Integrity  and  Prevention  of 
Corruption  Act  in  relation  to  that  appointment.  On  20  March  2025,  it  issued  two 
the  selection  procedures  for  high-level 
recommendations 
appointments to ensure greater transparency and integrity in decision-making, improve public 
trust and avoid corruption risks, which closely align with the findings of the Administrative 
Court judgement 54. The selection procedure for a new Director-General  started in April 2025 
and is still ongoing. Changes announced to the Police Tasks and Powers Act to improve the 
supervision of police work and prevent any political influence in decision-making in 2024 are 
envisaged for end 2025. Amendments to the relevant provision in the Organisation and Work 
of  the  Police  Act  (Art.  47)  are  being  discussed  among  Ministries  to  address  some  of  the 
issues  regarding  the  appointment  and  dismissal  of  the  Director  General  of  the  Police.  A 
working  group  to  coordinate  the  implementation  of  the  Resolution  on  the  National 
Programme for the Prevention and Suppression of Crime (2024-2028) held its first meeting in 
January 2025 to discuss an action plan and next steps55.  

improve 

The technical capabilities of the Commission for the Prevention of Corruption are being 
improved  although  further  measures  are  needed  to  improve  recruitment.  In  2024  and 
2025, the CPC continued upgrading its publicly accessible web portal ‘ERAR’ to modernise 
and  enhance  the  presentation,  accessibility  and  transparency  of  data  on  the  expenditure  of 
public funds as well as information on asset declarations, lobbying and business restrictions. 
However,  the  March  2025  ‘ERAR’  upgrade  uncovered  multiple  errors  regarding  data  on 
public spending, apparently originating in the underlying databases from which the data were 
extracted  as  well  as  the  huge  amount  of  data  involved56.  The  CPC’s  internal  system  and 
database  ‘Corruptio’  is  also  being  upgraded  so  as  to  provide  a  ‘one-stop-shop’  to  submit 
reports  under  the  Integrity  and  Prevention  of  Corruption  Act  and  improve  the  efficiency  of 
the  CPC’s  monitoring  of  the  reporting  obligations.  The  overall  aim  is  to  strengthen 
transparency  and  oversight,  reduce  corruption  risks  and  boost  integrity.  The  CPC’s  2025 
budget was increased for technical support, although more is needed to employ additional in-

53   In  the  judgment  I  U  1401/2023-85,  the  Administrative  Court  found  that  the  act  of  the  Special  Selection 
Board  of  the  Council  of  Officials  was  unlawful  due  to  insufficient  reasoning  as  to  why  the  selected 
candidate fulfilled the required leadership experience criterion. The parliamentary inquiry and the pre-trial 
investigation  initiated  in  2024  into  allegations  of  undue  political  influence  in  this  appointment  are  still 
ongoing. See also 2024 Rule of Law Report, Slovenia, p. 16 and related footnotes.  

54   The  CPC’s  recommendations  call  for  changes  to  the  Government’s  rules  of  procedure  to  ensure  that 
decisions on appointments or dismissals are more detailed, reasoned and justified. CPC (2025e) and CPC 
(2025f).  The  CPC  had  made similar  recommendations  to  the  Government  in  December 2022.  One  of  the 
objectives of the 2025 Resolution on the Prevention of Corruption is for all stages of the appointment and 
recruitment  procedures  in  the  public  sector  to  be  transparent,  independent  of  undue  influence  and  ensure 
equal treatment of persons, pp. 8 and 22-23.  

55   The  Working  Group  is  led  by  the  Police  and  includes  representatives  from  the  relevant  ministries, 
prosecution  offices,  the  Court  of  Audit  and  the  FIU  amongst  others.  One  deliverable  is  an  international 
conference held in May 2025 bringing together foreign and domestic experts in the field of protection of 
national  and  EU  financial  interests,  and  the  fight  against  corruption.  Slovenian  Government  (2025b), 
additional written input, p. 10, and country visit Slovenia, Government.  

56    The  CPC  has  since  apologised  for  the  detected  malfunctions  and  has  taken  steps  to  rectify  the  situation. 

CPC (2025d) and Country visit Slovenia, CPC. 

11 

 
 
 
house  experts  to  manage  these  complex  systems57.  A  new  CPC  Deputy  was  appointed  in 
August 2024 although difficulties in recruitment persist given that overall staffing remains at 
similar levels as in the past two years. While the CPC has continued its efforts to recruit more 
staff,  it  still  faces  difficulties  to  find  the  right  qualified  candidates,  a  situation  that  civil 
society continues to express concerns about58.  

The  lobbying  guidelines  were  updated  to  clarify  the  existing  exemptions  from  the 
obligation to register as a lobbyist. In December 2024, the CPC issued updated guidelines 
on lobbying to bring them in line with a Supreme Court judgment of September 2024 and to 
provide a more comprehensive explanation of the provisions of the Integrity and Prevention 
of Corruption Act that govern lobbying activities. The updated guidelines clarify that elected 
representatives of an interest organisation that do not have a (legal) representative specifically 
provided for by law (e.g. associations, civil initiatives, housing communities) may carry out 
lobbying  activities  without  the  need  to  register  or  report59.  The  CPC  noted  low  reporting 
levels  about  lobbying  contacts  especially  at  local  level  whereas  reporting  by  the  ministries 
and  parliament  works  well.  The  CPC  and  stakeholders  consider  that  amending  the  law  to 
align  the  respective  reporting  deadlines  for  contacts  between  interest  representatives  and 
officials would improve the functioning and transparency of the lobbying system60.  

Rules on the content and method of submission of the annual report of political parties 
were updated to ensure greater transparancy and clarity as regards their financing. The 
rules  on  the  annual  reports  of  political  parties  were  amended  so  as  to  align  them  with  the 
Political Parties Act revised in 202361. The rules determine the content, forms and method of 
submission  of a political  party’s annual  report to the Agency for Public Legal  Records  and 
Related  Services  and  of  its  publication.  The  technical  changes  require  parties’  accounts  to 
include  amounts  transferred  to  or  received  from  affiliated  parties  and  political  foundations 
operating  in  Slovenia  or  other  Member  States  for  projects  of  common  interest  and  the 
amounts  spent  to  implement  such  projects.  Moreover,  these  amounts  are  to  be  recorded 
separately  from  their  normal  political  activities  and  must  be  used  only  for  the  designated 
purposes set out in a written agreement62. The new rules are intended to enhance transparency 

57    An  agreement  between  the  CPC  and  the  Ministry  of  Digital  Transformation  (MDT),  that  took  over 
responsibility for the management of the public sector’s servers last year, has been deferred to 2026 from 
August 2024 as the MDT has not yet adopted its leasing policy. 

58   The technical upgrades are currently outsourced and will take place in phases. The CPC’s total 2025 budget 
is  around  EUR  3.1  million.  It  operates  with  about  50%  staff  capacity.  Slovenian  Government  (2025b), 
written input pp. 10 and Country visit Slovenia, CPC and Transparency International.  

59   Judgment  of  the  Supreme  Court,  I  U  1093/2019-54  of  4  September  2024.  CPC  (2024a),  pp.  25-27. 

Slovenian Government (2025b), written input, pp. 11-12, and Country visit Slovenia, CPC.  

60   Country  visit  Slovenia,  CPC  and  Transparency  International.  Currently,  whereas  lobbyists  only  need  to 
report their contacts annually, lobbied officials must do so within eight days of their contacts. As of April 
2025, there were  85 registered lobbyists compared to 84 at the end of 2023.  Of these,  36 sent reports on 
lobbying  activities  performed  in  2024.  CPC  (2025),  p.  32.  The  2025  Resolution  on  the  Prevention  of 
Corruption (pp. 8-9 and 19) highlighted the absence of reporting on lobbying contacts as one of the major 
challenges  that  need  to  be  addressed.  It  calls  for  strict  compliance  with  the  rules  on  the  part  of  both  the 
public and the private sectors.  

61   The  amendment  was  mainly necessary  to  comply  with  the  2023  amendments  to  the  Political  Parties  Act. 

2024 Rule of Law Report, Slovenia, p. 18. 

62   Projects of common interest could include joint events and educational activities (seminars, consultations, 
conferences,  workshops,  training  courses,  research  or  publishing  activities  and  so  on)  that  do  not  involve 
the  party’s  regular  operations.  A  party  must  also  keep  separate  records  and  report  separately  on  funds 
transferred  from  its  transaction  account  to  another  party  or  political  foundation.  Slovenian  Government 
(2025b), written input and additional written input, p. 14 and pp. 8-10 respectively.  

12 

 
 
 
and clarify what financial information parties should record and publish. In 2024, the Court 
of Audit carried out six political party audits, where it found only minor technical breaches, 
and will carry out three more in 2025. In April 2025, it finalised its report on the European 
Parliament  elections63.  Parliament  is  conducting  an  inquiry  into  suspected  illegal  political 
party  financing  that  allegedly  involved  state-owned  enterprises  and  the  misuse  of  public 
money64.  

Despite  awareness-raising  efforts,  few  reports  of  corruption  were  made  through 
whistleblowing  channels.  The  CPC’s  second  statistical  report  on  the  number  of 
whistleblowing reports received from internal and external reporting channels did not reveal 
any information specifically on corruption. Throughout 2024, the CPC continued its outreach 
and  awareness-raising  activities  explaining  how  the  Reporting  Persons  Protection  Act 
protects  and  supports  whistleblowers  in  practice  and  the  importance  of  whistleblowing 
including  for  detecting  and  preventing  corruption.  Parliament  did  not  receive  any 
whistleblower reports in 2024. The police registered only three reports none of which were 
relevant  to  corruption  or  conflicts  of  interest.  The  Specialised  State  Prosecution  Office  has 
not  yet  detected  any  positive  effects  on  reporting  or  accusations  of  corruption  criminal 
offences  deriving  from  the  Act  and  maintains  that  it  is  not  useful  for  criminal  cases. 
According to one civil society organisation, the law is still untested as it has not been in place 
for very long and a ‘whistleblowing culture’ is still lacking65.  

Efforts  to  improve  transparency  and  competition  in  public  procurement  continued. 
Businesses’ attitudes towards corruption in the EU show that 28% of companies in Slovenia 
(EU average 25%) think that corruption has prevented them from winning a public tender or 
a public procurement contract in practice in the last three years66. 53% of companies perceive 
the  level  of  independence  of  the  public  procurement  review  body  (National  Review 
Commission) as very or fairly good67. The Single Market and Competitiveness Scoreboard on 
access  to  public  procurement  in  Slovenia  reports  44%  of  single  bids  for 2023  (EU  average 
29%). Most authorities and stakeholders continue to highlight public procurement as a high-
risk area68. To enhance transparency, the Government is preparing an updated module on the 
national  eProcurement system  that would give authorities the option to  publish  information 
on  contracts  below  the  national  thresholds  for  public  procurement  on  a  rolling  basis  in 
addition  to  annual  publication69.  During  2024,  the  CPC  conducted  investigations  of 

63   Country visit Slovenia, Court of Audit.  
64    Country visit Slovenia, Parliament Secretariat. A report is expected by the end of 2025 or early 2026. 
65   Slovenian Government, Police and Parliament (2025), written input, pp. 12, 2 and 21, respectively. Country 
visit  Slovenia,  Specialised  State  Prosecution  Office  and  Transparency  International.  As  clarified  by  the 
Ministry  of  Justice,  the  Whistleblower  Act  is  not  specifically  oriented  toward  corruption,  but  toward  the 
reporting  of  any  breach  of  law  within  the  working  environment.  In  addition,  the  reporting  of  criminal 
offences,  including  corruption  and  the  protection  of  witnesses  in  criminal  proceedings  is  regulated  in  the 
Criminal Procedure Code and Witness Protection Act. 

66   Flash Eurobarometer 557 (2025). This is 3 percentage points above the EU average. 
67   Figure 59, 2025 EU Justice Scoreboard. 
68   Slovenian  Government  (2025b),  written  input,  pp.  13-15.  The  objectives  of  the  2025  Resolution  on  the 
Prevention of Corruption  include the mitigation and prevention of corruption risks in public procurement, 
including in the health and infrastructure  sectors, pp. 7-8 and 25-28.  Cases included  the healthcare  sector 
and  the  purchase  of  property.  The  high  proportion  of  single  bids,  bid-rigging  and  market  divisions  was 
highlighted by civil society while businesses referred to problems with licensing at the local and municipal 
level.  Country  visit  Slovenia,  CPC,  Specialised  State  Prosecution  Office,  Police,  Court  of  Audit, 
Transparency International, and Business Associations.  
69   Country visit Slovenia, Ministry of Public Administration.  

13 

 
 
 
misconduct in several large investment projects (e.g. purchase of real estate, acquisition of IT 
equipment,  concessions  for  water  sources),  and  issued  recommendations  to  the  government 
and  respective  ministries  on  handling  corruption  risks.  In  addition,  the  CPC  continued  to 
carefully  monitor  state-owned  enterprises,  which  are  considered  to  be  especially  prone  to 
undue influence and conflicts of interest situations because of the close interaction between 
the  public  and  the  private  spheres70.  In  December  2024,  the  CPC  clarified  the  rules 
preventing a public-sector body from engaging in business activity with a company involving 
a  family  member  of  an  office  holder  in  that  particular  public-sector  body71.  The  National 
Review  Commission  carried  out  several  investigations  into  potential  violations  of 
procurement in 26 hospitals and health-care entities and filed four cases for irregularities72.   

III.  MEDIA PLURALISM AND MEDIA FREEDOM  

including 

The media regulator generally remains independent, while concerns exist regarding its 
human  and  financial  resources, 
in  relation  to  the  envisaged  new 
responsibilities.  The  Media  Pluralism  Monitor  2025  (MPM)  notes  medium-low  risk  as  for 
the indicators regarding independence and effectiveness of the media regulatory authorities73, 
highlighting  that  concerns  regarding  the  selection  processes  for  the  media  regulator’s 
(Agency  for  Communication  Networks  and  Services,  AKOS)  main  bodies  (namely:  the 
Council and Director) persist, as both bodies are appointed by the Government.  The limited 
resources and  AKOS’s mostly  passive and low-profile approach to  media regulation  reflect 
the internal strategies set by its leadership74. Moreover, in light of the ongoing reform of the 
media  law  and  the  new  Mass  Media  Act  that  the  Government  submitted  to  Parliament  in 
December 2024, aimed to update media legal framework and implement the European Media 
Freedom  Act  (EMFA)75,  the  media  regulator  is  expected  to  receive  additional  regulatory 
powers76,  although  as  indicated  by  some  stakeholders,  some  further  challenges  remain 
regarding  its  level  of  human  and  financial  resources77.  AKOS  remains  legally  and 
functionally  distinct  and  independent  from  the  Government78.  However,  some  further 
concerns persist as the current mechanism of appointment of AKOS’s director and members 
of  the  AKOS  Council  remains  under  the  direct  control  of  the  Government,  raising  some 
concerns  among  stakeholders  regarding  the  level  of  political  influence  on  the  media 
regulator79. Moreover, the current  human  and financial resources of AKOS are  assessed by 

70   Country  visit  Slovenia,  CPC,  Specialised  State  Prosecution  Office,  and  Transparency  International.  In 
February  2025,  the  Business  Club  of  Slovenian  Entrepreneurs  sent  an  open  letter  to  the  Prime  Minister 
calling  out  against  what  it  terms  as  wide-spread  corruption  in  Slovenia,  especially  in  state-owned 
enterprises. Business Club of Slovenian Entrepreneurs (2025). 

71   CPC (2024a), pp. 10-12. The list of entities with restrictions on operations pursuant to the IPCA is publicly 

available on the ERAR portal.   

72   Country visit Slovenia, National Review Commission. The NRC was following-up on the CPC’s July 2023 

recommendations concerning its analysis of corruption risks in public healthcare institutions.   

73   Media Pluralism Monitor (2025), p. 10. 
74   Liberties (2024), p. 557. 
75   The  reform  of Mass Media Act was first announced by the Government in the second half of 2023, with 
view  to overhaul  and  update  the  media  legal framework.  2024  Rule  of  Law  Report,  Slovenia, p. 21.  The 
proposed  new  Mass  Media  Law  was  removed  from  final  reading  in  Parliament  in  May  2025  while  the 
legislative procedure is ongoing.  

76   According to the envisaged media law reform AKOS  would be equipped with the tasks, among others, in 

the field of allocation of state advertising. Slovenian Government (2025b), written input, p. 22. 

77   Media Pluralism Monitor (2025), p. 13. 
78   2024 Rule of Law Report, Slovenia, p. 21. 
79   Liberties (2025), p. 902. 2024 Rule of Law Report, Slovenia, p. 22. 

14 

 
 
 
some  stakeholders  as  insufficient,  given  the  increase  in  its  regulatory  powers  and  the  tasks 
foreseen  under  the  ongoing  reform  of  media  legal  framework,  in  addition  to  its  existing 
regulatory powers80. AKOS funding has been separate from the state budget, relying instead 
on  a  self-financing  system  based  on  contributions  collected  from  the  undertakings  that 
operate under its regulatory remit81. However, new regulatory tasks related to digital services 
and  media  are  projected  to  be  funded  by  the  state  budget,  raising  some  concerns  among 
stakeholders regarding the predictability of the annual budget allocation82.  

The independence of public service media has further improved. The 2022 public service 
media  reform  has  been  well-received  and  is  seen  as  a  success  in  maintaining  the 
independence  of  public  service  media83.  The  establishment  of  a  governance  structure  with 
members  who  are  not  politically  appointed  has  strengthened  the  independence  of  RTV 
Slovenia84.  Programme  creators  of  RTV  Slovenia  are  independent  and  autonomous  in  their 
professional  work85.  In  the  assessment  of  the  MPM,  independence  of  public  service  media 
scored  within  the  medium-low  risk  band86.  However,  in  December  2024,  journalists’ 
associations  cautioned  that  the  RTV  Slovenia  Council  overstepped  its  authority  and 
responsibilities  outlined  in  the  RTV  Act  by  providing  obligatory  guidelines  to  RTV 
Slovenia’s management87. Moreover, despite the positive developments in the public service 
media,  some  stakeholders  have  continued  to  report  challenges  in  implementing  the  new 
governance structure, which also impacted the efficient functioning of both the RTV Council 
and the Management Board88.  

Some progress  has  been achieved on ensuring the adequate funding for public service 
media although challenges persist89. The Government is working on a legislative reform to 
guarantee sustainable, independent, and politically neutral funding for public service media, 
namely  for  both  RTV  Slovenia  and  Slovenian  Press  Agency  (STA)90.  To  address  these 
concerns, the Ministry of Culture in May 2025 submitted proposed amendments to the RTV 
Slovenia Act for public consideration. The changes focus on the institution’s governance, the 
scope  of  its  public  service,  and  its  funding  model.  The  aim  is  to  enhance  the  efficiency  of 
RTV  Slovenia’s  management  and  ensure  more  stable  public  financing  by  tailoring  it  to  the 

80   In 2024, the size of the department enforcement of media regulation, overseeing radio, television and VOD 
amounted  to  12  employees, what  is  considered disproportionate  to  the  scope of  responsibilities,  Liberties 
(2025),  p.  903.  Country  visit  Slovenia,  AKOS.  As  flagged  by  some  stakeholders,  the  financial  statement 
with  budgetary  implications  linked  to  the  proposed  new  Mass  Media  Act  did  not  specify  the  amount  of 
funding allocated for the new regulatory tasks of AKOS or the number of potential additional staff assigned 
to the regulatory authority for this purpose. Liberties (2025), pp. 903-904. 

81   2024 Rule of Law Report, Slovenia, p. 23. 
82   Liberties (2025), p. 903. 
83   Country visit Slovenia, Association of Journalists.  
84   Amendments to the Radio Television Slovenia Act. Country visit Slovenia, Association of Journalists. The 
changes in the perception of independence are reflected also by the increase in the public trust, 2024 Rule of 
Law Report, Slovenia, p. 24. 

85   Country visit Slovenia, RTV Management Board. 
86   Media Pluralism Monitor (2025), p. 20. 
87   Media Pluralism Monitor (2025), p. 24. 
88   The  challenges  include  the  remaining  lack  of  clarity  in  some  aspects  of  the  division  of  competences 
between the RTV Council and RTV Management Board. Country visit Slovenia, RTV Management Board. 
89   The 2024 Rule of Law Report recommended Slovenia to ’[e]nsure that rules or mechanisms are in place to 
provide  funding for public  service  media  that  is  appropriate  for  the  realisation  of  its  public  service  remit 
while guaranteeing its independence’. 

90   Country visit Slovenia, Ministry of Culture, and Liberties (2025), p. 900. 

15 

 
 
 
changing  inflation  rates91,  to  provide  RTV  Slovenia  with  the  necessary  resources  to  ensure 
their  financial  viability  and  effective  fulfillment  of  their  public  service  mission92.  The 
increase in RTV Slovenia’s license fee for 2025 was approved93. Although the increase has 
been  deemed  necessary,  stakeholders  have  questioned  its  long-term  effectiveness,  arguing 
that it serves only as a temporary solution. Public service media are still dealing with severe 
financial  difficulties,  which  affect  their  long-term  viability  and  decisions  regarding 
programme  planning.  With  an  estimated  funding  gap  of  approximately  EUR 11 million 
anticipated for 2025, comprehensive and durable measures to address the issue are needed94. 
Moreover,  in  December  2024  the  agreement  on  budgetary  funding  for  STA  in  2025  was 
signed,  guaranteeing  an  increase  in  funding  for  STA  by  18.6%  compared  to  202495. 
Nevertheless,  some  concerns  have  been  raised  that  any  such  increase  is  dependent  on  the 
decision of the Government or Parliament, creating risks of undue influence96. Overall, there 
has been some progress on the 2024 Rule of Law Report recommendation to ensure sufficient 
funding for public service media while guaranteeing their independence. However, in view of 
the overall financial crisis of the public service media, further measures will be needed. 

The private media remain affected by financial difficulties and risks to media pluralism. 
The  media  market  remains  highly  concentrated,  including  at  the  local  market97,  with  the 
limited  information  on  ultimate  ownership98.  Despite  legal  provisions  prohibiting  daily 
newspaper  publishers  from  also  owning  or  co-founding  radio  or  television  stations, 
stakeholders have reported that such practices persist99. Moreover, the concerns regarding the 
transparency  and  fairness  of  the  distribution  of  state  advertising  persist100.  There  are  also 
indications suggesting that the media market will become even more concentrated in 2025101. 
Financial  difficulties  continue  to  have  a  significant  impact  on  the  media  sector  as  a  whole, 
especially  on the press  media102. MPM notes high risk bands  regarding the transparency of 
media  ownership,  plurality  of  media  providers,  media  viability  and  editorial  independence 
from  commercial  and  owners  influence103.  The  discussions  in  Parliament  are  ongoing  as 
regards the rules regarding assessment of media market concentrations104. The Association of 
Journalists  considers  the  adoption  of  the  new  Mass  Media  Act  as  necessary,  despite  the 
concerns  expressed  also  as  for  the  planned  model  of  state  subsidies105.  Some  stakeholders 

91   GOV.SI (2025). 
92   Slovenian Government, written input, p. 22. Country visit Slovenia, Ministry of Culture.  
93   The TV license fee was increased from EUR 12,75 to EUR 14,02 per month starting from January 2025, 

after it has remained unchanged for 12 years. Country visit Slovenia, Ministry of Culture. 

94   The labour and productions costs have increased due to inflation, while it has been emphasised that there is 
a  need  for  deep  modernisation  and  digitalisation  of  RTV  Slovenia.  Country  visit  Slovenia,  RTV 
Management. 
95   GOV.SI (2024). 
96   Liberties (2025), p. 903. 
97   Country visit Slovenia, AKOS. 
98   Country visit Slovenia, Association of Journalists. Media Pluralism Monitor (2025), p. 7. 
99   Liberties (2025), p. 905. 
100   Media Pluralism Monitor (2025), p. 7. 
101   Country visit Slovenia, Association of Journalists. 
102   Country visit Slovenia, AKOS. Media Pluralism Monitor (2025), p. 7. 
103   The Market Plurality area scored within the high-risk band, making the highest scoring area in the Slovene 
monitoring  in  terms  of  risk  bands.  Media  Pluralism  Monitor  (2025),  p.  15.  In  general,  market  plurality 
scores the risk band of 76 %. 

104   The  proposal  of  the  new  Mass  Media  Act  envisages  that  the  national  competition  authority,  the  AVK, 

would be responsible for media concentration assessments. 

105   STA  (2025),  Country  visit  Slovenia,  Association  of  Journalists.  The  proposal  is  subject  to  ongoing 

legislative procedure. 

16 

 
 
 
indicated  that  the  difficult  financial  situation  of  media  resulted  in  reductions  of  newsroom 
staff,  deteriorating  working  conditions  of  journalists,  and  that  a  broader  trend  of  media 
divestment is eroding media pluralism106. The MPM highlights also risks of political control 
over  certain  media  outlets  by  political  entities,  undermining  their  editorial  autonomy  and 
integrity of content107. As raised by journalists, this could result in a lack of diverse content 
and  a  decline  in  overall  media  quality  at  both  national  and  local  levels108.  As  part  of  the 
media  law  reform,  the  Government  supports  the  adoption  of  a  new  Mass  Media  Act  and 
relevant amendments in other legislative acts, covering the necessary aspects of the European 
Media Freedom Act, as part of the implementation process, addressing, among others, media 
market  concentrations  and  its  impact  on  media  pluralism,  state  advertising  and  aiming  to 
significantly increase the transparency of the media landscape109. 

The  framework  for  accessing  public  information  remains  favourable.  Slovenia  has 
ratified  the  Council  of  Europe  Convention  on  Access  to  Official  Documents110.  The  legal 
framework regulating the access to information and documents remains stable, as set out in 
the  Access  to  Public  Information  Access  Act.  Moreover,  the  media  and  journalists  benefit 
from  an  accelerated  procedure  pursuant  to  the  Mass  Media  Act  in  relation  to  requests  to 
access  to  public  information  held  by  any  public  body111.  Overall,  the  risk  as  regarding 
protection of right of information has been assessed as low by MPM112.  

Some further progress was made on the recommendation to improve the protection of 
journalists, yet the challenges remain113. MPM flags medium-high risk for the protection of 
freedom  of  expression  and  for  journalistic  profession,  standards  and  protection114.  The 
number of reported incidents concerning the safety of journalists has decreased while SLAPP 
lawsuits  and  online  harassment  against  journalists  have  continued,  including  at  the  local 
level115. The  proposed new  Mass  Media Act  currently under legislative procedure aimed at 
implementing  EMFA  would  contain  provisions  regarding  strengthen  protection  for 
journalistic  sources  as  well  as  the  prohibition  to  install  intrusive  surveillance  software  on 
devices used by journalists116. The transposition of anti-SLAPP Directive is also ongoing117. 
Since  the  2024  Rule  of  Law  Report,  no  new  alerts  have  been  recorded  on  the  Council  of 
Europe’s  Platform  to  promote  the  protection  of  journalism  and  safety  of  journalists118, 
although  eleven  new  alerts  have  been  reported  in  the  Media  Freedom  Rapid  Response 
(MFRR)  monitoring  report,  out  of  them,  eight  relating  to  verbal  attacks,  two  related  to 

106   Country visit Slovenia, Association of Journalists, Union of Journalists. 
107   Media Pluralism Monitor (2025), pp. 9, 18. 
108   Country visit Slovenia, Association of Journalists and Union of Journalists. 
109   Country visit Slovenia, Ministry of Culture.  
110   The Council  of  Europe  Convention  on  Access  to  Official  Documents (CETS  No.  205), also  known  as 

the Tromsø Convention, entered into force on 1 December 2020. 

111   Mass Media Act, Article 45. 
112   Media Pluralism Monitor (2025), p. 12. 
113   The  2024 Rule of Law  Report recommended Slovenia to  “[f]urther advance with the process of adopting 
legislative and non-legislative safeguards to improve the protection of journalists, particularly online, taking 
into account European standards on the protection of journalists”. 

114   Media Pluralism Monitor (2025), p. 10. 
115   Media Pluralism Monitor (2025), p. 11. 
116   Country visit Slovenia, Ministry of Culture. 
117   Country visit Slovenia, Ministry of Culture; Slovenian Government (2025b), written input, p. 23. The draft 
anti-SLAPP  bill  was  prepared  by  the  Government  and  submitted  for  public  consultation  and  expert 
coordination on 10 December 2024. 

118   Council of Europe, Platform to promote the protection of journalism and safety of journalists. 

17 

 
 
 
physical  assaults,  two  related  to  attacks  to  property  and  two  amounting  to  interference  and 
blocked journalistic activity119. Concerns have also been raised about a systematic problem of 
low  reporting  of  SLAPP  incidents  by  journalists120  and  ongoing  use  of  defamation  laws 
against  them121.  The  Association  of  Journalists  considers  that  authorities’  efforts  to  secure 
support from the Ministry of Culture for safety initiatives, including legal aid, training, and 
protocols of cooperation with law enforcement authorities, have been present but insufficient, 
while  further  efforts  would  be  welcomed  on  protection  and  safety122.  Overall,  while 
challenges  remain  in  practice  and  the  legal  provisions  on  strengthening  the  safeguards  are 
still  to  be  adopted123,  there  has  been  some  further  progress  on  the  recommendation  to 
improve the protection of journalists.    

IV.  OTHER INSTITUTIONAL ISSUES RELATED TO CHECKS AND BALANCES 

Over  two-thirds  of  companies  surveyed  in  Slovenia  express  confidence  in  the 
effectiveness of investment protection. 69% of companies are very or fairly confident that 
investments are protected by law and courts124. As regards authorities relevant for economic 
operators, 57% of companies perceive the level of independence of the national competition 
authority (Slovenian Competition Protection Agency) as very or fairly good125. A number of 
judicial mechanisms are in place in the Supreme Court to ensure the implementation of their 
judgments, which include the possibility to substitute annulled administrative acts. However, 
these  mechanisms  do  not  include  fines  or  disciplinary  actions  against  the  responsible 
officials, nor the possibility to award direct or consequential damages or compensation126.  

On 1 January 2025, Slovenia had 4 leading judgments of the European Court of Human 
Rights  pending  implementation,  a  decrease  of  1  compared  to  the  previous  year127.  At 
that  time,  Slovenia’s  rate  of  leading  judgments  from  the  past  10  years  that  had  been 
implemented  was  at  88%  (compared  to  86%  in  2024;  12%  remained  pending),  and  the 
average time that the judgments had been pending implementation was 1 year and 7 months 
(compared  to  1  year  and  2  months  in  2024)128.  The  oldest  leading  judgment,  pending 
implementation for 3 years, concerns the authorities’ failure to introduce remedies that would 
provide  the  applicants  with  a  reasonable  opportunity  to  challenge  the  Bank  of  Slovenia’s 
2013-2014 decisions129. As regards the respect of payment deadlines, on 31 December 2024 

119   European Centre for Press and Media Freedom, Media Freedom Rapid Response – Slovenia.  
120   Country visit Slovenia, Union of Journalists. 
121   Country visit Slovenia, Association of Journalists. 
122   Country visit Slovenia, Association of Journalists.  
123   Slovenian Government (2025b), written input, p. 23, and country visit Slovenia, Ministry of Culture. 
124   Figure  54, 2025 EU Justice Scoreboard. In  Slovenia, 21% of companies perceive the  frequent changes in 
legislation  or  concerns  about quality  of  law making  process  as  the  main  reason  for  the  perceived  lack  of 
effectiveness of investment protection. Figure 55, 2025 EU Justice Scoreboard. 

125   Figure 60, 2025 EU Justice Scoreboard. 
126   Figure 49, 2025 EU Justice Scoreboard. The data presented reflect exclusively the mechanisms in place at 
the level of the highest administrative jurisdiction; the same or other mechanisms may be in place at lower 
instance administrative courts.  

127   For an explanation of the supervision process, see the website of the Council of Europe.   
128   All figures calculated by the European Implementation Network (EIN) and based on the number of cases 
that are considered pending at the annual cut-off date of 1 January 2025. EIN (2025), written input, p. 8. 
129   Judgment of the ECtHR, 49969/14, Pintar and Others v. Slovenia, pending implementation since 2021.  

18 

 
 
 
there  were  no  cases  awaiting  confirmation  of  payments  (same  as  in  2023)130.  On  16  June 
2025, the number of leading judgments pending implementation had remained 4131. 

To  address  the  Constitutional  Court’s  considerable  caseload,  the  transfer  of  certain 
types  of  cases  to  administrative  courts  was  achieved  by  interpretation  of  legislative 
changes. As noted in  past  Rule of Law Reports, for several  years, the Constitutional Court 
has  been  raising  concerns  about  its  considerable  caseload,  which  prevents  the  Court  from 
dedicating  more  attention  to  the  most  constitutionally  relevant  cases132.  While  Parliament 
rejected  the  constitutional  amendments  which  aimed  to  reduce  the  Constitutional  Court’s 
caseload133,  the  Constitutional  Court  allowed  the  review  of  spatial  planning  acts  before  the 
administrative  courts134  to  continue,  even  though  it  had  ordered  Parliament  to  resolve  the 
constitutionality  issue  within  one  year135.  In  2024,  the  average  time  needed  to  conclude  a 
constitutionality review before the Constitutional Court decreased to 472 days (600 in 2023) 
while constitutional complaints took around 460 days on average (540 in 2023)136. The oldest 
pending cases were further reduced137. In total, the backlog again decreased considerably (by 
40%), also due to a lower number of incoming cases (by 35%)138.  

Following a call by the Constitutional Court, Parliament adopted amendments allowing 
the  Court  to  establish  the  incompatibility  of  office  of  its  members.  In  May  2024,  the 
Commission  for the Prevention of Corruption initiated misdemeanour proceedings  against a 
Constitutional Court judge due to a failure to report in relation to business restrictions, which 
is on-going139. Following this case and calls by the Constitutional Court to address the gap in 
its ability to act in such circumstances140, the Parliament President submitted amendments to 
the  Constitutional  Court  Act,  which  were  adopted  by  Parliament  on  25  March  2025.  The 
amendments  explicitly  state  that  the  function  of  the  Constitutional  Court  members  is 
incompatible with carrying out professional or other gainful activity, except when allowed by 

130   Council of Europe (2025), p. 157.   
131   Data according to the online database of the Council of Europe (HUDOC). 
132   2023 Rule of Law Report, Slovenia, p. 30, and 2024 Rule of Law Report, Slovenia, p. 31. 
133   Parliament  decided  in  April  2025.  Among  the  proposed  changes  were  setting  into  the  Constitution  the 
current  list  of  privileged  bodies  that  can  request  constitutional  review,  the  gradual  transfer  of  review  of 
local  government  issues  and  spatial  planning  acts  to  the  administrative  courts,  and  allowing  the 
Constitutional Court to select constitutional complaints and initiatives for constitutional review. 2024 Rule 
of Law Report, Slovenia, pp. 31-32. 

134   In  2021,  Parliament  adopted  amendments  to  the  Spatial  Planning  Act,  allowing  the  review  before  the 

administrative courts, unless a parallel procedure before Constitutional Court started. 

135  The  Constitution  provides  that  the  review  of  such  acts  should  be  before  the  Constitutional  Court.  In  the 
judgment  published  on  11  April  2025,  the  Constitutional  Court  stated  that  the  transfer  of  those  cases  to 
administrative courts is required also in view of an increasing need for factual assessments, as also required 
by  EU  law,  for  which  the  Constitutional  Court  would  be  less  appropriate,  and  in  order  to  ensure  the 
effective judicial protection under EU law. Judgment of the Constitutional Court, U-I-474/22-15, 20 March 
2025. 

136   Constitutional Court (2025), pp. 112-116. 
137   On  31  December  2024,  a  total  of  79  cases  older  than  two  years  remained  pending.  This  is  a  notable 
improvement,  as  at  the  end  of  2021,  there  were  553  cases  pending  that  were  up  to  5  years  old. 
Constitutional Court (2025), p. 116. 

138   End 2024, the Court had 1 173 pending cases (1 931 end 2023). Constitutional Court (2025), p. 116. 
139   This  issue  came  up  in  April  2024  following  uncertainties  regarding  the  existing  framework  when  it  was 
reported  that  one  of  the  Constitutional  Court  members  exercised  ancillary  professional  activities  in 
academia as a sole trader (‘samostojni podjetnik - s.p.’). 2024 Rule of Law Report, Slovenia, p. 31. 

140   The  Constitutional  Court  suggested  a  mechanism  similar  to  the  one  in  the  European  Court  of  Human 
Rights, where the judges themselves vote with a qualified majority on the alleged incompatibility of office 
of a judge. Rule of Law Report, Slovenia, p. 31. 

19 

 
 
 
the law. The amendments allow the President of the Constitutional Court to adopt a decision 
on incompatibility of an activity of the Court’s member, which can be challenged before the 
Constitutional Court. 

Legislative  amendments  would  extend  the  competence  of  the  Human  Rights 
Ombudsperson  and  maintain  the  parliamentary  appointment  procedure.  The  Human 
Rights Ombudsperson is the National Human Rights Institution, accredited with A-Status141. 
In March 2025, the Government shared with the Ombudsperson the revised amendments to 
the  Human  Rights  Ombudsperson’s  Act142.  Proposed  amendments  would  extend  the 
Ombudsperson’s oversight to certain private law organisations, specifically those exercising 
public powers, establish a special deputy for children’s rights (a Child Rights Ombudsman) 
within  the  Ombudsperson’s  office,  grant  the  Ombudsperson  a  mandate  to  monitor  human 
trafficking, and extend the term of office of the Ombudsperson and the deputies - from six to 
eight  years143.  Efforts  are  also  underway  to  organise  monitoring  of  the  Convention  on  the 
Rights  of  Persons  with  Disabilities  within  the  Ombudsperson’s  office.  These  amendments 
have  been  largely  welcomed  by  the  Ombudsperson,  including  that  the  draft  amendments 
maintain  the  appointment  of  the  Ombudsperson  by  Parliament,  and  do  not  envisage  the 
transfer of the appointment to the President of the Republic as initially planned144. However, 
the  Ombudsperson  raised  concerns  with  regard  to  the  proposed  change  that  the  election  in 
Parliament would be carried out by a secret ballot (which would decrease the transparency) 
and  that  the  draft  amendments  do  not  explicitly  establish  the  Ombudsperson’s  power  to 
suggest  that  Slovenia  ratifies  or  accedes  to  international  human  rights  instruments145,  as 
recommended  by  the  UN,  although  the  Ministry  of  Justice  states  this  right  exists  under 
general  provisions  of  the  existing  law146.  In  2024,  the  Ombudsperson  issued  95  new 
recommendations  (86  in  2023)147.  In  addition,  the  Ombudsperson  acting  in  the  capacity  of 
National  Prevention Mechanism issued further  294 recommendations  to  various institutions 
(578 in 2023). In 2024, the Ombudsperson highlighted approximately 100 especially relevant 
past  recommendations  that  remain  either  unimplemented  or  partially  implemented  (80  in 
2023). 

The civic space in Slovenia continued to improve. The positive trend already highlighted in 
past Rule of Law Reports regarding the improving situation for civil society continued, and 

141   Accreditation by the Global Alliance of National Human Rights Institutions (GANHRI).  
142   The Ombudsperson provided comments to the draft law and, in its letter of 25 March 2025,  stated that it 
would not be legitimate that the revision of framework continues while the selection procedure for a new 
Ombudsperson  is  ongoing  and  the  institution  has  only  an  acting  head  (since  February  2025).  The 
Ombudsperson also raised concerns about the lack of transparency in the procedure for appointment and the 
large discretionary power of the President of the Republic in the selection of a candidate. ENNHRI (2025), 
pp. 422-425. On 18 June 2025, a proposed candidate for the Ombudsperson did not obtain the required 2/3 
of votes of all members of Parliament. 

143   Slovenian Government (2025b), written input, p. 25. 
144   Country  visit  Slovenia,  Ombudsperson.  In  2024,  the  Ombudsperson  raised  concerns  about  the  envisaged 
transfer of the appointment of the Ombudsperson from Parliament to the President of the Republic, which 
would not be appropriate in the Ombudsperson’s view, since the institution reports to Parliament, as is the 
case for parliamentary ombudspersons. 2024 Rule of Law Report, Slovenia, pp. 32-33. 

145   This  was  one  of  the  recommendations  from  GANHRI  Sub-Committee  on  Accreditation  (SCA)  Report, 

December 2020, p. 24. 

146   Country visit Slovenia, Ministry of Justice. 
147   Human Rights Ombudsperson (2025). 

20 

 
 
 
the civic space in Slovenia has been upgraded to ‘open’148. While the Government’s attitude 
was  reported  as  positive,  there  were  some  negative  attitudes  towards  the  civil  society 
organisations  (CSOs)  coming  from  certain  public  actors  and  media  outlets  owned  by  or 
affiliated with certain political parties149. The new Strategy for developing non-governmental 
organisations  until  2030  as  well  as  the  Strategy  for  developing  volunteering  until  2030  are 
being developed150. Their measures aim to ensure that CSOs, contribute to the realisation of 
the  principles  of  pluralism  and  democracy  in  society.  As  regards  funding,  in  2024  and 
beginning 2025, several funding opportunities for CSOs were available at national level151. 

148   Rating  given  by  Civicus,  Slovenia;  ratings  are  on  a  five-category  scale  defined  as:  open,  narrowed, 

obstructed, repressed and closed. 

to  match  funding  for  EU  projects  with 

149   ENNHRI (2025), p. 147 and Liberties (2025), pp. 95, 900 and 922-923. 
150   Public consultation ended in January 2025; Slovenian Government (2025b), written input, p. 27. 
151   The  awards aimed at CSOs and volunteering organisations for  providing effective and quality services in 
the amount of EUR 12,6 million, published in June 2024, were selected at the end of 2024, while a second 
call 
the  co-financing  of  non-reimbursable  costs  for 
projects/organisations  receiving  EU  or  EFTA  grants  in  the  amount  of  EUR  5,3  million,  were  selected  in  
January 2025. Another call for development and professionalisation of non-governmental organisations and 
volunteering in Slovenia was published beginning of June 2025, amounting to EUR 15,7 million. Slovenian 
Government  (2025b),  written  input,  pp.  27-28,  and  Slovenian  Government  (2025a).  Legal  challenges  by 
some CSOs in relation to the annulled Spring 2023 public call for funding are still pending before courts. 
Liberties (2025), p. 921, country visit Slovenia, CNVOS and Peace institute, and 2024 Rule of Law Report, 
Slovenia, p. 34. 

21 

 
 
 
Annex I: List of sources in alphabetical order* 

* The list of contributions received in the context of the consultation for the 2025 Rule of Law report 
can 
https://commission.europa.eu/publications/2025-rule-law-report-targeted-
stakeholder-consultation_en. 

found 

be 

at 

Association of judges (2024), Press release of 8 November 2024 https://sodnisko-drustvo.si/izjava-za-
javnost-vlom-in-pozig-hise-sodnika-almirja-kurspahica/. 

Business  Club  of  Slovenian  Entrepreneurs  (2025),  Open  letter  to  the  Prime  Minister,  20  February 
2025 
https://www.sbc.si/novice/2025/02/odprto-pismo-predsednika-sbc-joca-pececnika-premierju-
robertu-golobu. 

Centre  for  Media  Pluralism  and  Media  Freedom  (2025),  Media  Pluralism  Monitor  2025,  Country 
report for Slovenia. 

Commission  for  the  Prevention  of  Corruption  (2024a),  Systemic  Explanation  on  Limitation  of 
Business Activity of 27 December 2024. 

Commission  for  the  Prevention  of  Corruption  (2024b),  Systemic  Explanation  on  Lobbying  of  6 
December 2024. 

Commission  for  the  Prevention  of  Corruption  (2025a),  Report  for  2024,  10  June  2024 
https://www.kpk-rs.si/storage/uploads/5a0a2713-69c1-4d8b-b251-c2acb2eee4d9/Letno-
poro%C4%8Dilo-2024_WEB.pdf.  

Commission  for  the  Prevention  of  Corruption  (2025b),  Annual  report  on  the  handling  of 
whistleblower 
https://www.kpk-
rs.si/storage/uploads/97653c8d-fb1b-4729-aae3-3cc4bdc2bcf1/Skupno-letno-poro%C4%8Dilo-ZZPri-
2024.pdf. 

protection 

2024, 

cases 

April 

2025 

for 

2 

Commission  for  the  Prevention  of  Corruption  (2025c),  Press  release:  In  view  of  the  perceived 
corruption  risks  in  the  appointment  of  the  Director-General  of  Police,  the  Commission  issues 
recommendations,  30  March  2025,  https://www.kpk-rs.si/sl/novice/vse-novice/zaradi-zaznanih-
korupcijskih-tveganj-pri-imenovanju-generalnega-direktorja-policije-komisija-izdala-priporocili. 

Commission  for  the  Prevention  of  Corruption  (2025d),  Press  release,  Dr.  Robert  Šumi:  the  errors 
were expected and are being corrected promptly, 7 March 2025.  

Commission  for  the  Prevention  of  Corruption  (2025e),  Recommendations  of  the  Government  of  the 
Republic  of  Slovenia  in  the  procedure  for  proposing  and  appointing  the  Director-General  of  the 
Police, 
https://www.kpk-rs.si/storage/uploads/4dcc2137-f1ac-4930-8be7-
8e80d51b4593/Priporocilo_oz._pobuda_06210-301-2023-57_P.pdf  

28  February 

2025 

Commission for the Prevention of Corruption (2025f), Recommendations to the Officials’ Council in 
the  process  of  proposing  and  appointing  the  Director-General  of  the  Police,  28  February  2025 
https://www.kpk-rs.si/storage/uploads/25382d50-d252-4b94-80ce-
f649ac422f2e/Priporocilo_oz._pobuda_06210-301-2023-58_P.pdf  

Commission for the Prevention of Corruption (2025g), Written contribution for the 2025 Rule of Law 
Report. 

Constitutional  Court 
rs.si/assets/Novice/sl_SI/46573/UI10924.pdf.  

(2024),  Judgment  U-I-109/24,  20  November  2024  https://www.us-

22 

 
 
Constitutional Court (2025), Report for 2024, xx May 2025. 

Council of Europe, Platform to promote the protection of journalism and safety of journalists. 

European Centre for Press and Media Freedom, Media Freedom Rapid Response – Slovenia. 

European Commission (2024), 2024 Rule of Law Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation 
in Slovenia. 

European Commission (2025), EU Justice Scoreboard 2024. 

European  Commission  (2025),  Flash  Eurobarometer  XXX  on  Businesses’  attitudes  towards 
corruption in the EU. 

European Commission (2025), Special Eurobarometer XXX on Citizens’ attitudes towards corruption 
in the EU.  

European 
Prosecution 
https://www.eppo.europa.eu/assets/annual-report-2024/index.html. 

(2025), 

Public 

Office 

Annual 

Report 

2024, 

European Public Prosecution Office (2025), Written input for the 2025 Rule of Law Report. 

GOV.SI (2024), Press release of 23 December 2024, Signing the STA Contract, This government 
guarantees financial independence and journalistic autonomy, https://www.gov.si/en/news/2024-12-
23-signing-the-sta-contract-this-government-guarantees-financial-independence-and-journalistic-
autonomy/. 

GOV.SI (2025), Press release of 20 May 2025, Public hearing of the amendment to the RTV Slovenia 
Act, https://www.gov.si/novice/2025-05-20-javna-obravnava-predloga-sprememb-in-dopolnitev-
zakona-o-rtv-slovenija/. 

Human  Rights  Ombudsperson  (2025),  Additional  written  contribution  for  the  2025  Rule  of  Law 
Report. 

the  Administrative  Court 

Judgment  of 
(2024), 
https://sodnapraksa.si/?q=odlo%C4%8Dbe%20&_submit=i%C5%A1%C4%8Di&order=date&directi
on=desc&rowsPerPage=20&page=11&id=2015081111479817.  

I  U  1401/2023-85,  24  October  2024 

Judgment  of  the  Constitutional  Court,  U-I-474/22-15,  20  March  2025  https://www.uradni-
list.si/glasilo-uradni-list-rs/vsebina/2025-01-0872.  

Judgment of the European Court of Human Rights,  Case of X and Others v. Slovenia, 19 December 
2024 https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/?i=001-238568  

Judgment of the Supreme Court, I U 1093/2019-54, 4 September 2024. 

Judicial Council (2025), Press release of 21 March 2025 http://www.sodni-svet.si/?p=objave-095  

Liberties (2024), Rule of Law Report, Slovenia. 

Liberties (2025), Rule of Law Report, Slovenia. 

OECD (2025), Press release of 19 February 2025, Slovenia must promptly strengthen independence of 
investigations and implement longstanding recommendations, says OECD Working Group on Bribery 
following High-Level mission in Ljubljana, https://www.oecd.org/en/about/news/press-

23 

 
 
releases/2025/02/slovenia-must-promptly-strengthen-independence-of-investigations-and-implement-
longstanding-recommendations-says-oecd-working-group-on-bribery-following-high-level-mission-
in-ljubljana.html.  

Slovenian Government (2025a), Additional written contribution for the 2025 Rule of Law Report. 

Slovenian Government (2025b), Written input for the 2025 Rule of Law Report. 

Slovenian  Parliament  (2025),  Resolution  214-02/25-2  (RePKRS-1)  of  28  March  2025  on  the 
Prevention of Corruption.  

Slovenian Parliament (2025), Written input for the 2025 Rule of Law Report. 

Specialised State Prosecutor (2025), Written input for the 2025 Rule of Law Report. 

STA 
https://english.sta.si/3428340/journalists-association-appalled-by-media-bill-withdrawal. 

Association 

Journalists' 

appalled 

(2025), 

media 

bill 

by 

withdrawal, 

The Council of Europe (2020), Convention on Access to Official Documents (CETS No. 205). 

Transparency International (2025), Corruption Perceptions Index 2024.   

National Legislation 

The Act on Amendments to the Criminal Procedure Act (ZKP-P) of 19 June 2024. 

Art. 56a and Art. 58 of the ZIntPK 

Act amending the Political Parties Act (Official Gazette, No. 78/2023) 

24 

 
 
Annex II: Country visit to Slovenia 

The Commission services held virtual meetings in March and May 2025 with: 

•  Agency for Communication Networks and Services (AKOS) 
•  Association of Journalists 
•  Business associations: Advantage Austria & GZS 
•  Commission for the Prevention of Corruption 
•  Constitutional Court 
•  Court of Audit  
•  Energy Agency 
•  Faculty of Social Sciences (Prof. dr. Marko Milosavljević) 
•  Human Rights Ombudsperson Office 
•  Judges’ Association 
•  Judicial Council 
•  Ministry of Culture 
•  Ministry of Justice 
•  Ministry of Public Administration 
•  Ministry of the Interior 
•  National Bureau of Investigation (NPU) and General Police Directorate (Economic 

Crime division) 

•  National NGO umbrella network (CNVOS) 
•  National Review Commission (for public procurement) 
•  Parliament Secretariat 
•  Peace Institute 
•  Radio-television Slovenia (RTV): Council (President Goran Forbici) 
•  Radio-television Slovenia (RTV): Management Board (President Natalija Gorščak) 
•  State Attorney General (dr. Ana Kerševan) 
•  State Prosecution (State Prosecutor General dr. Katarina Bergant, Supreme State 

Prosecution Office, Specialised State Prosecution Office) 

•  State Prosecutorial Council 
•  Supreme Court 
•  Transparency International Slovenia 
•  Union of Slovenian Journalists 

* The Commission also met the following organisations in a number of horizontal meetings:  

•  Amnesty International  
•  Araminta  
•  Civil Liberties Union for Europe   
•  Civil Society Europe   
•  European Civic Forum   
•  European Partnership for Democracy  
•  European Youth Forum,  
• 

International Commission of Jurists   

25 

 
 
 
• 

International Federation for Human Rights (FIDH)  
JEF Europe  

• 
•  Philea – Philanthropy Europe Association.  
•  Transparency International   

26