Volume 9 Numbers 1/2

Winter/Spring 2000

Constitutional Watch
     A country-by-country update on constitutional politics in Eastern Europe and the ex-USSR

Slovenia - Slovenia is fast approaching a parliamentary election later this year, and its parties are realigning themselves. The Social Democratic Party (SDP), the largest opposition party, and the Christian Democratic Party (CDP) formed an election coalition in January. Also, on February 24, CDP and the Slovenian People's Party (SPP) merged, and SPP withdrew from the government. Without SPP's 19 seats, Janez Drnovsek's government was left with only 30 of 90 seats in the Drzavni Zbor (the National Assembly, or parliament). With the loss of SPP from the government, Drnovsek had to nominate eight new ministers to replace the SPP members. At the same time, he proposed a vote of confidence on the reshuffled government. On April 8, 55 out of 90 lawmakers voted against the new govern-ment. According to Art. 116 of the Constitution, if a majority of parliament does not endorse the vote of confidence, the "National Assembly must, within thirty days, either elect a new prime minister or express its confidence in the incumbent prime minister in a fresh vote." If neither happens, the president dissolves parlia-ment and calls new elections. This was the fourth government following Slovenia's first multiparty elec-tions in 1990 and Drnovsek's third. As things stand, Slovenia is effectively left without a government.

Parliament has continually failed to reach any decision on a new voting system. (In parliament's lower chamber, the Drzavni Zbor, members are elected for a four-year term-88 members are elected by propor-tional representation and two by ethnic minorities.) On January 28, parliament rejected, in the first reading, a bill on a two-round plurality system. The proposed law failed to clear the required two-thirds hurdle. This was the third time that MPs rejected a bill proposing to introduce a plurality system. To date, SDP, CDP, and SPP, which together hold 44 seats in parliament, have advocated changing the system.

Other parties, however, have supported a proportional system, a mixed system, or a plurality system for the 2000 elections only, which would then be followed by a referendum on a final formula. No one approach has gained enough votes to carry, and five motions on the voting system are wending their merry way through parliament. The parliament showed less fractiousness on February 2, when it approved Dimitrij Rupel as foreign minister, with 55 votes in favor and 13 against. Rupel was Slovenia's first foreign minister (1990 to 1993) and, most recently, was ambassador to the United States. At his swearing in, Rupel stated that his priorities would be EU and NATO integration, greater cooperation with the United States, and fostering neighborly relations, in particular, with Italy and Croatia. Rupel replaces Boris Frlec, who resigned on January 21, citing personal reasons and complaining about frequent media attacks. Frlec had been harshly criticized for statements he was alleged to have made during a visit to China. Quoting the foreign ministry's internal bulletin, the media reported that Frlec had pledged to his Chinese counter-part that Slovenia would consider Tibet an internal Chinese matter. Frlec also said, reportedly, that Slovenia never cosponsored resolutions concerning human-rights issues in China. In response, Frlec claimed his statements had been misinterpreted. The opposition SDP nonetheless called for his resignation.

Finance Minister Mitja Gaspari faced a more concerted attack. In mid-December, SDP and CDP deputies filed an interpellation motion against him. (For a description of the interpellation process, see Slovenia Update, EECR, Vol. 8, No. 3, Summer 1999.) The legis-lators accused the minister of unlawful and wasteful public spending, wrongdoings in the privatization of state-owned banks and insurance companies, illegal and wasteful management of state property, harmful public-finance policies, and other irregularities. Denying the allegations, Gaspari claimed that the motion was politi-cally motivated. The attempt to oust him finally ran out of steam in March, when a parliamentary majority defeated the motion.

Parliament also managed to make some headway toward soothing long-strained relations with neigh- boring Croatia. On December 14, parliament ratified the Slovenian-Croatian agreement on property issues, allowing citizens of both states unrestricted use of their property in either country. The agreement was pushed primarily by Slovenia, since Slovenians have extensive property holdings in Croatia. The Croatian government had imposed limits on Slovenian property holders since independence, specifically, that Slovenian companies could not own property in Croatia. The restriction presumably was aimed at the numerous Slovenian companies that own hotels on the Croatian seashore.

But parliament put off ratification of a bilateral Croatian-Slovenian agreement on border traffic and cooperation, apparently fearing the agreement might affect an ongoing maritime boundary dispute. After a failed attempt to restore the agreement to the parlia-mentary agenda, a group of legislators asked the Constitutional Court to determine whether the accord de facto resolved the disputed maritime boundary, prematurely foreclosing the issue. The judgement should clear up all doubt about the agreement's consti-tutionality, thus allowing its endorsement by parliament. The agreement on border traffic and cooperation between Slovenia and Croatia was signed in April 1997 and was ratified by Croatia's parliament in 1998.

The parliament adopted several major pieces of legislation. Among the most important were the Law on Pension and Disability Insurance, passed on December 10, introducing a slimmer pension system, and the 2000 National Budget Act, endorsed on January 21, which envisages 1.06 trillion tolars ($5.2 billion) in outlays and 1 trillion tolars ($5 billion) in revenues. On January 27, parliament adopted two laws regulating the insurance industry. The long-awaited Law on the Privatization of Insurance Companies, which was ground in the slow parliamentary gristmill for four years, regulates the conversion of public capital in joint-stock companies whose exclusive line of business is insurance and reinsurance. The law brings the industry in line with EU regulations.

Despite this activity, parliament is still behind in ratifying the acquis communautaire-the vast body of legislation necessary for Slovenia's accession to the European Union. In an effort to ensure that adoption of the acquis is complete by the end of 2002, the govern-ment is aiming to pass a schedule regulating the adoption of 74 pieces of EU-compatible legislation in the first six months of 2000.

The EU, meanwhile, has two main criticisms of Slovenia. The first regards its public administration, which the EU has deemed inefficient and slow. The second is directed at the judiciary, whose inefficiency has resulted in a huge backlog of cases. (For more on this issue, see Slovenia Update, EECR, Vol. 8, No. 3, Summer 1999.) Inadequate funding has pushed the situ-ation to a critical point. Courts lack the funds to cope with an increasing number of new cases, as well as with thousands of old ones.

Speaking before a parliamentary committee, in November, Ales Zalar, president of the Judges Association, described the plight of the courts. In 1999, funding was insufficient for courts to meet their basic operating expenses. Some were unable to pay their elec-tricity or phone bills or their rent. Court-appointed attorneys, expert witnesses, and interpreters also went unpaid. Zalar even feared that some judges would not receive their salaries. Mitja Deisinger, president of the Supreme Court, the highest court of ordinary jurisdic-tion, pointed out that the judiciary is in a different position from that of ministries and other government departments, since the courts cannot cancel programs if they run out of money.

Although most courts have financial problems, the worst off are the district courts, which also provide funds for the operation of county courts, the lowest courts in the state. The district courts in Celje, Kranj, Nova Gorica, and Slovenj Gradec were in the direst straits. The Celje district courthouse, for example, had its heating cut off on November 18 for failure to pay the bill. The court also found itself 93 million tolars ($450,000) in debt to court-appointed attorneys, expert witnesses, interpreters, guardians, the post office, and others. In December, the court was short 10 million tolars for judges' salaries.

The courts were eventually granted additional monies from state budget reserves to meet their 1999 obligations. But in addition to adequate funding for ongoing operations, the courts desperately need extra money to reduce their case backlog. According to Deisinger, there are roughly 500,000 unresolved cases involving approximately one million people-half the population of the country. If the courts cannot tackle this problem, there is a real possibility that Slovenia will be sued in the European Court of Human Rights. (Article 6.1 of the Convention on Human Rights reads "everyone is entitled to a fair and public hearing within a reasonable time.") Such a suit might well complicate negotiations with Brussels over joining the EU.

back