7.4 C
Ljubljana
Tuesday, December 17, 2024

Revenge of Golob against the court of audit of the Republic of Slovenia and the national council of the Republic of Slovenia

By: Vida Kocjan

The ruling coalition (Gibanje Svoboda, SD, and Levica), led by Robert Golob, has significantly reduced funding for both the Court of Audit of the Republic of Slovenia and the National Council of the Republic of Slovenia in the approved budgets for 2025 and 2026. Experts warn that this is a politically motivated decision, as both institutions have recently criticised certain government measures. What are the real reasons for the budget cuts, and what will be the consequences?

Court of Audit under financial pressure: nearly 4 million euros cut

The Court of Audit, tasked with overseeing the use of public funds, will receive almost 4 million euros less in 2025 than initially planned. The funding reduction comes at a time when the Court has published a series of high-profile findings regarding alleged government misconduct, including irregular financing of certain projects, such as the purchase of real estate and equipment for state institutions. The President of the Court of Audit, Jana Ahčin, warned that the budget cuts call into question the financial independence of the institution, which is essential for its impartiality and effectiveness.

The national council is also a political target

The National Council has faced an even larger reduction in funding, with its budget cut by nearly half a million euros. Councillors warn that this hampers the institution’s normal operations, including spatial and development projects. Furthermore, the National Council has been among the loudest critics of certain government decisions, including legislative changes and the allocation of funds to other priority projects. The President of the National Council, Marko Lotrič, stated: “It would be appropriate for the National Council’s budget to adequately follow the budget of the National Assembly, as increased activities in the first chamber also mean increased activities in the second chamber of the Slovenian Parliament.” He further pointed out that an increase in the National Council’s budget is also expected due to public sector wage reform and the alignment of wage disparities.

Lotrič emphasised that the National Assembly acted similarly last year, which prevented them from filling planned positions for systematised jobs and raising session fees, “even though both public sector employees and officials in public administration received raises.” The National Council still lacks adequate spaces for councillors, and its international activities and developmental projects, including the establishment of regions, have been curtailed. As a result, significant disparities are emerging between the pay of National Council officials and the officials of the executive, judicial branches, and the National Assembly.

What does the government say?

Finance Minister Klemen Boštjančič and Prime Minister Robert Golob emphasise that the funding cuts are part of broader measures to rationalise the budget and align spending with European fiscal rules. Interestingly, the government chose to pursue rationalisation specifically with these two institutions. This comes as the government plans record-high public spending for 2025. The government claims that the funds withdrawn from institutions like the Court of Audit and the National Council will be redirected to projects such as post-flood reconstruction, healthcare, and public sector wage reform.

“Childishly withdrawn funds”

The opposition and certain non-governmental organisations warn that the reduction of funds for these selected institutions signals political retaliation. Both the Court of Audit and the National Council are critical oversight bodies that have criticised the government for irregularities and a lack of transparency. The President of the National Council, Marko Lotrič, also stated that the funds were “childishly withdrawn” without thorough negotiations.

Independence of oversight bodies in question

The budget reduction for institutions crucial to oversight and ensuring transparency in state operations raises concerns about the independence of these bodies. Is this truly about rationalisation, or is it a warning to silence critics?

The Court of Audit is a key institution that ensures public funds are spent properly and budget procedures are correctly implemented. Its role is vital for maintaining transparency and accountability in public administration. Similarly, the National Council, as the upper chamber of Parliament, plays an important role in decision-making that impacts all citizens. When these two bodies express concerns or criticism of government policies, it inevitably raises the question of whether funding cuts are strategic attempts to reduce their power or simply necessary fiscal consolidation.

Previous budget cuts for oversight institutions

Similar measures occurred in the past when funding for oversight institutions like the Court of Audit was reduced in response to their criticism of government projects. For example, during the Marjan Šarec government, concerns were raised that cuts to the Court of Audit were directly tied to accusations of political influence and the safeguarding of political interests within the administration. Even then, warnings surfaced that these cuts were retaliatory measures for unfavourable findings by oversight bodies.

National council and political consequences

A similar situation occurred with the National Council, which has often highlighted irregularities in legislative processes and recommended additional reviews of certain laws. In 2019, during the Marjan Šarec government, the National Council criticised government measures regarding tax policy and legislative changes related to the privatisation of state-owned companies. While the council’s proposals were often professionally justified, accusations of political motivation and influence consistently arose. These criticisms were later linked to funding cuts for the council, interpreted as a sign that Šarec’s government did not want the institution to continue obstructing its decisions.

These examples highlight a recurring issue in Slovenia, where political decisions regarding the budgets of oversight institutions often reflect political motivations, threatening their independence and effective functioning in the public interest.

Conclusion: A risk to democratic values

The reduction of funds for the Court of Audit and the National Council is not merely a fiscal decision but a political signal that raises questions about the future of transparency and accountability in Slovenia. These institutions are essential for the functioning of a democratic system, ensuring that government actions comply with the law and benefit citizens. Increasing numbers of critics argue that these cuts are not merely an inevitable part of fiscal policy but an attempt to influence independent institutions that pose obstacles to the ruling government. For Slovenia’s future, it is crucial that the government protects these institutions and ensures their effective and independent operation.

Budget cuts: Punishment or rationalisation?

The funding cuts for the Court of Audit and the National Council are not just technical measures for optimising public finances, as the government claims. Instead, they carry political weight that cannot be ignored. Government critics argue that the cuts are a direct response to unfavourable reports from the Court of Audit, which highlighted shortcomings in public funding, and to the National Council’s role in pointing out legislative errors or deficiencies. While the government insists the reductions are necessary to balance the budget, the question remains whether these measures are truly essential for maintaining the country’s financial stability or simply political retaliation.

For any democratic society, it is crucial that oversight institutions remain independent and adequately funded. The Court of Audit and the National Council ensure that public measures and budget procedures are executed in compliance with the law, free from political influence. Reducing their budgets may undermine their ability to fulfil these tasks. Transparency in public spending and accountability for government actions are the foundation of citizens’ trust in institutions. In the current political climate, where allegations of political ties and unfair practices abound, this independence is more critical than ever.

Protest letter from court of audit leadership: 30% budget cut

The President of the Court of Audit, Jana Ahčin, in a protest letter signed by her two deputies, all senior state auditors, and the Court’s secretary, condemned the unjustified interference of the legislative and executive branches in the independence and autonomy of the Court of Audit.

The Court of Audit particularly highlighted the unannounced budget cuts executed by the government through its coalition in the National Assembly on Wednesday, November 20th. The government informed the Court of the 3.86-million-euro reduction on the same day the National Assembly approved the budgets for 2025 and 2026. The leadership emphasised that the initial budget had been agreed upon with the Ministry of Finance but was later reduced by 30% without any consultation. The Court, whose financial independence is constitutionally guaranteed, considers such interference by the government and coalition as unacceptable and a serious violation of its autonomy as the supreme state auditing institution.

In the protest letter, the leadership called on the government and the National Assembly to respect the constitutional position and independence of the Court of Audit when making decisions. This appeal was unsuccessful. Although the National Council vetoed the budget, the Golob coalition voted again and confirmed its proposal.

Share

Latest news

Related news