By: Peter Jančič
The prediction that the injured Primož Roglič and Tadej Pogačar with Urška Žigart would not be at the Olympic Games in Paris, but that Nataša Pirc Musar with her official companion Aleš Musar and Robert Golob with his companion Tina Gaber would be widely photographed there, did not entirely come true.
The government’s prediction was wrong. Gaber stayed at home, even though she was already at the airport and had a ticket. However, there was a buzz on social media that Pogačar was on vacation in Paris with Urška Žigart, with an old video posted as proof. Pogačar has undoubtedly been to Paris many times, having won the Tour three times and broken numerous records this year. It is unlikely anyone will come close to his achievements there for a long time.
Instead of Urška, Prime Minister Golob was photographed in Paris with Franjo Bobinac in standout white sneakers.
During Golob’s administration, Bobinac has ascended to the supervisory board of SDH and the top of the Olympic Committee, where he unsuccessfully attempted to sell the Sports Lottery to the Czech owners of POP TV. He is also quite personally connected with the media in another way: Bobinac’s Gorenje, along with GEN-I when it was led by Golob, and the company of Finance Minister Klemen Boštjančič, financed the parallel company of Siol.net, Necenzurirano journalist, and now Gibanje Svoboda politician Vesna Vuković’s SEE M. &C.
Urška Klakočar Zupančič is trying to block the parliamentary investigation into Golob’s financing of the Necenzurirano company, which was liquidated by Primož Cirman, the last owner. Despite this, she did not even receive Bobinac’s invitation to Paris.
The only one among the heads of the political branches of power. Marta Kos, however, was in Paris. Earlier this year, Golob had offered her the position of European Commissioner if she would lead the Gibanje Svoboda’s list in the EU elections. She declined. Klakočar Zupančič was also not ready to run.
Bobinac began the sale of the Sports Lottery after Golob met with Jiří Šmejc, CEO of the Czech company PPF, the owner of the most-watched TV channel POP TV, in December 2022. Golob did not report this meeting to the CPC, claiming it was not lobbying for business interests. The annoying opposition in parliament stopped the sale of the lottery, as Zvone Černač (SDS) demanded explanations from the Prime Minister.
How everything is connected is evidenced by the fact that Nina Zidar Klemenčič, acting as a lawyer for the Czech buyers, also helped Sebastjan Vežnaver sell the dream building for the courts to the government, which the courts do not want. This ultimately led to the dismissal of Justice Minister Dominika Švarc Pipan and Tanja Fajon from the top of the SD party, but not Finance Minister Boštjančič, who allocated the money for the purchase from state reserves, bypassing the state budget and the rules of normal and prudent business conduct.
The affair also led to the dismissal of Švarc Pipan’s deputy, Igor Šoltes, who had previously headed the Court of Audit and thus knew that what the Ministry of Finance was doing with the allocation of funds from state reserves for the purchase of property in Ljubljana was improper. This week, the government sent his successor at the top of the Court of Audit, Tomaž Vesel, to parliament for consideration as a candidate for European Commissioner, a position the state must propose to Brussels by August 30th. Ursula von der Leyen has called on countries to also offer female candidates to ensure a gender-balanced commission. According to the government, Tomaž Vesel will be both the male candidate and the female candidate from Slovenia.
Vesel explained that proposing an additional candidate would violate the law, which is an ambitious interpretation. The law states that the country nominates a male candidate or a female candidate. There is no prohibition against nominating more than one. If this were truly an issue, the coalition could also amend the regulation. The clause is as follows:
Article 11.b
(1) The government proposes a male or female candidate for the member of the European Commission (hereinafter referred to as: candidate) based on the notification of the competent EU institutions and forwards the proposal to the National Assembly. The government decides on the proposal at a regular session.
(2) The candidate presents themselves to the working body of the National Assembly responsible for European affairs, which votes on the candidate and provides an opinion with a justification, and promptly sends it to the government.
(3) The government is not bound by the opinion from the previous paragraph. After receiving the opinion and before forwarding the proposal of the candidate to the competent EU institutions, the government informs the National Assembly of the proposal. The government’s proposal must be justified.
That Vesel would be the candidate has been known for several months. He was appointed by Golob. Now, the government claims this ensured the transparency of the process. The transparency was in not seeking the best candidate. Initially, Golob traded the position to secure the leader of the European list. When that failed, Vesel, who had been appointed before the European election results and the selection of the President of the European Commission, became the candidate.
Thus, Golob very transparently ordered it.
In the past, we have witnessed similar directives when Alenka Bratušek, as Prime Minister in 2014, nominated herself for a position when it was already clear that her time at the top of the government was over. She came to power when Zoran Janković’s Positive Slovenia won a relative victory in the 2011 elections but was unable to form a government at the beginning of 2012. The government formed by Janez Janša was blown up within a year by Goran Klemenčič (husband of lawyer Nina Zidar Klemenčič) with CPC reports on the leaders of some parties, which he published about Janša and Janković, and as the court later found, he forgot to offer them the right of reply. This led Gregor Virant to leave Janša’s government and help form Bratušek’s government.
When Bratušek tried to ascend to the European Commission, Virant unsuccessfully opposed it at home, but she was stopped in Brussels, where she performed poorly in her presentation.
How it will be with Vesel this time, we will see, but Vesel has never been elected to any important political position in free elections, and now he is being proposed for a position with over 20,000 euros in salary without additional allowances. This will put him almost on par with the salary Robert Golob received at the state-owned GEN-I. The opposition in parliament is also trying to investigate this because it far exceeded the limits for the heads of state-owned companies.
Vesel was similarly well-paid as the head of the Court of Audit when he received around 200,000 euros in 2021 for part-time work at FIFA. He informed the public that he had been allowed to do this by CPC, but when journalists checked, CPC found no trace of it. Vesel has also not shown any “permission” or any documentation so far.
This is particularly interesting today because the President of the Parliament, Urška Klakočar Zupančič, who was not invited to Paris by Franjo Bobinac, recently “expressed the expectation” that Constitutional Court judge Klemen Jaklič should resign because he had the status of a self-employed person for some time for additional work as a university teacher, for which he did not receive special permission from his employer or CPC.
Nor did Vesel have permission for additional work at FIFA when he was head of the Court of Audit, where it involved much more money and also a conflict of interest, as the Court of Audit audited major sponsors of football, such as Telekom, not to mention the state.
However, Vesel should be credited for never running away from journalistic criticism and answering even the unpleasant questions of journalists who are not “his”.
In this respect, he is certainly better than Golob. Whether he is with Tina or not.
P.S. There are some responses on social networks to the column suggesting that Vesel has not always acted exemplarily when it comes to the media. When I describe that he also responded to journalists who are not “his”, I am referring to an event when, as editor of Siol.net, I criticised him for his actions at the Constitutional Court in checking respirators and the non-existent CPC documentation on additional work at FIFA, and he responded in an interview about his controversial behaviour. The interview is available here: Vesel on the criticism of Prime Minister Janša: “I do not understand it”.
The reactions that not everything was exemplary are as follows:
peter jancic • Jul 28
@peterjancic
It counts in Vesel’s favour that he never shied away from journalistic criticism and answered even the unpleasant questions from journalists who are not “his own”. In this he is definitely better than Golob. Well, if he is with Tina or without her.”