By: Dr. Matevž Tomšič
The recently concluded rule of “Svoboda” can be described with many characteristics, most of them negative. But if we had to choose one that most clearly defined the forma mentis and the resulting actions of the previous left‑wing coalition, it would be hypocrisy. This means that its representatives applied stark double standards when judging the words and actions of “their own” and “the others”. What is unacceptable and condemnable in the latter is permissible or even desirable in the former. What is allowed for some is not allowed for others.
This hypocrisy has become especially visible after the elections, when this political group lost the levers of power. Now they loudly proclaim democracy and human rights, allegedly threatened under the new government. They express great concern about the danger of abuses of power for political purposes. Thus, they fiercely attacked the new law on parliamentary inquiries. Together with loyal NGOs, they began collecting signatures for a subsequent legislative referendum, claiming that the law would enable abuses of parliamentary inquiries to persecute critics of the government. Supposedly, this is a step toward authoritarianism (which the left constantly attributes to Janša anyway).
But we must recall what these same people, who now speak so vehemently about abuses of power, did when they themselves held power. At that time, they extensively abused state institutions to target political opponents and others critical of them. In this regard, Golob’s government surpassed all its predecessors.
One of the instruments that was intensely and crudely abused for political purposes was precisely the parliamentary inquiry. The most striking example was the commission with a long and complicated name, which in reality investigated media that were “incorrectly” politically oriented, meaning those unfavourable to the government. This was clearly stated by the commission’s first chair, Mojca Šetinc Pašek, who said it was established to target the SDS party and its media network. Even more explicitly, Vesna Vuković, then the general secretary of “Svoboda”, said in one of the recordings published before the elections that the commission’s purpose was to portray Janez Janša as a criminal. And because Šetinc Pašek was not satisfactory to her party, the commission was taken over by Tamara Vonta. She led it with the zeal and fervour of a true inquisitor. She treated invited witnesses as if they were criminals, insulting and humiliating them. She unlawfully dug into the business operations of the investigated media, even when it had nothing to do with the subject of the inquiry. This was an abuse of parliamentary inquiry unprecedented in the history of representative democracy. The new parliamentary majority would have to try very hard to match it.
A similar example of hypocrisy is the complaint by representatives of the new opposition about the way the National Assembly and its bodies are being run. They claim it is arrogant and unfair to them. But let us recall how they behaved when they held the levers of decision‑making. How hostile the previous president of the legislature was toward the then opposition. And how offensive those (mostly) female MPs were, the same ones who are now the loudest in expressing outrage. They clearly see themselves primarily as provocateurs. Describing their behaviour as “street‑like” by Zoran Stevanović, for which he was fiercely attacked by the left‑wing scene, was entirely appropriate.
Nor are the representatives of the previous government the only hypocrites. This is also a hallmark of their media and civil‑society supporters. Those who now gather in the streets, file referendum initiatives, and so on, quietly supported or openly defended the abuses mentioned above. But for “our people”, different rules apply, do they not?