By: Sara Kovač / Nova24tv
“When I publicly congratulated Dr Anže Logar (I also congratulated my lawyer colleague Dr Nataša Pirc Musar and Dr Vladimir Prebilič), I was subjected to a number of insults and abuse, such as ‘a closeted Janšaist is among us,’ and worse, but I would rather not repeat all of those ugly things. Although I am not obliged to explain my vote to anyone, I will do so because perhaps in this way I will contribute at least a little to a more tolerant dialogue and the unification of the fractured Slovenian politics,” wrote lawyer Marko Pavliha who, as he says, is on a different side of the political spectrum than Logar.
In recent days, the media headlines have been filled with attacks on Nika Kovač, who has been receiving incredible media attention from “independent” media outlets. The attack on her is reprehensible, as are all of the other insults and attacks, which, although they do not benefit the mainstream media and therefore are not mentioned as part of their stories, are happening anyway. One such incident recently happened to lawyer Marko Pavliha only because he supported Anže Logar as a candidate for the President of the Country after the resignation of Marta Kos.
He said that in elections, he always makes a subjective decision for a concrete individual, which is often difficult because of our flawed electoral system. “My initial choice in the presidential election was Marta Kos, and the second choice was Dr Anže Logar, which I also told him. I also respect Ivo Vajgl, but he did not have a realistic chance of becoming a presidential candidate.” Pavliha believes that Kos was badly played by her own party, and that is why he chose Logar, because he did an excellent job as the Minister of Foreign Affairs in the previous government’s term. But this is where the trouble started.
After his congratulations, the insults started pouring in After Pavliha publicly congratulated Logar, the insulting comments and curses poured in, and just like Nika Kovač accused some media outlets of being to blame for the attack on her, we could take the same path here. Let’s just recall the coverage of the national media outlet Radio-Television Slovenia and the largest commercial television station’s news programme, 24ur, about their visit to Logar’s headquarters. In the story about Logar’s headquarters, the cover was not adorned with a smiling Logar – they used a gloomy photograph of a seemingly unrelated object, and they did not summarise his statement, but rather chose a sentence that sounded like something from an Alfred Hitchcock movie: “The disappearance of the flat cake (pogača), the arrival of Janša and the mysterious conversation by the Ljubljanica river.” There is no doubt about what they were trying to communicate with this: disappearance, secret, darkness… Welcome to the dark side!
But despite all of the insults, lawyer Pavhila “felt obliged” to explain his decision on the grounds that it would contribute at least a little to a more tolerant dialogue and the unification of Slovenia’s fractured politics.
Why did he choose Anže Logar? “Because of his superior professionalism and networking skills, as well as his kindness, calmness, moderation and tolerance, and to top it all off, one of his leading supporters in the presidential campaign is the brilliant scientist and politician Dr Romana Jordan, whom I also hold in very high esteem.” Dr Logar invited Pavliha to be part of the Strategic Council on Foreign Policy and also to be a moderator of the Foreign Ministers’ Round Table on the Northern Adriatic at the Bled Strategic Forum, even though they are “officially” on different sides of the political spectrum. “And let me just add an interesting piece of information – after the latest elections to the national assembly, the internationally renowned expert and diplomat professor Dr Ernest Petrič and I found out from the media that we are no longer part of this consultative body, to which the new Minister of Foreign Affairs, Tanja Fajon, has appointed her own ‘vetted’ staff.”
Pavliha has not belonged to any political party for more than ten years now and has always strived for trans-partisan politics and a civil society that would unite us, not divide us, that would be the best for the people as a golden mean and a state-building river between the two banks. “Is it really so reprehensible, then, for a man to think with his own head and his heart and support a particular person for his virtues and skills, regardless of political or other affiliations? After all, such discrimination is also forbidden by our Constitution, according to which even MPs are representatives of all people, and not just of their political parties,” Pavliha wondered. He will do the
same in the second round of the presidential elections, even if that means he will lose some of his so-called friends, he pointed out.