By: Peter Jančič (Spletni časopis)
For the factory of lies, because we wrote that there was additional work for the Faculty of Arts, Minister of Culture Asta Vrečko (Levica party) cursed the media. But later admitted that she did indeed work for this faculty because I published a document showing that she had requested permission from the government to do so. Speaker of the National Assembly Urška Klakočar Zupančič (Svoboda), on the other hand, after the writings of the “factories of lies”, only from the government political spectrum, demanded the resignation of Constitutional Court judge Klemen Jaklič because he had the status of a independent contractor open for several years while serving as a constitutional judge, occasionally lecturing, and researching. She declared that he had violated the law. She likes to judge. In legal states, judges judge, which Klakočar Zupančič has not been for several years now.
Just a slap for Accetto or something more?
That there were purges in the top echelons of the largest state-owned media, healthcare institutions, and companies, it is probably an exaggeration to anticipate purges in the judiciary, where a few judges are not entirely in line with the ruling party. However, the demand for Jaklič to resign is certainly a slap for Constitutional Court President Matej Accetto, for not taking action. Klakočar Zupančič arrived at the conclusion that Jaklič must resign when reading the opinions of the left-wing magazine Mladina. The additional work of Jaklič was initially pointed out by the magazine Reporter. However, Klakočar Zupančič reads Reporter less than Mladina. Jaklič is not popular on the left because he is part of the minority of judges on the Constitutional Court who were not appointed by the left and he issues separate opinions when the majority leans too much towards Svoboda party. The CPC Erar application shows how Jaklič has reported additional work publicly in recent years.
Jaklič responded to the criticism on Planet TV, stating that the law allows constitutional judges to engage in a profession and gainful activity if it involves the activity of a university lecturer, a scientific worker, or a university collaborator. He had a registered status as an independent contractor, which he recently abolished because it incurred more costs than benefits.
The law states the following:
Article 16
(1) The function of a Constitutional Court judge is not compatible with:
– functions in state bodies, in bodies of local communities, in bodies of political parties, and in bodies of trade unions,
– work in state bodies, in bodies of local communities, and in holders of public powers,
– membership in management and supervisory bodies of companies, institutes, and cooperatives,
– practicing a profession or engaging in gainful activity except for the activity of a university lecturer, a scientific worker, or a university collaborator.
Regarding the media reporting, which was sharply criticised by Urška Klakočar Zupančič, Jaklič stated that he does not find it problematic because he advocates for freedom of the press and speech, believing that there is still too little of it. He did not label them as “factories of lies” like Asta Vrečko did.
The additional work of a constitutional judge would be abuse if parties in disputes paid or rewarded him for additional work to rule in their favour. That would be corruption. An impression of such unfair conduct arose in the last year, but not regarding Jaklič. It involved Constitutional Judge Neža Kogovšek Šalamon. Jaklič’s additional work was not concealed. The fact that he was an independent contractor for educational activities was publicly available information throughout. Even on the Commission for the Prevention of Corruption (CPC). What was more hidden was that Minister Vrečko had additional work and that six other constitutional judges did too. I learned about Asta Vrečko’s additional employment when in 2022 I demanded data from the government about which ministers were allowed additional work.
That many constitutional judges also have additional employment became apparent to me when I was checking whether former director of the Peace Institute, Neža Kogovšek Šalamon, would be recused from judging at the Constitutional Court because, as a constitutional judge, she also has additional employment with the Peace Institute. Moreover, while the law on purges at RTVS (Radio-Television Slovenia) was already in force, she was ruling in favour of the interests of this private institution, which, along with the President of the National Assembly, Urška Klakočar Zupančič, advocated for the replacement of the entire management of RTVS.
When I asked the Constitutional Court whether Kogovšek Šalamon had permission for additional work for a party involved in a dispute before the Constitutional Court, I learned that President of the Constitutional Court, Matej Accetto, had allowed her additional work, and that many constitutional judges also have “side” additional employment. The information about who the constitutional judges are working for additionally is not publicly available and accessible to everyone, so that parties involved in disputes could find out whether judges might be paid by those from the other side.
When it was revealed that there had been unfair adjudication, Judge Kogovšek Šalamon was recused from the proceedings regarding the RTVS law. Before that, the Secretary-General of the Constitutional Court, Sebastijan Nerad, explained to me: “Regarding the recusal of judges, it is possible for parties to the proceedings or the judge themselves to propose recusal, but the decision on recusal is always made by other judges.” Kogovšek Šalamon did not propose her own recusal immediately, nor did President Accetto, even though he had allowed her additional paid work and was therefore aware of the issue.
The concept of the Institute of Consent for additional work loses much of its meaning, if not its entirety, with this situation.
The Peace Institute is a private institution similar to those like the March 8th Institute or the May 1st Institute and actively participated in the campaign regarding the RTVS law on the side of the ruling parties, Svoboda, SD, and the Levica. It also appeared in proceedings before the Constitutional Court. The appointment of Kogovšek Šalamon as a constitutional judge was quite controversial from the start. It is as if the director of the private March 8th Institute, Nika Kovač, or the director of the private May 1st Institute, Jan Škoberne, were appointed as constitutional judges. These are essentially party-affiliated institutions. The Peace Institute has the longest tradition, originating from the time of the Liberal Democracy of Slovenia (LDS) and Janez Drnovšek.
With a variety of organisations collaborating with the government parties to achieve the replacement of the leadership of RTVS (Slovenian Journalists’ Association, PIC – Legal Centre for the Protection of Human Rights and the Environment, and the Institute for Cultural Diversity Open), the Peace Institute even filed a special intervention with the Constitutional Court, in which they assessed that the purge of the RTVS leadership would not violate the constitution in any way. Until she was recused, Kogovšek Šalamon was among those who opposed the suspension of changes in the RTVS leadership until the court decides on the constitutionality.
In Jaklič’s case, there is no similar impression that he would rule in favour of those for whom he does additional work in specific cases. Yet, Klakočar Zupančič demands resignation. However, Jaklič did not report additional work to President Accetto and did not obtain permission for it. For Planet TV, he asserted that he should only obtain permission if he were to be additionally employed by a fifth, which he did not do. Also, it is not uncommon for officials not to report or obtain permission for additional work. One such case was that of SD MP in the previous term, Gregor Židan, who was initially not allowed to do additional coaching work in football at the beginning of his term, with the explanation that it was not scientific or pedagogical work. Later, however, he did coaching work for the football association, and the bill was issued through his company Gregorino Ltd, through which his namesake pizzeria in Ljubljana operated. As he explained, he informed the leader of his parliamentary group, Matjaž Han, about the additional work for the football association and coordinated with him.
Later, the majority in parliament decided that Židan’s hidden additional work, when he billed “per diems” to the football association through his private company, although he did not obtain permission from parliament for any of it, was not problematic.
That officials additionally work through their own companies, institutes, or associations is not unusual. One such example was the renowned basketball legend Peter Vilfan, whom the parliament allowed to return to his profession as a sports commentator after his term ended. However, when Vilfan was not re-elected, he did not employ himself in his own association, the Peter Vilfan Basketball School, for which, as a member of parliament, he billed the media as a sports commentator. Instead, he demanded parliamentary compensation, claiming he could not find work. He received approximately €21,000 in gross compensation. When his “right” expired, he was employed as a state secretary by Prime Minister Marjan Šarec. But only for a short time. Because irregularities were discovered in the meantime.
The media also pointed out Jaklič’s ruling on the Supreme Court, which decided that judges cannot be independent contractors because their work is incompatible with gainful activity. However, the Supreme Court’s ruling applies to regular judges, such as Urška Klakočar Zupančič. Additional work is specifically permitted for officials with limited mandates who return to their professions afterward. Constitutional judges, for example, return to teaching. If a constitutional judge has not taught for nine years, they cannot return because they would no longer meet the requirements for the job. Regular judges, on the other hand, are not such officials, as they have lifelong mandates and will not be returning anywhere. There is no reason to allow them, as MPs or ministers, to engage in additional work with a second job at universities or elsewhere, whether directly or through associations, Ltd., institutes, or independent contracts.
For example, former Health Minister Daniel Bešič Loredan (Svoboda) was additionally employed in his own Institute. Klakočar Zupančič did not demand his resignation.
However, it remains controversial whether Jaklič should have informed President Accetto about his additional work. Jaklič claims that this is only necessary for supplementary employment, and other work is not the concern of the President of the Constitutional Court. However, notifications are prudent precisely to enable action in case of conflicts of interest, as witnessed in the case of Neža Kogovšek Šalamon, where the President of the Constitutional Court did not intervene and immediately demand the judge’s disqualification due to a conflict of interest. Which would have been appropriate.
This revealed an additional flaw in the system. Silent notifications and approvals within institutions are not a good solution. Citizens find it difficult to learn who political officials and constitutional judges are working for in addition to their main positions, and data on how much additional income they receive in this way are completely hidden. Because all of this is concealed, it is possible to commit fraud. The test of whether it is possible to find out will be Asta Vrečko, where I (similarly to other media) demanded data from the Faculty of Arts on how much they paid her additionally for her work with them in the past. However, this data should be accessible to everyone.
Urška Klakočar Zupančič, apparently frustrated with Accetto, has announced that she will report Jaklič to the Commission for the Prevention of Corruption, where they already had issues with the additional work of former President of the Court of Audit Tomaž Vesel, whom Prime Minister Robert Golob for Svoboda, of which the Speaker of the Parliament is also a member, has just declared as the Slovenian candidate for European Commissioner. Vesel has publicly claimed in the past that he informed the Commission for the Prevention of Corruption about his additional afternoon work for a global football organisation, through which he earned much more in Switzerland than leading the Court of Audit at home. When journalists verified these claims with the Commission for the Prevention of Corruption, we learned that there were no traces of communication or permission from them, and that such permissions are not within the purview of this institution.
Surely, the candidate for European Commissioner will now have to provide more detailed explanations, not only because of the esteemed position that awaits him with the help of the Prime Minister and Svoboda, but also due to the political reasons behind his nomination. We will observe Klakočar Zupančič to see how capable she is of cleaning up her own backyard, as everyone seems adept at pointing fingers at others’ faults while ignoring their own.
Klakočar Zupančič, of course, targeted Jaklič for political reasons. She remains silent on the much more controversial case of Neža Kogovšek Šalamon and Vesel for the same reasons.
However, by chastising Jaklič and Accetto, she will not solve the country’s problems. Just as no problems were solved by purges in the media and healthcare. Parliament could at least address some of these issues and ensure more transparency in the additional employment of officials, thus reducing fraud.
But unfortunately, they prefer to politicise and waste time, even with the President.
