By: Moja Dolenjska
Slovenian Constitutional Court published a decision annulling Article 10.b of the Foreigners Act, which stipulates that, in the event of a crisis situation, foreigners can be swiftly removed from the country or denied entry into our country.
The mentioned tightening of asylum legislation, aimed at preventing the possibility of a large number of migrants entering Slovenia uncontrollably under the guise of seeking asylum, was adopted by the government of Janez Janša. It was challenged before the Constitutional Court by a group of then-opposition MPs from the parties Levica, LMŠ, SD, and SAB.
The Constitutional Court reviewed and ruled on this initiative despite the fact that the MPs who submitted it were no longer members of the National Assembly. In doing so, it changed its previous practice – without providing any specific justification or explanation, which is crucial in such cases.
Until now, the Constitutional Court had not ruled on initiatives submitted by MPs whose terms had expired by the time of the decision, arguing that the proposer’s legal interest in the matter had ceased. In this case, however, the Constitutional Court altered its previous practice. Yet it neither justified nor explained this change, which is a basic requirement for such significant shifts in judicial practice.
The decision to annul Article 10.b of the Foreigners Act was adopted by a narrow margin of five votes to four. Judges Rok Čeferin, Klemen Jaklič, Rok Svetlič, and Marko Šorli voted against the annulment.