By: Ana Horvat (Nova24TV.si)
“It does not seem right to us that someone, solely because they have a majority in the National Assembly, can arbitrarily come and dismantle a public institution, not because we do not like you, but because it is bad for democracy. Tomorrow, someone else, more totalitarian than you, could come and demand the same,” said Dr Peter Gregorčič during a confrontation with MP Mojca Šetinc Pašek on the N1 show. The latter appeared visibly powerless against the articulate Gregorčič, who presented facts while she herself put forward weaker arguments.
“I understand that this topic is highly political and emotionally charged because it concerns the issues at RTV Slovenia. However, you must know that when we talk about human rights, individuals are the bearers of human rights, and the essence of human rights is human dignity, which belongs to each individual simply because they are human. Even if you, I, or an MP were a criminal, we still have human rights that must be effectively protected. If they are not, then you violate the norms of civilisation, Europe, and the Western world,” explained Dr Peter Gregorčič at the beginning of his confrontation with Svoboda MP Mojca Šetinc Pašek on the N1 show.
Following the decision of the Constitutional Court to lift the temporary suspension of the implementation of parts of the new Radio and Television Act, Peter Gregorčič and author Matej Avbelj filed a complaint with the European Court of Human Rights, as they believe that all legal remedies in Slovenia have been exhausted. Gregorčič explained on the N1 show that this was the only option left for them at the moment to defend their rights. He initially submitted the decision on a potential violation of human rights due to the termination of the mandates of members of the programming and supervisory boards and representatives of RTVS management to the judgment of the court in Strasbourg. In the show, he criticised the decision of the Constitutional Court to lift the order for the temporary suspension of the law’s implementation as “scandalous”, as the court did not protect the legal position of the applicants in the assessment of constitutionality. He added that he and Avbelj believe this is a significant precedent not only in Slovenia but also in the European sphere, emphasising the need for effective protection of human rights.
“By its decision, the Constitutional Court has also clarified that it cannot fulfil its constitutional role in this composition. It can no longer effectively protect human rights. This means that we have exhausted all legal remedies, and the doors to the court in Strasbourg are open to us,” said Gregorčič. MP Mojca Šetinc Pašek from the Gibanje Svoboda party agreed that every person has the right to utilise all legal options both in Slovenia and at the European Court of Human Rights. However, she added that it is evident from the Constitutional Court’s decision that it has not yet reached its final decision.
Different opinions are the essence of pluralism
The MP accused the public broadcaster of political barbarism and pogrom, claiming that certain individuals employed at the RTV were or still are politically affiliated. While it is evident that she herself, coming from an “independent” journalistic background, has entered politics, she argues that her case is “completely different” and that she had higher ambitions. Gregorčič noticed that her statements are more discriminatory than not, and he believes that people should be treated equally regardless of personal circumstances, including political party affiliation. He stated that he is not a politician, does not exert any political influence, and is not a member of any political party, “personally I do not identify with any party, but I have my own perspective and worldview through which I evaluate events in the country, just as you do, just as Mr. Orešnik does, and I think that is right; that is the essence of pluralism”. In response to the accusation of “appointees” at the national television, which the MP also made, he asked her whether it is fair to inquire about political affiliation when people apply for a job and whether they should be accepted or rejected based on that criterion.
Politics is not the only one that seeks influence over the media
“As a former journalist, you probably know that politics is not the only one that seeks influence over the media. There are also economic, social, and interest groups,” replied Gregorčič to the MP. He added that “any group that wants to exert its power and gain influence wants to control the media”. He explained that we only know about the words and actions of politicians when we hear them through the media, “and from that standpoint alone, this proposal is deficient because it removes the appointment of key bodies from a transparent process that takes place in the National Assembly. But mind you, this is an institution with the highest democratic legitimacy, into the dark rooms of civil society groups that also have their own interests,” said Gregorčič. He pointed out to the MP that he was never explained exactly what he had done wrong, and for which actions his position was being terminated. “I can assure you that when I took on the position of the President of the Programming Council last February, I strived to work solely for the benefit of the institution. I sought compromises within the institution, but I also experienced the following: when the Council of Workers complained that they could not establish a dialogue with the management, I wanted to help facilitate that dialogue due to internal conflicts. There are always two sides.” When he offered his assistance, it was rejected by the Council of Workers.
Gregorčič believes that the issued decision goes beyond the scope of RTV, and he adds that the Constitutional Court could have handled the matter in a much more elegant way. He suggests that the Constitutional Court “could have determined the method of implementing its decision, as it did in the case of environmental protection laws, where the matter has been dragging on for over a year with temporary suspensions, without anyone worrying about whether Slovenia will have to pay hefty compensations for not having proper waste management facilities. It could have specified a method of implementation that would have resulted in the reinstatement of their mandates, allowing the National Assembly to dismiss them with a guaranteed legal remedy, namely an appeal to the Constitutional Court. However, in this case, the Constitutional Court simply took the side of the legislature, imposed a measure, and let the complainants be washed away by the tide.”
“The authorities collectively act against the individual, which is contrary to the right to human rights because the state or the authorities are not the bearers of human rights and therefore cannot appeal to the ECHR,” said Gregorčič, who is convinced that human rights must be effectively protected.
Gregorčič does not expect his mandate to be reinstated by the court in Strasbourg; according to him, the mentioned court provides “satisfaction”. As he has explained multiple times, Gregorčič and Avbelj decided to file the complaint because they do not believe in depoliticisation or civil war. “We believe in law, in what is right”. He stated that he is glad he is no longer in that position since he agrees that things at RTV are untenable. “it does not seem right to us that someone arbitrarily, solely because they have such a majority in the National Assembly, comes and beheads a public institution, not because we would dislike you, but because it is detrimental to democracy”, Gregorčič said. He explained that “tomorrow someone else, more totalitarian than themselves, could come and demand the same”, warning of the potential consequences.