By: Kavarna Hayek
A note by the Ministry of the Interior (MNZ) on the Twitter social network leaves no doubt – it equated legal migration with illegal. That it is necessary to accept them, because they are part of the “reality and constant of modern societies” and that the number of illegal crossings is comparable to the pre-coronavirus year 2019.
When the Ministry, which is in charge, among other things, of protecting the borders and preventing illegal crossings, considers that it does not really matter who enters its territory and in what way, because this has become something completely normal in the modern world, it means that the government renounces territorial sovereignty and authority. Namely, borders determine how far the power (or influence) of the government extends. After Robert Golob de facto handed over the executive authority to non-governmental organisations at the end of June, Minister Tatjana Bobnar announced that the government is renouncing its sovereign right to control state borders.
Let me be very clear: any illegal border crossing is a violation of the territorial sovereignty of a country. Although such crossings happen every day all over the world, countries usually tend to prevent every illegal crossing. And if the country’s goal is “zero deaths on Slovenian roads”, the goal of border control should be “zero illegal border crossings”. Not 100, 500 or 1,000 per year, but zero (0!). All neighbouring countries (Italy, Austria, Hungary) have such a goal, but Slovenia has now given up. Bobnar apparently does not care whether the newcomers (whom she does not know and does not know for what purpose they are coming) enter Slovenia through illegal smuggling or legally at border crossings. And even if she is an ardent supporter of (illegal) migration, today she is in a position where she has to defend and protect the borders. It is completely irrelevant what the government (or the police) thinks about migration, it must ensure that the law is respected (the executive branch takes care of this), which means that it must prevent illegal crossings, not encourage, and minimise them.
As we can read on the website of the government (MNZ), it is worrying that they do not separate migrants from refugees. A refugee is entitled to asylum in the first safe country. If we were a writ of law and adhered to it, no one would be able to get asylum in Slovenia because they had previously (illegally) crossed several safe countries. No one claims that migration is not a part of modernity (not only modernity, migration has always occurred in history), but it is about economic migrants who legally cross the border at border crossings. However, even in this case, the state has the sovereign right to determine who can enter and how many can enter its territory. If it wants to preserve the national identity, culture, and tradition of the indigenous people (borders usually define a rounded territory with the same culture, language, and tradition), it does not allow unlimited in its territory……
