Presidente. – L'ordine del giorno reca la discussione sulle dichiarazioni del Consiglio e della Commissione sui diritti fondamentali e Stato di diritto in Slovenia, in particolare i ritardi nella nomina dei procuratori europei (2021/2978(RSP)).
Ricordo a tutti i colleghi che per tutte le discussioni di questa tornata non è prevista la procedura "catch-the-eye", né saranno accettate domande "cartellino blu".
Inoltre, sono previsti anche interventi a distanza dagli Uffici di collegamento del Parlamento negli Stati membri.
Anže Logar,President-in-Office of the Council. – Mr President, prior to my intervention, let me make a short notice from the Presidency on the EU budget vote. At the beginning, I would like to inform you that, after the announcement of the plenary vote on the EU budget 2022, the Presidency delivered, on behalf of the Council, a statement on the budget vote in a written form congratulating you for concluding your vote on the budget of the European Union for the financial year 2022. The Council notes with satisfaction that the European Parliament confirmed the agreement reached at the Conciliation Committee meeting on 15 November.
Now, coming to the today’s agenda topic, as we know, the rule of law is essential in guaranteeing that our common values are well protected and complied with, ultimately ensuring the very functioning of our Union. Let me therefore start by highlighting the importance that the Council attaches to this issue and how the Presidency is committed to bringing forward exchanges in a positive and constructive atmosphere on the rule of law and related issues, while observing the principle of objectivity, non—discrimination and equal treatment of all Member States.
The General Affairs Council, in the framework of the annual rule of law dialogue, twice discussed the development in the area of the rule of law. The intention is to retain an atmosphere of trust where best practices can be exchanged and a preventive approach can be set into motion. The Commission’s 2021 Rule of Law report fed into this key exercise. Let me stress that the dialogue is of paramount importance since it allows Member States to reach a common understanding of rule of law principles and to address possible shortcomings before they become actual problems. Best practices, experiences and also critical remarks are exchanged.
On 19 October, in a horizontal discussion on the rule of law in the EU as a whole, the Council covered the general trends in the Union, both positive and negative, with the aim of enabling the lessons learned and strengthening EU resilience, also in upholding the rule of law. The debate, inter alia, focused on the institutional checks and balances amidst the restrictive measures in the COVID—19 pandemic, with attention to the role and responsibilities of the respective branches of power.
Yesterday, the General Affairs Council held a country—specific discussion, which allowed to cover developments and particular aspects of natural rule of law frameworks in five Member States, namely Croatia, Cyprus, Italy, Latvia and Lithuania. Once again, the Council proved a committed forum where Member States can discuss various rule of law issues and learn from, and about, each other in an open, inclusive and constructive debate.
Coming to the situation in Slovenia, we have read with great attention the relevant country chapter in the Commission’s 2021 Rule of Law Report. I quote some findings. ‘The Slovenian justice system has seen some positive developments, including on issues raised in the 2020 Rule of Law Report.’ ‘The legal and instrumental framework for preventing and fighting corruption continues to improve.’ ‘Parliament continued to function after quickly amending the Rules of Procedure to allow for online sessions.’ ‘The financial independence of certain independent bodies has been protected by a Constitutional Court judgment.’ ‘To discuss the rule of law, the President of the Republic convened the first ever meeting of all three branches of government.’
However, the report also acknowledged that there are concerns in regard to downward trends in certain areas. Appointments of state prosecutors are unjustifiably delayed and the pandemic exposed the need to accelerate improvements to electronic communication tools. The low number of convictions for corruption cases, especially for high—level instances, remain a serious concern. The area of media freedom and pluralism faced several challenges.
The report also raises concern by national and international stakeholders, following the refusal by the authorities to finalise the Slovenian press agency for 2021 and the failure to timely nominate European delegated prosecutors. In this regard, I would like to highlight that the Slovenian Government and the Slovenian press agency concluded an agreement concerning the provision of public service, thus guaranteeing financial resources to the agency.
Referring to the European Public Prosecutor’s Office (EPPO), I wish to draw your attention to the fact that the Council attaches the greatest importance to the smooth operation of this body. The Council has always supported the EPPO and actively worked towards the implementation of the EPPO Regulation. Concerning the appointment of European delegated prosecutors, I would like to remind you that the Council is not involved in the procedure. The appointment is a matter for the individual Member State. Nevertheless, I can inform you that Slovenian Government nominated two candidates for appointment last week, on 19 November 2021, and, as we were informed, the EPPO College has confirmed their appointment today.
To conclude, let me repeat that one of the priorities of the Slovenian Presidency is strengthening the rule of law, which is the joint responsibility of the EU institutions and the Member States. Respecting the rule of law is also vital to maintain citizens’ trust in public institutions and a prerequisite for mutual trust among Member States.
Didier Reynders,membre de la Commission. – Monsieur le Président, Monsieur le Ministre, Mesdames et Messieurs les députés, l’objectif du rapport annuel sur l’état de droit, dont la seconde édition a été adoptée en juillet dernier, est de suivre la situation dans tous les États membres de l’Union, tant les évolutions positives que les évolutions négatives. Ce rapport a prouvé qu’il pouvait servir de base à un véritable dialogue politique sur l’état de droit dans l’ensemble de l’Union.
Permettez-moi, dès lors, de présenter les principales conclusions de la Commission sur la situation de l’état de droit en Slovénie, telles qu’elles sont détaillées dans le chapitre consacré à cet État membre dans notre rapport annuel. Comme indiqué à plusieurs reprises, je vous confirme que je suis à la disposition de votre Parlement pour aborder également les conclusions du rapport relatives à chacun des États membres.
As regards the justice system, Slovenia has seen some positive developments this year, in particular, the ruling of the Constitutional Court that declared the rules governing parliamentary inquiries to be unconstitutional for lack of safeguards on judicial independence provides an important protection for judges. Also, the judiciary initiated a discussion on improving the framework for disciplinary proceedings regarding judges.
I also take note of the recent decision of the Constitutional Court, which clarified the guarantees on impartiality in certain disciplinary proceedings regarding judges. However, appointments of state prosecutors remain unjustifiably delayed. It is not a good sign that, since the publication of this year’s report, the number of candidates for state prosecutors that are waiting for their appointment or promotion by the government has only increased, from 15 to 19.
Challenges remain in proceedings relating to cases of economic and financial crime. The COVID-19 pandemic exposed the need to accelerate improvements regarding electronic communication tools. Access to courts and prosecution documents has become a sensitive matter, leading to a Supreme Court judgment and to a legislative amendment.
Unfortunately, I also took note of another recent development, namely the seven degrees of budget for the justice system after the level of funds was already agreed, and without prior consultation on this change with the courts, the Judicial Council and the state prosecution.
As regards the anti-corruption framework. The report finds that the legal and institutional framework for preventing and fighting corruption continues to improve. Legislative amendments have improved the independence, organisation and functioning of the Commission for the Prevention of Corruption, although its human resources remain limited.
The same amendments have also strengthened the legal framework on lobbying, the protection of whistleblowers and declaration of assets. However, concerns remain over the effective enforcement of the anti—corruption rules, for instance, on conflicts of interest and on whistleblowers. Although the number of prosecutions has increased, the challenge remains, notably as regards the capacity for effective investigations and the low number of convictions for corruption cases, especially for high-level cases.
Let me now turn to the third pillar of the rule of law report, dedicated to media freedom and media pluralism. Over the last months, the Commission had expressed concerns as regards media freedom in Slovenia. Those related notably to attempts to undermine the funding and independence of the national press agency staff. The Commission always made it clear that it is the duty of the Slovenian Government to ensure the appropriate funding for the national press agency, in accordance with national law. The national authorities must also ensure that the independence of this agency is fully preserved.
We are aware that the long overdue funding for 2021 is now unblocked. The Commission will nonetheless continue to follow the situation closely with regards to both the financial viability and the independence of the agency, notably in light of the conditions attached to the funding. It is also clear that any political attacks on independent media and individual journalists are not acceptable.
As regards checks and balances, the report notes that the Slovenian Parliament continued to function during the COVID-19 crisis after quickly amending its rules of procedure to allow for online sessions. The financial independence of certain independent bodies has been protected by a judgment of the Constitutional Court. This court improved its efficiency and played an active role in reviewing COVID-19 measures.
Le rapport sur l’état de droit souligne également que l’absence de nomination dans les temps de procureurs européens délégués auprès du Parquet européen a suscité de grandes inquiétudes.
Comme vous le savez, les activités opérationnelles du Parquet européen ont débuté le 1er juin. À ce jour, le Parquet européen a reçu plus de 1 700 signalements criminels et ouvert plus de 350 enquêtes représentant un préjudice au budget de l’Union estimé à environ 4,5 milliards d’euros. Ces chiffres sont clairs, le parquet européen fonctionne, au-delà même des attentes, et nous pouvons nous en féliciter. En un peu plus de cinq mois, le Parquet européen est devenu l’acteur principal dans la lutte contre la fraude et la corruption portant atteinte au budget de l’Union. Permettez-moi donc de remercier encore une fois votre Parlement pour son soutien constant au Parquet européen.
La Commission a commencé une évaluation approfondie des mesures que les États membres ont prises pour adapter leurs systèmes juridiques nationaux à cette nouvelle réalité juridique. Notre objectif est clair: vérifier que les adaptations nécessaires ont bien été mises en place, que le cadre juridique national est conforme au règlement sur le Parquet européen et que le Parquet peut exercer tous les pouvoirs que le règlement lui confère.
Concernant l’absence de désignation de procureurs européens délégués par la Slovénie, j’ai été en contact étroit avec le ministre de la justice ainsi qu’avec le premier ministre pour les encourager à désigner des candidats. Nous prenons note du fait que le gouvernement slovène a finalement soumis, le 19 novembre, les noms de deux candidats au Parquet européen. Vous le savez, il appartient au collège du Parquet européen de se prononcer sur cette proposition, et il est important de noter que la nomination des procureurs européens délégués doit être conforme au droit de l’Union et respecter la pleine indépendance du Parquet européen. À cet égard, l’article 17 du règlement établissant le Parquet européen prévoit que, je cite, «les procureurs européens délégués sont nommés pour un mandat de cinq ans renouvelable». Je suis ravi que le collège du Parquet européen ait nommé aujourd’hui les deux candidats dans leurs fonctions pour le mandat de cinq ans prévu à l’article 17 du règlement établissant le Parquet européen, avec toutes les garanties requises pour assurer son indépendance.
Cela signifie qu’il y a désormais des procureurs européens délégués en place dans chaque État membre participant au parquet. Cela constitue une excellente nouvelle. Le parquet européen peut maintenant fonctionner pleinement et nous allons continuer à travailler à la conclusion d’accords entre ce Parquet européen et les États membres qui ne participent pas encore au Parquet, comme à la conclusion d’accords avec des pays tiers. Bien entendu, je ne peux qu’engager les États membres qui ne participent pas encore au Parquet européen – en respectant leur choix – à réfléchir à leur participation prochaine aux activités de cette nouvelle institution européenne.
Romana Tomc, v imenu skupine PPE. –Gospod predsednik!
Pred štirimi leti smo v Evropskem parlamentu obravnavali primer pranja milijarde evrov denarja iranskega izvora v največji slovenski državni banki z napotilom Parlamenta, naj ukrepajo institucije pravne države. Do danes za ta kriminal svetovne razsežnosti ni odgovarjal še nihče.
Slovenski sodniki, ki se niso uklonili pričakovanjem sistema, so deležni šikaniranja in sodnega preganjanja. Imamo prvorazredne državljane, ki se zaradi načrtnim napak v postopkih, izognejo roki pravice in drugorazredne, ki so za svoje pravice borijo desetletja.
Slovenija ima nedvomno precej težav z vladavino prava, ki izvirajo iz prejšnjega sistema. Ugotoviti razsežnost teh težav, naj bi bil tudi cilj nedavnega obiska neformalne skupine odbora LIBE. Žal pa so se namesto z resnimi težavami vladavine prava ukvarjali predvsem z vprašanjem delegiranih tožilcev in financiranja STA.
Vlada je pri imenovanju tožilcev bila omejena s slovensko zakonodajo. Iskanje rešitve je povzročilo zamude, ki pa ne bodo v ničemer vplivale na učinkovitost dela evropskega tožilskega organa, če bo zato volja. Vesela sem, da je zadeva rešena, tudi STA, in s tem odprta pot za pregon vseh, ki so z evropskim denarjem goljufali in sredstva porabljali za razne sumljive in preplačane projekte.
Najbrž se zato sprašujete, zakaj se je ta točka danes sploh znašla na dnevnem redu. Odgovor je jasen. Gre za nov poskus slovenske opozicije škodovati lastni vladi. Take poskuse pričakujem, seveda, tudi v prihodnje. Postajali bodo čedalje bolj brutalni, a tudi čedalje bolj prozorni, kot je bil tudi zadnji poskus kolegice Fajon s tako imenovanim lektoriranjem poročila o obisku v Sloveniji.
Ob vseh težavah, ki v tem trenutku pestijo Evropsko unijo, je nesprejemljivo in skrajno škodljivo, da se Evropski parlament izrablja za namen notranjepolitičnega obračunavanja.
Cyrus Engerer, on behalf of the S&D Group. – Mr President, unity in diversity. Colleagues, this is our slogan, and these are the words that bring us together. As a Union, we are all different and it is that which makes us European. We come in different shapes and sizes because of the places we come from, but we have diverse frames of mind and opinions, but regardless of these key and sometimes fundamental differences we are all European. What binds us together are our values, those values that all of us hold as supreme and that we all agreed upon when we came together in this European project.
To uphold values one thing is vital: dialogue. The ability to sit together and speak to each other and understand where we are coming from and what we want to achieve. This is what I wanted out of our mission to Ljubljana to achieve, but unfortunately we were met with empty chairs. We must be able to listen to each other and not turn everything into smear campaigns and to slander and polarisation. This is why it is so important to have forward-thinking discussions on fundamental rights and the rule of law, as the Commissioner said earlier on, be it in Slovenia, Germany, Poland or in any other Member State. It keeps us all on our toes striving to be better. It allows Member States like my own, Malta, to recognise where we can improve and make changes in order to reach a higher standard for all citizens. But in order to reach a higher standard, we must ensure a number of safeguards are in place to protect our democracies.
The European Public Prosecutor is one of them. Although it took a much longer time than expected, the nomination of Slovenia’s European Public Prosecutor is a step in the right direction, but one which could have been made much earlier. I thank the College for their appointment today.
European governments must ensure the separation of powers. European governments must ensure and must follow and abide by rulings by the courts. European governments must protect journalists and European governments must ensure diversity of opinion and freedom of speech.
Ramona Strugariu, on behalf of the Renew Group. – Mr President, I am a bit confused by Mr Logar’s message. We’re talking, Mr Logar, about six months of delay in nominating the Slovenian delegated prosecutors to the EPPO. We are talking about the Prime Minister’s direct intervention in the process. We are talking about the Minister of Justice resigning in protest.
This was an act of obstruction of justice in Slovenia and in the Union, casting a dark shadow over the current presidency of the Council. The consequence: investigations into serious crimes were completely blocked for all this time. Back in May, Mr Janša sabotaged a perfectly legally conducted procedure and prevented the nominations of two highly qualified prosecutors because of their involvement in past investigations into his own assets. His pressure, through the controlled media, is in pure violation of the independence of the State Prosecutor’s Office. I hope the Commission and the Council have eyes to see and ears to listen.
The scandal of nominating prosecutors is just the tip of the iceberg. Mr Janša is copying Mr Orban’s moves in making a mockery of key European values, media freedom as well. But we have now the tools to stop this kind of abuse. We prefer letters sent around confidentially, but the truth is that it is time to make that conditionality real – make it real and it will work.
Tineke Strik, on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group. – Mr President, Council, Commissioner, the rule of law crisis in Poland and Hungary have taught us to better monitor and intervene at a much earlier stage of regression, and our assessment of Slovenia is therefore timely. The rule of law functions, but it is under threat. It is unacceptable that the threats directly come from President Janša and his ruling party.
The personal attacks and lawsuits against actors safeguarding checks and balances are deeply concerning. They affect the authority of independent institutions, the freedom of speech of NGOs and citizens, and freedom of media for journalists. The government almost broke the Slovenian press agency by a complete budget cut. It must guarantee structural funding – not mid-next year, but now.
The governmental contempt for court rulings is devastating. Thanks to national and European pressure, the candidates for EPPO have finally been appointed for five years, but the Supreme Court judgment to end collective expulsions of migrants, for instance, is still ignored. So Janša’s disdain and embarrassing behaviour towards the European Parliament perfectly mirrors the problems he’s causing at home. Let’s hope that new elections will give the protection of the rule of law back to the Slovenian citizens. But I urge the Commission to stand with the people of Slovenia, stay alert and intervene if necessary.
Annalisa Tardino, a nome del gruppo ID. – Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, come da modus operandi di quest'Aula, oggi partiamo da una bella scusa: il presunto ritardo della nomina dei delegati sloveni nella procura europea, istituzione peraltro inutile, per attaccare la sovranità di uno Stato membro, la Slovenia. Oserei dire un "non tema", considerato che il governo sloveno, a guida del Presidente Jansa, ha non solo nominato i procuratori delegati, ma ha anche sbloccato i finanziamenti necessari all'attività della principale agenzia di stampa del paese, come da voi chiesto.
Dovreste invece chiedere al Primo ministro quali e quante difficoltà incontra un governo che deve risolvere problemi storici, lasciati in dote da un vecchio regime. Ma questo non vi interessa. Preferite servirci l'ennesima polemica strumentale, che tale è sia per la tempistica che per le modalità utilizzate dai suoi ideatori, che hanno come unico interesse quello di destabilizzare il governo di uno Stato membro.
Vedete, siamo stati di recente in missione a Lubiana e possiamo confermare che la Slovenia non è una dittatura, né una democrazia illiberale, ma è uno Stato sovrano dove le istituzioni pubbliche funzionano correttamente - lo dice la commissione LIBE - con riforme in itinere, e che tiene una linea politica, questo sì, a voi sgradita.
Ma la Slovenia ha tutto il diritto di esprimersi su come vede il proprio futuro e il futuro dell'Europa, dove tutte le voci devono trovare pari ascolto, se è vero che il dialogo è alla base della democrazia.
Ci dispiace, ma non riuscirete a imporci un pensiero unico su quello che la nostra Europa deve essere. Non ci stiamo ad assistere alla continua trasformazione dell'Europa in una cooperazione tecnocratica. Noi aspiriamo ad una cooperazione democratica, fondata sul rispetto di tradizioni, diversità e culture, fondata soprattutto sul rispetto delle singole nazioni, cuori pulsanti delle tradizioni democratiche.
Noi oggi qui difendiamo la Slovenia, quale Stato membro sovrano, per difendere anche la nostra idea di Europa.
Assita Kanko, on behalf of the ECR Group. – Mr President, I was in Slovenia with the European Parliament delegation. I saw a very beautiful country, with a very ugly political debate. Leaders of national institutions told us that they were able to do their work independently and without fear. I believe them. Journalists and NGOs also told us they were under attack from many sides. I believe them as well. What Slovenia needs, and what most of our Member States need, is a good dose of decency in the public debate. Less moralistic, more diplomatic; less sexist, more polite.
In many European countries we see a crisis of trust. I am convinced that where politicians, policymakers and opinion makers engage in the public debate in a dignified manner, trust will return. Trust does not equal agreement, but trust is essential to find workable compromises. It’s good that Slovenia’s national press agency is now funded again. It’s good that Slovenia has finally nominated two interim prosecutors for the European Public Prosecutor’s Office. Not soon enough, unfortunately, but good it’s finally happening. With all the challenges facing us these days, we need more of those solutions. More of those compromises. More dialogue for Flemish citizens, for Slovenian citizens, and for all of us inside the EU.
Κωνσταντίνος Αρβανίτης, εξ ονόματος της ομάδας The Left. – Κύριε Πρόεδρε, κύριε Υπουργέ αυτή τη φορά δεν μας φέρατε βίντεο. Σας είδαμε ζωντανά. Και έχουμε δεχθεί όλοι εδώ ότι η Ευρωπαϊκή Ένωση ζει με τις αντιφάσεις της. Όμως αυτό δίνει και ένα ιδιαίτερο πολιτικό ενδιαφέρον στην Ένωση μας. Όμως η περίπτωση του κυρίου Janša είναι, νομίζω, η υπέρβαση σε υπερθετικό σε υπερθετικό βαθμό, καθώς από τη μία προεδρεύει σε έναν θεσμό που από την άλλη απαξιώνει. Τι εννοώ. Θυμίζω ότι ο κύριος Janša και ο Υπουργός Δικαιοσύνης έκαναν πράξη το δικαίωμα στην αποσύνδεση —χαριτολογώ— με λάθος τρόπο και για λάθος λόγο, όταν, κληθείς από την επιτροπή μας να απαντήσει στα ζητήματα που αφορούν και τη σημερινή μας συνεδρίαση, απαίτησε αντί απαντήσεων να παίξουμε ένα βίντεο στην επιτροπή και μετά, όταν εμείς το αρνηθήκαμε, αποσυνδέθηκε. Στην πρόσφατη μας επίσκεψη της αρμόδιας επιτροπής, στην οποία συμμετείχα, στη Σλοβενία, πρέπει να σας πω ότι είχα άλλη εικόνα από την κυρία Kanko. Πρέπει να σας πω ότι ο πρωθυπουργός ακύρωσε την τελευταία στιγμή την επικοινωνία με την επιτροπή μας. Πλήρης απαξίωση των θεσμών που προεδρεύει ακριβώς ο κύριος Janša. Δεν θα σχολιάσω την ανιστόρητη και απαράδεκτη επίθεση του πρωθυπουργού της Σλοβενίας κατά της πολιτικής μου ομάδας που απάντησε επαρκώς και με αυστηρότητα ο Πρόεδρος Sassoli. Στις τρεις μέρες που βρεθήκαμε στη Σλοβενία διαπιστώσαμε ότι υπάρχει μείζον πρόβλημα που αφορά στη δικαιοσύνη. Νομίζω ότι η Σλοβενία ή θα συμμορφωθεί ή θα πρέπει να μπει μπροστά το άρθρο 7.
Balázs Hidvéghi (NI). – Mr President, the Left in this house is cooking from the same recipe all over again, isn’t it? The recipe is the following: take a successful, conservative right-wing government, come up with unfounded political attacks, disguise them as legal issues, and then put it up on the agenda here as a rule-of-law debate. We’ve seen this before: mostly it’s been about Hungary and Poland, now it is Slovenia. But let’s be clear: your real problem is that in these countries the liberal mainstream does not have hegemony. People are able to speak their minds without taboos, and they can have real debates without political correctness.
It is ridiculous how you criticise media freedom in these countries, but you forget to mention how media looks like in most of your countries now – like in Germany, for instance, where all the liberal views are tolerated and everything else is censored.
Luckily it does not matter how many fake fact-finding missions you organise to these countries, how many debates, resolutions or sanctions you push for here. It will always be and remain the free people of these countries to decide about their governments, and not you.
Jeroen Lenaers (PPE). – Mr President, to be honest I wasn’t sure about the necessity of this debate on the late nomination of the EPPO prosecutors today, but I have to admit, the colleagues who insisted on it do have impeccable timing, because this morning the two Slovenian prosecutors were indeed appointed by the College of the EPPO and the EPPO is now finally fully operational. So this debate comes at the right moment to send our congratulations to these prosecutors, to the EPPO, and to the Slovenian Government for doing the necessary, for doing exactly what this House has always called for. Just like this Parliament has always called on the Slovenian Government to ensure the proper functioning of the Slovenian press agency, which in the meantime has also signed a new contract securing normal funding, and we count on all parties to solve any outstanding issues for the future.
These two issues have featured prominently in our debates on Slovenia and I’m happy today that we can at least establish that both issues are addressed. That leaves us with the wider debate on the rule of law. This is a crucial debate because without rule of law, ultimately, democracy ceases to exist and it is up to all of us, whether at the European or the national level, to wherever and whenever it is under attack, defend the rule of law in a fair, objective and indiscriminate way. Because when we stop being objective about the rule of law and we start using it for political purposes, we ourselves contribute to the erosion of it.
Looking at the recent developments also in this House, there is also reason for concern. Reports were leaked to the Slovenian press before shared with Members. The Office of the Slovenian Opposition Leader edits reports of missions that she didn’t participate in. Is that really the way we want to work on the rule of law? Sometimes a good look in the mirror is necessary so what we ask of the Slovenian Government in order to further improve the rule of law situation in the country based on the recommendations also by the Commission, is what we should ask of ourselves as well.
Danes drugič v tej stavbi govorim o skrhani demokraciji v Sloveniji. Marca smo govorili o političnem vmešavanju v svobodne medije. Dejstvo, da že drugič govorimo o Sloveniji, potrjuje, da je v državi nekaj resno narobe in to obžalujem. Ne želim, da te razprave izzvenijo kot kritika Slovenije, njenih ljudi. To, kar je povod teh razprav, je kritika slovenske vlade pod vodstvom Janeza Janše.
Evropsko politiko so večkrat razburile provokacije premierja. Nazadnje, ko je zavrnil evropsko parlamentarno delegacijo in se pozneje z nekaterimi spustil v besedni boj na Twitterju. Odzivi so bili ogorčeni, ogorčeni so bili evropski odzivi na nedopustno finančno izčrpavanje Slovenske tiskovne agencije in zavlačevanje imenovanja dveh evropskih delegiranih tožilcev.
Pozdravljam, da so evropske institucije vztrajno zahtevale od slovenske vlade, naj izpolnjuje zakonske obveznosti. Danes smo dobili delegirana tožilca iz Slovenije, želim, da bosta sposobna brez očitkov o pristranskosti obravnavati zadeve in brez poskusov slovenske vlade, ki se zdi, da so danes že na mizi, da ju diskreditira ali celo odpokliče, kar je nemogoče. Slovenska vlada se namreč eno leto z njunim imenovanjem ni strinjala.
Tovrstne kršitve evropske zakonodaje v Sloveniji, tudi v primeru Slovenske tiskovne agencije, bodo žal pustile slab pečat na sicer solidnem delu slovenske administracije v času predsedovanja Slovenije na čelu Sveta Unije.
Spremljanje držav, v katerih je stanje demokracije zaskrbljujoče, je ključno, da zavarujemo naše skupne vrednote, človekovo dostojanstvo, svobodo, demokracijo, enakost, pravno državo, človekove pravice. In na nas, kolegi, je, da skupnim vrednotam ostajamo zvesti in vedno ukrepamo, če so te kršene, saj s tem obvarujemo ljudi.
Irena Joveva (Renew). – Gospod predsednik!
Če kritiziraš, sledijo napadi. Če ni podreditve, sledi uničenje. Če nisi s to vlado, moraš oditi. Če nisi njihov, se – skratka – pazi. Da, o trenutnih razmerah v Sloveniji govorim. Na primeru Poljske in Madžarske pa smo lahko videli, da tak odklon od demokratičnih norm preseže nacionalne okvire in preraste v problem Unije.
Drži, aktualna slovenska vlada je nedavno popustila pritiskom. Sprostili so financiranje STA po skoraj letu manipulacij. Seznanili so se z imenoma za evropska delegirana tožilca po več kot letu pravne farse. Ampak, naj vas to ne zavede.
Ves ta problem ni rešen, ne ve se, kaj bo naslednje leto, pri tožilcih pa se vlada s svojimi sklepi glede začasnosti in celo nekimi novimi zakonskimi predlogi še vedno samo norčuje iz neodvisnih institucij.
To popuščanje torej pomeni samo stopnjevanje pritiska drugje. Tožilstvo, sodstvo, policijo, medije, nevladnike, neodvisne regulatorne agencije poskušajo podrediti, utišati, blatiti. Z vsemi sredstvi.
Za domnevnim pluralizmom se skriva uničenje institucij, za teorijami zarote o komunistih se skrivata klientelizem in korupcija. To ni obramba tradicionalnih vrednot. To je njihova negacija.
Zavoljo bogate demokratične tradicije in integritete posameznic in posameznikov so naše institucije vzdržale do zdaj. Vendar, kako dolgo še? Kje so odločni konkretni odzivi? Kdaj vas bo izučilo, da stanje v eni državi članici vpliva na vso Unijo?
Mikuláš Peksa (Verts/ALE). – Mr President, the rule of law in Slovenia is unfortunately deteriorating quite rapidly. But as the only Member representing the Budgetary Control Committee during our mission to Slovenia, I have to admit that I observed something I would call grassroots-level corruption.
There is a big lack of competition in the country due to its size, and more than 90% of public procurements are won by local companies. For example, one single company can win most of the construction contracts as it is very much connected to the establishment. I am afraid we should strive for a more open, transparent and integrated EU single market on public procurement.
I also witnessed a very high level of pressure on the independence of different state institutions and civil society organisations. The government is cutting funds, initiating intimidation lawsuits and verbally attacking anyone who dares to investigate or criticise its actions. One example of good journalism is the Slovenian press agency, which unfortunately relies almost exclusively on governmental funding.
Nicolaus Fest (ID). – Herr Präsident, Herr Kommissar, councillor! Ich war selbst Mitglied der Mission in Slowenien, und am Ende stellt die Missionsleiterin Sophie in 't Veld fest: Die Institutionen funktionieren. Justiz, Parlament, Zivilgesellschaft und vor allem die Presse können arbeiten, und drei Viertel der slowenischen Presse sind regierungskritisch eingestellt.
Allein vier Dinge seien, so die Missionsleiterin, problematisch. Erstens, der Datenschutz, aber das sei in 90 % der europäischen Mitgliedstaaten ebenfalls der Fall. Zweitens – wir haben darüber gesprochen –, die Ernennung der europäischen Staatsanwälte. Das ist inzwischen geschehen – also Problem abgeräumt. Drittens, die Finanzierung der nationalen Presseagentur, auch das ist inzwischen geschehen – also Problem gelöst. Und viertens, so Sophie in 't Veld, sei der Umgangston zwischen Regierung und Opposition sehr scharf. Das ist richtig. Slowenien ist in dieser Hinsicht ein gespaltenes Land. Aber die EU ist nicht der Wachhund der Wortwahl und auch nicht die Nanny für freundlichen Umgang.
Es gibt also keinen einzigen Grund, die Überwachung von Slowenien fortzusetzen. Und drei der sieben Missionsmitglieder haben das auch deutlich gemacht, dass man hier endlich enden müsse. Und der eigentliche Skandal ist, dass diese Einwände im Endbericht keine Erwähnung fanden. Stattdessen will man das Monitoring fortsetzen, und das ist nichts anderes als eine steuerfinanzierte Verleumdung einer konservativen Regierung. Und so sehr ich Sophie in 't Veld schätze, sollten wir doch nicht dazu übergehen, hier die nächsten 30 Jahre alle möglichen Länder zum ewigen Ruhme der DRFMG-Leiterin zu beobachten.
Joachim Stanisław Brudziński (ECR). – Panie Przewodniczący! Kolejny raz w tej izbie jesteśmy świadkami ataku na suwerenny rząd państwa członkowskiego Unii Europejskiej. Po Polsce i Węgrzech dzisiaj przyszedł czas na Słowenię. Tym razem to rząd premiera Janszy jest obiektem ataku. Atak ten jest wbrew obowiązującym traktatom, które jasno stanowią, że kwestie wymiaru sprawiedliwości pozostają wyłączną domeną państw członkowskich. Po Warszawie i Budapeszcie dzisiaj Lublana i obywatele Słowenii, którzy demokratycznie zdecydowali, kto i jaka partia ma rządzić, są obiektem ataku lewicowej większości w tym parlamencie.
Może najwyższy czas, Szanowni Państwo, abyście uznali, że wasze neomarksistowskie wizje rezonerskie próby pouczania państw Europy Środkowo-Wschodniej niekoniecznie podzielają obywatele naszych państw. Mówicie Państwo o wartościach, mówicie o praworządności, no tak, tylko wiecie, my uznajemy te prawdziwe wartości w Starym i Nowym Testamencie, w prawie rzymskim, w filozofii greckiej, w logice arystotelesowskiej, a nie w neomarksistowskich utopiach.
Wstępowaliśmy do Unii Europejskiej Roberta Schumana, Konrada Adenauera, de Gaspariego, Monneta, a nie Karola Marksa. Wstępowaliśmy do Unii Europejskiej, w której państwa członkowskie są suwerennym podmiotem wspólnoty, na którą się umawialiśmy, a nie jakimś konglomeratem, superpaństwem, które wam jawi się w głowie i chcecie pisać kolejne scenariusze nowego wspaniałego świata.
Miguel Urbán Crespo (The Left). – Señor presidente, nuestro grupo político estuvo hace un mes en Eslovenia y el recibimiento del Gobierno de extrema derecha fue acusarnos en un tuit de ser terroristas antifascistas.
Este solo es un ejemplo del clima de intimidación y de acoso que tiene que sufrir la oposición diariamente; un ejemplo del uso esquizofrénico de las redes sociales, alentando el odio y la crispación.
Muy preocupante es cómo el derecho a la protesta —un derecho básico en cualquier democracia— está siendo seriamente amenazado por la represión contra los manifestantes, o cómo el Gobierno ha intentado cambiar el sistema de votación para dificultar el derecho fundamental a ciertos colectivos, o cómo se han utilizado también las supuestas medidas anti COVID-19 como una forma encubierta de recorte de libertades.
Todo esto está ocurriendo ahora mismo en Eslovenia, pero también está habiendo resistencias de medios independientes, del movimiento feminista, de las organizaciones que ayudan a los migrantes, de una izquierda que no se resigna. Desde aquí, desde el Parlamento Europeo, quería mandarles todo nuestro apoyo y decirles que no están solos.
Jiří Pospíšil (PPE). – Pane předsedající, dámy a pánové, dovolte mi několik poznámek k tomuto tématu. Já zde často vystupuji jako obhájce principů právního státu, považuji za mimořádně důležité, aby Evropský parlament tomuto tématu věnoval pozornost, a jsem také rád za dnešní debatu.
Na úvod je třeba konstatovat, že ten klíčový problém, kvůli kterému zde dnes debatujeme, a to je přístup slovinské vlády k evropskému prokurátorovi, evropskému veřejnému žalobci, byl vyřešen. Je třeba však konstatovat, že to slovinské vládě trvalo nepřiměřeně dlouho, že kolem toho byla celá řada, podle mého názoru, zbytečných politických debat a že k tomu mohlo dojít již dříve. Možná i pod vlivem té dnešní debaty slovinská vláda nakonec dva veřejné žalobce takto jmenovala.
V každém případě si myslím, že je třeba situaci sledovat. Na druhou stranu mně nepřipadá adekvátní debata kolegů z levice, kteří podle mého názoru příliš emocionálně hodnotí situaci právního státu ve Slovinsku a možná do toho trochu promítají i své politické vidění světa.
Já jsem velmi rád, že pan komisař zde hovořil obecně o evropském žalobci. Je to nová instituce, vkládáme do ní velké naděje. Mě potěšilo to, co bylo řečeno, že si veřejný žalobce vede velmi dobře, že řeší konkrétní kauzy, ale chci konstatovat, že pět měsíců je velmi krátká doba na to, abychom mohli hodnotit práci této instituce. Tedy doufám, že do budoucna budou naše debaty spíše obecné o tom, jak tato instituce pracuje jako celek, a že přesvědčíme zbylé země, aby k tomuto institutu přistoupily.
Katarina Barley (S&D). – Mr President, once again we gather here today to talk about the rule of law in one of our Member States, and this time in the Member State that is still holding the EU Presidency.
I heard your speech, Minister, and I would like to have agreed to your conclusion on the importance of the rule of law. But unfortunately, your government is led by someone who in recent months has left no doubt as to his lack of respect for the European Union and its institutions, as well as for the rule of law.
We have seen Janez Janša trying to play propaganda videos during parliamentary hearings. We have witnessed him publicly insulting judges, journalists as well as members of this House. And last but not least, we have seen him obstructing the work of the European Prosecutor’s Office for six months, which has, fortunately, come to an end today.
The establishment of the EPPO was one of the biggest milestones in the field of judicial cooperation in recent years, and we are rightly proud of it. But why is the head of state acting like this in the first place? The answer is the same as with all of these leaders: because he wants to get rid of any form of control – at European level by blocking EPPO, domestically when it comes to critical media and independent judiciary. This is always a very bad sign for the state of democracy in a country.
Minister, we have to have a common understanding of the rule of law, you said. Quite – but not by negotiating between Member States what governments like as control and what they don’t like, but according to our Treaties and the rulings of the European Court of Justice. Freedom of media pluralism and the independence of the judiciary are cornerstones of the principle of the rule of law, and all Member States must respect them.
Last sentence. Mr President, four months ago in this Parliament, Janez Janša said that there were many issues more relevant than the rule of law. Today I will say there is no issue that ever will be more relevant than safeguarding the rule of law, which is our backbone and our values, without which we cannot stand.
Michal Šimečka (Renew). – Mr President, I will focus on the situation with the media, because free and critical media are the clearest sign of a healthy democracy, whereas smear campaigns, criminal investigations and lawsuits against journalists are the marks of authoritarian politics.
In some Member States, including – I have to say – in Slovenia with Mr Janša, we are increasingly seeing the latter picture. The defamation lawsuits targeting investigative journalists are a threat to democracy itself. They do not seek justice, nor truth, but aim to silence critics. Attempts to silence reporters have not always ended only with verbal attacks and lawsuits. We know that after what happened to Daphne Caruana Galizia – and Ján Kuciak in my country – we can never become complacent about journalists’ safety and freedom to write.
Therefore, we need a strong European response, a response from the Commission, including with new legislation, to safeguard media freedom and protect journalists in Slovenia and elsewhere in the European Union.
Saskia Bricmont (Verts/ALE). – Monsieur le Président, Monsieur le Commissaire, Monsieur le Ministre, chers collègues, à quelques semaines de la fin de la présidence slovène, nous apprenons, non sans un certain soulagement, la nomination pour cinq ans de procureurs délégués du Parquet européen, qui devient ainsi entièrement opérationnel et je m’en réjouis.
La Slovénie rejoint enfin le travail de lutte contre la fraude et la corruption liées au budget européen. Mais pourquoi donc le premier ministre Janez Janša, qui a retardé puis bloqué la nomination des procureurs délégués, qualifie-t-il ces nominations de temporaires? Je voudrais comprendre et, surtout, que tout doute soit levé quant à la volonté de réformer les procédures de nomination des procureurs et de mettre au pas la justice indépendante dans le pays, ce qui constituerait une énième entorse à l’état de droit.
Nous voulons aujourd’hui un engagement ferme et sans ambiguïté de la Slovénie afin que nous puissions clôturer une fois pour toutes nos échanges sur ces nominations et afin de marquer le retour de la Slovénie à bord du train de la démocratie, de l’indépendance de la justice, du respect de l’état de droit, de la liberté de la presse, de l’opposition et de la société civile. Des valeurs universelles que nous voulons continuer à partager avec le peuple slovène.
Beata Kempa (ECR). – Panie Przewodniczący! Panie komisarzu! Ta debata to rzeczywiście coś, co my uważamy, zarówno w Polsce, jak i – myślę – na Węgrzech. Solidaryzujemy się dzisiaj ze Słoweńcami, którzy w sposób demokratyczny wybrali rząd i nikt nie zastrzegł demokratycznych wyborów i legalności tych wyborów. W naszej świadomości według was nie istnieją pojęcia suwerennego państwa, wolnych obywateli, demokratycznych decyzji czy wolnych wyborów. Dlatego że wszystko, co nie jest grane według niemiecko-holenderskiego planu federalnej Europy, jest dla was zagrożeniem i złamaniem zasady praworządności.
W tym samym czasie – przypomnę – zamiatane jest pod dywan utkany z milczenia i obojętności krwawe tłumienie protestów w Holandii, w Belgii, omijamy szerokim łukiem milczenia listy sędziów z Hiszpanii, ponieważ wszędzie tam rządzą wasi lewicowo-liberalni stronnicy.
Wczoraj Polska, dzisiaj Węgry i dzisiaj również Słowenia na linii ataku unijnych instytucji. Szanowni państwo, my domagamy się szacunku dla demokratycznie wybranych rządów w naszych krajach. My domagamy się szacunku dla naszych obywateli. Jeżeli oni chcą zmian, to trzeba te zmiany przeprowadzać, a wy te zmiany uważacie za łamanie praworządności. Myślę, że na to nie należy się zgodzić.
Monika Hohlmeier (PPE). – Lieber Herr Präsident, Herr Kommissar, sehr geehrter Herr Minister, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Ich probier's mal nicht mit Schimpfen und Beklagen, sondern einfach damit, dass wir in Bezug auf die Europäische Staatsanwaltschaft überzeugen.
Erst seit fünf Monaten ist sie operativ tätig, Herr Kommissar, und sie hat bereits 400 Ermittlungsverfahren eingeleitet, und die Fälle entsprechen einem Schaden in einer Größenordnung von 5 Milliarden Euro. Slowenien ist der Staatsanwaltschaft beigetreten, andere Länder sind dies nicht. Das Benennungsverfahren war vielleicht nicht glücklich und war auch nicht richtig. Ich hoffe, dass die Staatsanwälte, die jetzt benannt sind, tatsächlich die dauerhaften Partner sind und damit die Frage erledigt ist.
Das, was mich aber nach wie vor ärgert, ist, dass es einige gibt, die nicht daran teilnehmen und darunter auch Länder wie z. B. Schweden, die nicht dabei sind. Wir müssen aufpassen, dass wir die Diskussion nicht zu sehr verschieben: genauso Länder wie Ungarn, genauso Länder wie Polen, die schlicht und einfach ihre Option wahrnehmen – aber ich halte es nicht für klug.
Denn wenn ich mir anschaue, dass wir alleine in fünf Monaten grenzüberschreitende Ermittlungen zu 5 Milliarden Euro Schaden tätigen können, fordere ich alle Länder auf, dem EPPO beizutreten. Ich fordere alle auf, schnell ihre Staatsanwälte zu benennen. Ich fordere die nationalen Staatsanwaltschaften auf, eng zu kooperieren. Denn das, was der EPPO in kurzer Zeit bereits angegangen hat, bedeutet, dass der EPPO viel mehr, als er jemals kostet oder als wir mit nationalen Staatsanwaltschaften reinbekommen können, am Ende tatsächlich bereits heute angeht. Das ist das, worum es eigentlich geht.
Wir müssen gemeinsam die Europäische Staatsanwaltschaft vorantreiben. Slowenien tut es mittlerweile auch. Wie gesagt, das Verfahren empfand ich als äußerst unglücklich. Aber ich hoffe, dass wir jetzt auf einem guten Weg sind. Und jetzt muss es darum gehen, dass alle anderen auch noch teilnehmen, die dies derzeit nicht tun.
Elena Yoncheva (S&D). – Monsieur le Président, ce n’est pas la première fois que nous discutons de la Slovénie. Depuis que le premier ministre Janša y a pris le pouvoir, nous enregistrons une détérioration progressive et systématique dans de nombreux domaines, de la liberté des médias à l’indépendance judiciaire. Le gouvernement de Ljubljana n’avait même pas le temps ni la volonté de désigner des procureurs européens. Mais ces petites astuces conçues pour perturber le travail des institutions européennes visant à protéger l’argent de l’Union européenne n’aboutiront pas.
Ma question à la Commission est très simple. Jusqu’à quand allez-vous tolérer un tel comportement de la part des États membres? N’est-il pas temps que vous mettiez les questions d’état de droit en tête de vos priorités? Si quelqu’un ne se soucie pas assez de la protection de l’Union européenne, il n’a probablement pas besoin de son argent.
J’ai beaucoup de questions pour le Conseil. Mais je ne pense pas que la présidence slovène ait la crédibilité pour y répondre. Je ne peux qu’espérer que la prochaine présidence osera faire la différence dans le domaine de l’état de droit.
Moritz Körner (Renew). – Herr Präsident, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! In einer parlamentarischen Anfrage an die Kommission habe ich gefragt, ob das Nichtnominieren von Staatsanwälten für die Europäische Staatsanwaltschaft nicht einen Grund darstellt, nach der Verordnung den Rechtsstaatsmechanismus auszulösen.
Die Kommission hat mir geantwortet, dass die Nicht-Kooperation mit OLAF und der Europäischen Staatsanwaltschaft tatsächlich ein solcher Grund wäre. Aber natürlich haben wir nicht gesehen, dass in den letzten Monaten tatsächlich gehandelt wurde und der Rechtsstaatsmechanismus eingesetzt wird, und das ist ein längerer Trend. Wir sehen, dass zugeschaut wird, und wir sehen, dass man sich erst Ungarn, dann Polen, jetzt auch ein Stück weit immer mehr Slowenien zum Vorbild nimmt. Deswegen brauchen wir endlich entschlossenes Handeln bei der Frage der Rechtsstaatlichkeit in Europa.
Ich bin aber heute auch zuversichtlich, weil ich heute auf den Koalitionsvertrag der neuen Bundesregierung stolz bin, die eine klarere Linie in der Rechtsstaatlichkeit festgelegt hat. Wir müssen in Europa gemeinsam entschlossener für europäische Werte kämpfen, sonst werden sich weiter welche vornehmen, die europäischen Werte zu unterminieren.
Sergey Lagodinsky (Verts/ALE). – Herr Präsident, Herr Kommissar, Herr Minister! Die Zeiten sind längst vorbei, wo es selbstverständlich war, dass alle in der EU für Demokratie stehen. Die Geschwindigkeit, mit der wir in Polen und in Ungarn die antidemokratischen Entwicklungen sehen, ist atemberaubend. Und es ist ja kein Wunder, dass wir ganz genau hinschauen, was in Ljubljana seit Monaten und Jahren passiert.
Das Beispiel von Ungarn und Polen darf keine Schule machen. Und es ist gut, dass wir jetzt mit der Staatsanwaltschaft vorankommen. Es ist auch gut, dass die Nachrichtenagentur STA erst einmal eine Lösung gefunden hat. Aber das dürfen keine Lippenbekenntnisse aufgrund der Ratspräsidentschaft bleiben.
Wir schauen ganz genau hin, und eine Sache möchte ich hier noch einmal betonen, und zur Wahrheit gehört auch Folgendes: Viel zu lange haben die Schwesterparteien von Ihnen dieses Verhalten gedeckt, nicht nur in Ljubljana, sondern auch in Ungarn und auch in anderen Ländern.
Und deswegen rufe ich die Kolleginnen und Kollegen, die vorher gesprochen haben, auf: Schaut nicht einfach zu, sondern handelt und bekennt euch dazu, eine demokratische Familie zu sein! Handelt auch und schaut ganz genau, was in Slowenien mit der Schwesterpartei passiert!
Milan Zver (PPE). – Gospod predsednik!
Evropska komisija je ugotovila, da Slovenija nima težav s pravno državo, saj institucije delujejo. Vendarle, potem s tem stališčem se levi politični pol tega parlamenta ni mogel strinjati, zlasti slovenski kolegi, in nastala je ta delovna skupina v okviru LIBE, ki je obiskala Slovenijo in seveda pripravila poročilo, o katerem bomo morali še govoriti, saj je kontaminirano že od vsega začetka.
Ampak res je, Slovenija ima določene probleme z vladavino prava. Le 25 odstotkov državljanov zaupa, recimo, sodstvu, ima probleme z mediji, pa ne s svobodo medijev, ampak z netransparentnim lastništvom, koncentracijo lastništva medijev, asimetrijo, 90 odstotkov medijev je levih, levo usmerjenih, in ljudje, seveda, na ta način niso kakovostno in objektivno informirani.
Vsak, ki bi se lotil vladavine prava v Sloveniji, bi se moral lotiti ne twittanja predsednika vlade, ampak predvsem nekaterih korupcijskih omrežij, ki deloma izvirajo še iz prejšnjega režima, deloma pa so nova in dejansko obvladujejo določene družbene podsisteme.
Prej smo slišali od kolegice Tomc, da lahko eno tako omrežje, ki ima vpliv v bančni industriji, brez težav opere skoraj dve milijardi ameriških dolarjev umazanega denarja iranskega režima, pa se nič ne zgodi.
Torej menim, da ta razprava ima nek politični namen spraviti slovensko vlado na pranger in z njo tudi Slovenijo. Upam, da ne bo kakih večjih posledic zaradi tega. Morda je tudi sporočilo, glavno sporočilo te razprave, da bodo morda jo spravili s prangerja takrat (takoj bom), ko bo v Sloveniji kakšna druga vlada.
Juan Fernando López Aguilar (S&D). – Señor presidente Castaldo, señor comisario de Justicia, señor ministro, es la segunda vez que este Parlamento Europeo debate la situación de los derechos fundamentales y del Estado de Derecho y la situación de la Fiscalía Europea en Eslovenia. Créanme que, como presidente de la Comisión de Libertades Civiles, Justicia y Asuntos de Interior de este Parlamento Europeo, no me alegra. Al contrario: me preocupa especialmente porque Eslovenia ostenta en este semestre la presidencia de la Unión Europea —la presidencia rotatoria— y usted, señor ministro, no representa a Eslovenia en este debate, sino al Consejo.
Pero, sin duda, Eslovenia está en disposición y, a mi juicio, puede y debe marcar la diferencia con aquellos Estados miembros lamentablemente habituales en los debates sobre el Estado de Derecho, la democracia y los derechos fundamentales —Hungría y Polonia—, para empezar, afirmando y aceptando la primacía del Derecho europeo, que consagra como valores comunes de la Unión Europea, en el artículo 2 del Tratado de la Unión Europea, los de respeto al pluralismo y protección de las minorías, y que, además, señala como un mandato muy claro la obediencia y el acatamiento de las sentencias de los tribunales de justicia cuando aplican el Derecho europeo, y, por supuesto, impone el deber de leal cooperación con la Fiscalía Europea.
De modo que lamentamos ese retraso de cinco meses y celebramos que finalmente los dos fiscales nacionales de Eslovenia se incorporen a la estructura de la Fiscalía Europea para que rindan sus mejores servicios.
Pero usted también, señor ministro, está en disposición de enviarle un mensaje a su primer ministro, Janez Janša, y el mensaje es claro: cuando el Parlamento Europeo envía una delegación oficial a un Estado miembro de la Unión Europea, esa delegación no es un alien, no es una injerencia extranjera, no: está representando a la ciudadanía europea de dos millones de ciudadanos eslovenos.
Klemen Grošelj (Renew). – Gospod predsednik!
Aktualna vlada je zaradi strahu pred mehanizmom pogojevanja dostopa do evropskih sredstev, potem ko je praktično uničila STA kot javni informacijski servis, le plačala del predvidenih sredstev in začasno imenovala delegirana tožilca, katera bo, izgleda, glede na predlog sprememb zakona, ponovno odpoklicala.
S tem daje vtis, da je Sloveniji vse v najlepšem redu. A žal gre samo za vtis. Politika sistematičnega in premišljenega slabljenja ključnih javnih institucij s ciljem njihove podreditve ali vsaj njihovega utišanja se nadaljuje. Kako si sicer lahko razlagamo, da se nekaj mesecev pred volitvami nujno spreminja programska shema informativnega programa javne televizije, da vladajoča koalicija spremeni zakon o policiji, ki ministru omogoči, da po lastnem okusu imenuje preko sto vodilnih policijskih kadrov? Ali pa da se ob rekorndih proračunskih izdatkih zmanjšajo sredstva pravosodju, še posebej Sodnemu svetu, neposredno odgovornemu za zaščito neodvisnosti sodnikov in pripravo predloga imenovanj novih sodnikov.
In to počne mimogrede vlada, katere minister za pravosodje je v sodni preiskavi. Torej na kratko: psi lajajo, karavana pa gre dalje.
Daniel Freund (Verts/ALE). – Mr President, Minister Logar, you stood here earlier and said that EPPO membership and respect for the rule of law is of utmost importance for your government. Yet the Slovenian Government used a personal vendetta of the Prime Minister against the EPPO candidates to block their nomination for six months, preventing the fight against corruption, money laundering and VAT fraud in Slovenia. I find it irritating that Prime Minister Janša has to face basically zero consequences for this action. No punishment whatsoever. The Commissioner hasn’t used the rule of law conditionality. The other governments in the Council have not even dared to criticise their colleague. The EPP remains silent, says maybe it’s a bit unfortunate, but everything is great; nothing to see here.
We have to be honest about these things. We have to speak up, regardless of whether people sit in our own party family, and those that attack the rule of law and the independence of the judiciary have to be sanctioned for that. We have to remember that Ireland, Denmark and Sweden are still not members of EPPO. They serve as a fig leaf for the corrupt and rule of law-attacking governments in Poland and Hungary. I can only say to all those that are serious about the rule of law in the European Union: join EPPO and speak out when you see something that’s going wrong.
Thijs Reuten (S&D). – Mr President, last month we experienced a low point in this Parliament; we had to discuss the Polish Government questioning the primacy of EU law. Let me stress that I do not want, and also do not expect, to have a similar plenary debate about Slovenia in two years. But, we should have learned by now to read early warning signals.
The crumbling of rule of law and democracy often starts with bigger or smaller attacks on the media, judiciary and vulnerable groups. That is why we should take the Slovenian problems with the European Public Prosecutor’s Office and the STA and Prime Minister Janša’s ridiculous and personal attacks on individuals seriously.
Although solved partly and extremely late, we should not accept the downplaying of these issues. When dialogue is not sufficient, measures should follow. Not after months, after hesitation by the Commission, but swiftly. It will save time. I’m saying this because I’m on the side of the Slovenian citizens.
When political leaders anywhere in Europe are not preserving the positions and the rights of their journalists, judges or minorities, the EU has to step in and support them as effectively as possible.
Didier Reynders,membre de la Commission. – Monsieur le Président, Monsieur le Ministre, Mesdames et Messieurs les députés, je vous remercie tout d’abord de vos interventions dans ce débat sur la situation de l’état de droit en Slovénie. Le dialogue interinstitutionnel sur la situation de l’état de droit dans l’ensemble de l’Union est très important et je me tiens, je l’ai dit, à la pleine disposition de votre Parlement à cet égard, que ce soit en plénière ou en commission.
In our work in the Commission about the rule of law, we apply the principle of non—regression, and, of course, we ask to develop different elements to promote the independence of the judiciary, but also to guarantee some principles, like the primacy of EU law and the binding character of all the decisions of the Court of Justice in Europe. It’s the reason why we organise a dialogue in the European institutions, but also in the Member States, on the basis of the Rule of Law Report. The goal is to improve the situation in all the Member States.
Next year, as you know, we will include recommendations in our report. We also have direct contact with the Member States to solve concrete issues like, in Slovenia, the funding of the press agency and the nomination of the European delegate prosecutors. I have said that I had many contacts with the Prime Minister and the Minister of Justice in Slovenia about these two problems to have the opportunity to improve the situation and again to solve those two issues. We continue to monitor the situation of the Presidency, but now we have a nomination for five years of the two delegate prosecutors. So it’s possible to work with a complete composition of the EPPO, at least with delegate prosecutors in all the participating Member States. I have said that it is, of course, a voluntary choice of all the Member States to take part or not, but I have said to the non-participating Member States that it will be important to think about their participation to be able to fight better, maybe, against all the fraud and abuse concerning the use of the EU budget.
To develop a real culture of the rule of law in the entire European Union, I have also tried to organise visits to the Member States to have discussions with the parliaments, governments, judicial authorities, civil society, students or the press. It’s very important to try to develop such a culture in all the Member States. Of course, I rather thought to insist on the fact that we will continue to use all the instruments at the disposal of the Commission to protect and promote the rule of law. We are going to the European Court of Justice with infringement proceedings or requests for daily financial sanctions. We are also going to the Council on the basis of Article 7, and we will do the same, if needed, on the basis of the new conditionality mechanism. But again, we give further priority to the dialogue, but we are using all the instruments at our disposal.
To conclude, I want to thank you in this Parliament for your support in this permanent work to promote the rule of law, because, again, what we want to achieve is a non-regression principle and to see in all the Member States how it’s possible to improve the situation concerning the rule of law.
Anže Logar,predsedujoči Svetu. – Gospod predsednik, spoštovane poslanke in poslanci, spoštovani komisar!
Naj vam še enkrat zagotovim kot v uvodu, da predsedstvo in tudi Svet v celoti pripisujeta velik pomen spoštovanju načela pravne države in varstvu temeljnih pravic.
Institucije Evropske unije in države članice so skupaj odgovorne za spoštovanje, varstvo in spodbujanje naših skupnih vrednot, ki so zapisane v temeljnih pogodbah.
V razpravi so bile izpostavljene nekatere pomanjkljivosti s področja vladavine prava v Sloveniji. Naj naslovim nekatere od njih.
Izpostavljeno je bilo zmanjšanje sredstev za pravosodni sistem. Naj najprej poudarim, da je proračun za pravosodni sistem v zadnjih letih konstantno naraščal, pri čemer je pomembno, da proračun za leto 2022 za posamezne institucije znotraj pravosodnega sistema ostaja nespremenjen oziroma se ni znižal glede na predhodno dogovorjene proračunske okvire. Enako velja za proračunsko leto 2023. Vlada Republike Slovenija je pri pripravi proračuna 2022 – 2023 prednostno opredelila financiranje ukrepov, potrebnih za boj proti posledicam pandemije ter za investicije. To se odraža tudi v proračunu ministrstva za pravosodje, ki je med drugim odgovorno tudi za investicije, potrebne za delovanje pravosodja, tako da bo povečanje investicijskih sredstev sodstvu zagotovila tudi boljše pogoje za delo, kar predsedstvo pozdravlja.
Ponavljam, da sta vlada Republike Slovenije in Slovenska tiskovna agencija 8. novembra 2021 sklenili pogodbo o financiranju javne službe, s čimer so bila agenciji zagotovljena ustrezna finančna sredstva.
Slovenija se zaveda tudi določenih pomanjkljivosti glede učinkovitosti pravosodnega sistema ter izzivov s področja obravnave gospodarskega in finančnega kriminala. Tu, kot je bilo tudi že zapisano v poročilu Evropske komisije, pravosodni sistem čaka še veliko dela. Trenutno je v pripravi podrobna analiza o vzrokih za nastalo stanje, ki jo bo Vrhovno sodišče v kratkem predstavilo javnosti.
Izpostavljene so bile tudi zamude pri imenovanju državnih tožilcev. Naj povem, da ministrstvo za pravosodje trenutno pripravlja spremembe nacionalne zakonodaje, ki bodo pripomogle k optimizaciji teh postopkov. Imenovanja tožilcev naj bi v kratkem obravnavala vlada.
Kar pa zadeva Evropsko javno tožilstvo, bo Svet še naprej pozorno spremljal njegove dejavnosti in mu bo zagotavljal vso potrebno pomoč. Pri tem bo tudi v prihodnje prednostno obravnaval vse zadeve, povezane z evropskim javnim tožilstvom, ki spadajo v pristojnost Sveta.
Naj ponovim, kar je v uvodu izpostavil tudi komisar Reynders, da je slovenska vlada s predlaganjem dveh kandidatov za delegirana tožilca izpolnila svojo obveznost. Evropsko javno tožilstvo tako deluje v polni sestavi.
Za konec naj izpostavim The World Justice Project Rule of Law Index, kjer je Slovenija v letu 2021 obdržala 29. mesto izmed 139 držav sveta. Kljub temu da je v svetu kar 75 odstotkov držav poslabšalo svoje izhodišče.
Predsedstvo se zaveda, da ima področje vladavine prava v Sloveniji določene pomanjkljivosti in na tem mestu lahko zagotovim, da je ena ključnih prioritet vlade Republike Slovenije odpravljanje pomanjkljivosti v pravosodnem sistemu, ki niso bile odpravljene v tridesetih letih demokratičnih procesov v Republiki Sloveniji.
Presidente. – Grazie mille caro Ministro.
La discussione è chiusa. La votazione si svolgerà durante la tornata di dicembre.
Dichiarazioni scritte (articolo 171)
István Ujhelyi (S&D), írásban. – Minden járvány ellen védekezni kell: megelőzéssel, oltással, ha kell, akkor korlátozással. Az európai közösségünket is most egy súlyos betegség próbálja meg legyőzni, de legalábbis a végletekig legyengíteni: a maffiaállamot építő korrupt politikusok vírusa. A vírusgazdát ismerjük: Orbán Viktor, aki hosszú évek alatt szisztematikusan építette ki az uniós forrásokat megcsapoló, azokból saját oligarcha-hálózatát és családját gazdagító, az európai értékeket rendre meggyalázó rendszerét. Ez a vírus fertőzte meg Szlovéniát is, ahol – amolyan franchise rendszerben – az orbáni taktikát és praktikát átvéve építi ki korrupt hatalmát a jelenlegi vezetés. Szlovéniában tudatosan akadályozzák az Európai Ügyészség működését, zaklatják és fenyegetik az újságírókat, hallgattatják el a kritikus hangokat.
Ahogyan a koronavírussal szemben is közös és határozott fellépés, úgy az európai közösségünket rákos daganatként megfertőző korrupt politikai kalandorokkal szemben is egységes kezelés kell. Az Európai Bizottság a napokban küldte meg – a jogállamisági mechanizmus elindítása előtti utolsó felszólításként – levelét a magyar kormánynak, amelyben konkrét kifogásokat emel többek között az Orbán Viktor családjáig érő állami korrupcióval kapcsolatban. Szégyen, hogy idáig jutottunk. Szégyen, hogy a magyar kormány idáig jutott. Nem tolerálhatóak tovább az Európai Unió alapértékeivel szembemenő, az európai közpénzeket személyes gyarapodásukra fordító politikai rendszerek. Az Európai Unió vagy erős és tiszta közösség lesz, vagy nem lesz.
Presidente. – La seduta è sospesa e riprenderà alle 20.30 con la dichiarazione della Commissione sul Piano d'azione europeo contro le malattie rare.