European Parliament, Strasbourg, P9
CRE-PROV (2021)11-24(3-263-0000).
Herr President. Herr Commissioner. Councillor.
I myself was a member of the mission in Slovenia and mission
leader Sophie in ‘t Veld in the end determined: The institutions are
functioning. Justice, parliament, civil society and, first of all, the press
are able to work, and three-quarters of the Slovenian press have a bias critical
of the government.
Four things alone, according to the mission leader, may be
problematic. First, the data protection, yet that anyway may be the case in 90%
of European member states. Second – we have spoken of it – the naming of the
European state prosecutor. This meanwhile has occurred – thus, problem removed. Third, the financing of the
national press agency, and this meanwhile has happened – thus, problem solved.
And fourth, according to Sophie in ‘t Veld, the tone of discourse between
government and opposition may be very sharp. This is correct. In this regard, Slovenia
is a divided country. Yet the EU is not the watchdog of the choice of words and
also not the nanny for friendly intercourse.
There is thus not a single reason to continue the
supervision of Slovenia. And three of the seven mission members have made it
clear that here it needs finally end. And the real scandal is that these
objections find no mention in the concluding report. Instead, the monitoring
will be continued, and that is nothing other than a tax-financed defamation of
a conservative government. And as much as I estimate Sophie in ‘t Veld, we
should nevertheless not here turn over for observation in the next 30 years all
possible countries to the eternal glory of the leader of the DRFMG [Democracy,
Rule of Law and Fundamental Rights Monitoring Group].
[trans: tem]
