It took one year for the Slovenian Supreme Court to finally annul the approval judgment for the report of Commission for the Prevention of Corruption, which in 2012 led to the fall of the centre-right government
The Supreme Court has annulled in its entirety the judgement of the Administrative Court that initially confirmed the controversial report of the Commission for the Prevention of Corruption (CPC) about the wealth state of the president of Slovenian Democratic Party. In 2012 the CPC issued a so-called final opinion, in which then Prime Minister Janez Janša was accused (with no option for repeal) of the violation of law. The report has not even been handed to Prime Minister; it was only presented at a press conference and published on the Internet. The main purpose was the PR effect that would eventually lead to the fall of Janša’s government.
Mr Janša has strongly rejected all accusations and transparently explained all of the origins of his assets that amount to the level of the average savings of the lower middle class employee. He has immediately appealed to the Administrative Court that with no clarification approved the report of the Commission. Today, one year later the Supreme Court finally annulled the judgement of the Administrative Court.
The Supreme Court states that the Administrative Court in its judgement has not concretely defined the reasons for its approval judgement. What’s more, the First Instance Court has put a general assessment as an explanation of the judgement and therefore does not meet the standards of the judicial decision, notes the Supreme Court judgement. According to the Supreme judges, the adequate explanation is the perquisite for a review of the legality, accuracy and reasonableness of the decisions taken.
This judgement directly questions the manner through which the Commission announced their findings exclusively to the public (and not to the Prime Minister, who was unable to appeal to the judgement) and the manner in which the Commission abandoned some of, by law, critical procedures. The law states that if CPC finds irregularities in the assets of officials, it has to report these irregularities to the competent authorities and propose actions. CPC in this case did not abide the law and only released the report to the public. The consequences of this report, that is partly guilty for the fall of two governments and the continuing crisis, are now irreversible. Those who have abused this state institution for a political statement will never answer for their actions. What’s more, they have gotten the reward in the form of well-paid jobs either in the state-owned banks or somewhere in the European institutions.
It is impossible for the major negative impact of the fall of the government to be repaired, but, with this judgement, the SDS at least got a moral satisfaction. This judgment is a big slap in the face to both the CPC and all those who have, on the basis of this report, taken any decisions.