What do the coastal candidates for the state assembly of the Resni.ca party think about the Mijić affair?

A controversy involving a Slovenian politician has sparked public debate over the integrity of parliamentary representation. Boris Mijić, a member of parliament for the party Resni.ca, faces mounting scrutiny after allegations surfaced regarding his professional qualifications and financial responsibilities. The situation has led to calls for his resignation from the opposition, while his party seeks to retain him in the National Assembly until October 10, with a replacement candidate set to step in should he remain in office. The controversy began earlier this month when it was revealed that Mijić had falsely claimed to hold a degree in civil engineering. This claim appeared both during his campaign for the National Assembly and in his official biography published on the assembly’s website. However, upon investigation, officials at the Faculty of Civil Engineering and Geodesy at the University of Ljubljana clarified that Mijić was not officially registered as a graduate. Furthermore, his thesis could not be found in the publicly accessible COBISS system, raising questions about the authenticity of his academic credentials. This revelation followed other troubling reports about Mijić's business activities. His company, Progros, had long been accused of failing to pay employees and accumulating debts exceeding tens of thousands of euros. These irregularities were uncovered by the Labour Inspectorate, and the firm also came under the scrutiny of the Anti-Corruption Commission. In June, Mijić resigned from his position as director of the company but remains its sole owner. He has stated that he intends to settle all outstanding debts before the end of the year. In response to these developments, members of the Primorska electoral unit of Resni.ca, who received the highest number of votes in recent parliamentary elections, have expressed their views on the issue. Irena Jaklič Valenti and Valter Krmac, two of the candidates, were asked for their opinions. While they did not comment directly on Mijić’s personal conduct, they emphasized the importance of transparency and accountability in political life. The situation has created a rift within the party, with some members advocating for Mijić’s immediate removal from the National Assembly, while others argue that his continued presence could benefit the party’s legislative agenda. The party leadership has opted to keep Mijić in office until October 10, allowing time for a new candidate to be selected and vetted. This decision has drawn criticism from both supporters and opponents alike, with many questioning whether it reflects a genuine commitment to ethical governance or a strategic move to protect the party’s interests. As the situation unfolds, the focus will likely shift toward the selection process for Mijić’s replacement. The new candidate must navigate the same scrutiny that has surrounded Mijić, ensuring that they meet the necessary standards of competence and integrity. Meanwhile, public interest in the case continues to grow, with media coverage and political discourse highlighting the broader implications of such controversies for democratic institutions.