Obviously a new law on RTV Slovenia will be needed

A new law on RTV Slovenia appears inevitable following the Supreme Court’s approval of the current legislation. The court’s decision has raised questions about the next steps, particularly regarding the potential need for legislative changes affecting the public broadcaster's operations. A coalition, including the party Resni.ca, had previously proposed three advisory referendums, one of which would address the issue of the RTV contribution. While such referendums are not legally binding, they could reflect public sentiment toward the state-run broadcaster under its present structure. The ruling has sparked discussions about whether the coalition can use this opportunity to change the composition of RTV Slovenia’s board. However, legal experts argue that this is unlikely. The current legislation effectively reinstates the situation that existed before 2005, when the board was composed through a delegate system, organizations appointing their representatives. This model allowed entities like the Slovenian Olympic Committee to have official representation, with individuals such as Janez Kocijančič serving as delegates. In 2005, during the first government of Janez Janša, the law was amended to introduce a program committee, with members appointed by the National Assembly based on nominations from political parties and voters. The current arrangement is seen as de-politicizing the public broadcaster, protecting existing privileges while preventing structural changes even with a possible shift in government. Historically, the Supreme Court ruled against similar practices in the 1990s. At that time, a newly formed board rejected the mandate of RTV Slovenia’s director-general, Žarko Petan, leading to his brief dismissal. The court later invalidated provisions allowing arbitrary decisions over the appointment of the director, citing insufficient procedural rights. Petan’s mandate was restored, and RTV Slovenia continued until 1996. The court emphasized the importance of balancing pluralism against political self-interest, a principle that seems less central today. With these historical precedents in mind, the question arises whether a new law will follow if a referendum is held. Opposition groups are likely to oppose any changes, but left-wing non-governmental organizations and trade unions might also resist, possibly with support from the president of the republic. She has repeatedly expressed opposition to the removal of the RTV contribution, suggesting that such a move could undermine public broadcasting. Additionally, there are concerns about the accessibility of archival video material from the period of Slovenia’s independence. Much of this content is no longer available to the public, despite being once widely accessible. RTV Slovenia cites alleged violations of intellectual property rights by foreign media companies whose footage is included in news programs. However, according to available data, the cost of broadcasting major sporting events far exceeds any potential losses from restricted access to older materials. Despite these challenges, changes in availability remain unlikely due to financial constraints facing RTV Slovenia. Premier Janez Janša recently highlighted the financial burden on the public broadcaster, noting that the Jožef Stefan Institute, home to numerous top scientists, spends half the budget allocated to RTV Slovenia annually. This suggests that funds are being directed into areas with little tangible benefit. Such revelations underscore the ongoing debate over the role and sustainability of public broadcasting in Slovenia. As the situation evolves, the focus remains on how future legislative changes might reshape the landscape of public media in the country.