The initiators of the referendum on the voting rights of foreigners have their tail between their legs, counting on the Constitutional Court

Nova24TVParty-alignedCenterFactual 85Objective 752 days ago

Organizers of a referendum on a proposed law aimed at preventing citizens from third countries from voting in local elections have announced they will withdraw their initiative. They plan to challenge the proposed law through the Constitutional Court, believing it would gain broad support if put to a referendum. However, the court’s recent rulings appear to favor the transitional left, with most judges having previously supported leftist governments. The organizers could begin collecting signatures for a new referendum request starting September 1, needing 40,000 verified signatures by October 5. Non-governmental organizations behind the initiative claim all procedures were followed correctly, but they were caught off guard by coalition parliamentary groups and the opposition Resnica submitting a motion for a consultative referendum during parliamentary recess. This move may allow three opposition parties, Freedom, SDS, and Left, to demand a constitutional review of the law and its temporary suspension. Since the law has not yet been published in the Official Gazette, the opposition has not yet been able to oppose it before the Constitutional Court. Some political commentators and MP

Bias read (Center): The article presents both perspectives: the organizers' decision to withdraw the referendum and their plans to challenge the law via the Constitutional Court, while also noting the potential impact of the court's rulings and the involvement of opposition parties. It does not exhibit clear bias in ph

Why factuality (85): Same content as other articles, including the withdrawal, reasons, and effects on the opposition's ability to challenge the law. Cross-source consistency is maintained.

Why objectivity (75): The article frames the withdrawal as a strategic decision to avoid political conflict, which may suggest a preference for the opposition's approach. Tone is slightly supportive of the opposition's actions.

ReporterIndependentProgressiveFactual 85Objective 752 days ago

Organizations advocating for a referendum on local elections have announced they will withdraw their initiative but continue to oppose the law through constitutional legal channels. They emphasized that all procedures related to requesting a legislative referendum were conducted correctly and timely. However, coalition parliamentary groups introduced a proposal for an advisory referendum during parliamentary recess. The organizations criticized this move, noting that both the legal service of the National Assembly and broader professional public viewed the proposal negatively. Despite this, the coalition appears to expect significant benefits from the referendum. The groups stated that continuing the process would lead to two referendums on nearly identical issues, potentially shifting the debate into political conflict over immigration policies. They expressed concern that recent changes to the foreigners' law make it harder for immigrants to access Slovene language courses, increase language proficiency requirements, and raise living cost thresholds, which could hinder integration efforts.

Bias read (Progressive): The article frames the withdrawal of the referendum initiative as a strategic move to challenge the law through constitutional legal avenues rather than allowing a potential divisive political debate around immigration policies. It highlights concerns about restrictive immigration laws and their reg

Why factuality (85): Consistent with other articles on the withdrawal of the referendum proposal, the reasons, and the impact on the opposition. No new or conflicting information.

Why objectivity (75): The article presents the withdrawal as a way to channel opposition efforts into constitutional channels, which may imply a subtle bias towards the opposition's strategy. Tone is slightly supportive of this approach.

Slovenske noviceIndependentCenterFactual 85Objective 752 days ago

The article reports that the initiators of a legislative referendum on local elections have withdrawn their proposal. They claim this decision aims to prevent the debate over the law from turning into political recrimination regarding the status of foreigners in Slovenia. The initiators emphasize that withdrawing the proposal does not mean they oppose the law itself, but rather intend to address its controversy through constitutional legal channels. Non-governmental organizations have stated that all procedures related to the request for a legislative referendum were conducted correctly and timely. Meanwhile, coalition parliamentary groups, along with Resnica, have submitted a proposal for a consultative referendum on the same issue. The initiators note that the legislative and broader expert public have negatively assessed the proposal for a referendum on a law already passed. Despite this, they acknowledge there is political interest in holding a referendum. The initiators argue that continuing the process could lead to two referendums on almost identical questions, potentially transforming the discussion about revoking voting rights into political blame regarding whether foreign

Bias read (Center): The article presents a balanced view by including perspectives from both the initiators of the referendum withdrawal and the non-governmental organizations. It avoids taking a clear ideological stance, instead focusing on the procedural and political implications of the decision. While the topic is

Why factuality (85): Reports the same core facts as other articles: withdrawal of the referendum proposal, reasons given, and the impact on opposition parties seeking constitutional review. Consistent with cross-source reporting.

Why objectivity (75): The language suggests an understanding of the political strategy involved, which may subtly favor the opposition's approach. While not overtly biased, the framing implies a preference for the alternative route of constitutional review.

VečerIndependent🔒CenterFactual 85Objective 753 days ago

The organizers of a referendum initiative on the proposed amendment to the law on local elections are reportedly considering withdrawing their initiative early next week. This move would allow opposition parties such as Freedom Movement, Social Democrats (SD), and Left to request a constitutional review and temporary suspension of the amendment. The referendum initiative was launched by cultural organizations including Cultural Society Gmajna, Cultural Center Danilo Kiš, and Albanian Cultural Society - AKD Liria. They needed 40,000 verified signatures, which they could have started collecting on September 1st, with the deadline set for October 5th. However, the organizers could withdraw the initiative at any time before the voting date. According to reports, after several consultations during the summer, they decided to withdraw it now to enable the opposition to challenge the amendment through the Constitutional Court. Without the referendum initiative, the law has not yet been published in the Official Gazette, preventing the opposition from filing a request for a constitutional review. If the Constitutional Court were to grant a temporary suspension, the current electoral law,允许

Bias read (Center): The article presents both the decision of the referendum organizers to potentially withdraw their initiative and the potential implications for the opposition's ability to challenge the law through the Constitutional Court. It does not exhibit clear bias toward either side but rather provides a fact

Why factuality (85): The article reports on the decision by referendum initiators to withdraw their proposal, aligning with multiple sources. It mentions the reasons for withdrawal, including preventing political maneuvering and enabling opposition parties to seek constitutional review. The information is consistent wit

Why objectivity (75): The tone leans slightly towards supporting the initiative's goal of avoiding political polarization, but remains generally neutral. There is some emphasis on the potential benefits of withdrawing the referendum, which may reflect a subtle bias toward the opposition's position.

RTV Slovenija (MMC)State / PublicProgressiveFactual 85Objective 753 days ago

The article reports that the initiators of a legislative referendum on local elections have decided to withdraw their proposal at the beginning of the next week. They aim to avoid political blame regarding the issue of foreign citizens' status in Slovenia. The collection of 40,000 verified signatures for a subsequent legislative referendum was expected to start on September 1 and conclude by October 5. Non-governmental organizations stated they followed all legal procedures correctly and timely. However, coalition parliamentary groups proposed a consultative referendum on the same issue, which was negatively assessed by legal experts and the broader public. The initiators believe this would lead to two referendums on nearly identical questions, turning the debate into political blame rather than focusing on the core issue. They emphasize that withdrawing the proposal does not mean they no longer oppose the law but intend to address its controversy through constitutional channels. They argue that the withdrawal of voting rights at the local level cannot be separated from a broader xenophobic policy towards immigrants and insufficient integration programs. Recent changes to the law,如

Bias read (Progressive): The article frames the withdrawal of the referendum proposal as a strategic move to prevent political blame, implying that the current legislation has xenophobic implications. It highlights concerns about the impact of recent laws on immigrant integration and emphasizes the negative assessment of a谘

Why factuality (85): Same content as other articles, mentioning the withdrawal, reasons, and implications for the opposition. Information is consistent across sources.

Why objectivity (75): The article frames the withdrawal as a strategic decision aimed at preventing political conflict, which may imply support for the opposition's stance. Tone is somewhat supportive of the opposition's actions.

DeloIndependent🔒CenterFactual 85Objective 753 days ago

The organizers of a legislative referendum on amending the law on local elections are reportedly considering withdrawing their initiative, according to unofficial information from portal N1. This decision would allow opposition parties such as Freedom Movement, Social Democrats (SD), and Left to request a constitutional review and temporary suspension of the proposed amendment. The referendum was initiated by cultural organizations including Kultura Gmajna, Cultural Center Danilo Kiš, and Albanian Cultural Association AKD Liria. They could have started collecting signatures for the referendum on September 1, with a deadline of October 5 to gather 40,000 verified signatures. However, after several discussions during the summer, the organizers believe it is more strategic to withdraw now, as the law has not yet been published in the Official Gazette, preventing the opposition from challenging it before the Constitutional Court. If the court were to temporarily suspend the amendment, local elections in November would still proceed under the old law, allowing citizens of other countries residing in Slovenia to vote. Meanwhile, the question of whether the opposition will challenge the決定

Bias read (Center): The article presents both the withdrawal of the referendum initiative and the potential legal challenges by the opposition without overtly favoring any side. It includes perspectives from multiple political groups and mentions the legal uncertainties surrounding the advisory referendum. There is no

Why factuality (85): Consistent with other articles on the withdrawal of the referendum proposal, the reasons, and the effect on the opposition's ability to challenge the law constitutionally. No new or conflicting information presented.

Why objectivity (75): The article emphasizes the potential consequences of the withdrawal, suggesting a concern for the broader political implications. This may lean slightly towards supporting the opposition's perspective.

Maribor24IndependentCenterFactual 85Objective 753 days ago

The article discusses a proposed referendum on the voting rights of foreigners in Slovenia, which could potentially fail due to insufficient signatures. The initiative was launched by cultural organizations and aims to challenge a recent law that revokes the voting rights of long-term foreign residents. Opposition parties, including Gibanje Svoboda, SD, and Levica, could use this referendum to request a constitutional review and temporary suspension of the law. The proposed referendum would allow opposition groups to delay the implementation of the new law until November local elections, which could still take place under the old rules if the constitutional court grants a temporary stay. However, there is uncertainty regarding whether the left-wing opposition will support a separate advisory referendum planned for October 11, despite legal concerns raised by lawyers. The law, passed in June, has faced criticism from over 20 non-governmental organizations and human rights defenders, who argue it conflicts with European conventions on the participation of foreigners in local affairs.

Bias read (Center): The article presents information from multiple political perspectives, including the motivations of various opposition parties and the legal arguments against the law. It does not overtly favor any particular side but reports on the potential implications of the referendum and the differing opinions

Why factuality (85): Same information as other articles, including the withdrawal, reasons, and impact on the opposition. Cross-source consistency is maintained.

Why objectivity (75): The tone suggests an awareness of the political ramifications of the withdrawal, possibly leaning towards supporting the opposition's strategy. Framing is slightly biased towards the opposition's goals.

Siol.netState / PublicCenterFactual 85Objective 753 days ago

The article discusses the potential withdrawal of a legislative referendum proposal regarding amendments to local election laws in Slovenia. According to unofficial reports from the portal N1, the initiators of the referendum are considering withdrawing the proposal, likely at the beginning of the next week, to allow opposition parties, Gibanje Svoboda, SD, and Levica, to request a constitutional review and temporary suspension of the law. The proposed changes would revoke voting rights for citizens of third countries, and by withdrawing the referendum, the initiators aim to prevent these changes from taking effect at upcoming local elections. The referendum initiative was organized by cultural groups including Kulturno društvo Gmajna, Kulturni center Danilo Kiš, and Albansko kulturno društvo – AKD Liria. They need 40,000 verified signatures to start collecting them, with a deadline of October 5th. The article notes that if the initiators withdraw the proposal before the vote, the opposition could file a constitutional challenge immediately after the law is published in the Official Gazette. It also mentions ongoing discussions about whether the Constitutional Court might support a暂缓

Bias read (Center): The article presents information about the potential withdrawal of a referendum proposal and the implications for opposition parties seeking legal challenges. While there is some emphasis on the strategic move by the initiators, the tone remains neutral, presenting both sides' positions without明显的倾向

Why factuality (85): Consistent with other articles on the withdrawal of the referendum proposal, the reasons, and the implications for the opposition. No contradictions or unsupported claims.

Why objectivity (75): The article presents the withdrawal as a calculated move to enable constitutional challenges, which may imply a subtle bias towards the opposition's approach. Tone is slightly supportive of this strategy.

N1 SlovenijaIndependentCenterFactual 85Objective 753 days ago

The cultural association 'Gmajna', along with other organizations such as the Danilo Kiš Cultural Center and the Albanian Cultural Association AKD Liria, has decided to withdraw their initiative for a constitutional referendum regarding the amendment to the law on local elections. This amendment would remove the voting rights of citizens from third countries who reside permanently in Slovenia. The withdrawal comes just before the planned start of collecting 40,000 verified signatures needed for the referendum, which was scheduled to begin on September 1. The decision allows opposition parties like Freedom Movement, SD, and Left to request a constitutional review and temporary suspension of the law. Without the referendum initiative, the law could now be published in the Official Gazette, enabling the opposition to formally challenge it at the Constitutional Court. The organizers of the referendum believe they have a stronger chance of success through the court rather than gathering enough signatures or winning a potential referendum.

Bias read (Center): The article presents both the reasons behind the withdrawal of the referendum initiative and the potential legal implications, including the possibility of a constitutional review by the Constitutional Court. It does not exhibit clear bias toward either side but provides information on the positions

Why factuality (85): Consistent with other sources regarding the withdrawal of the referendum proposal and the rationale behind it. Mentions the legal implications and the involvement of cultural organizations, which aligns with cross-source consensus.

Why objectivity (75): The article presents the situation as a strategic move by the initiators, implying a certain level of political calculation. While not overtly biased, there is a slight tilt towards understanding the motivations of the initiators rather than presenting both sides equally.

Maribor24IndependentProgressiveFactual 85Objective 704 days ago

The Slovenian parliament (DZ) has announced four advisory referendums scheduled for October 11th, covering topics such as linking social benefits with community service, abolishing the RTV contribution, granting voting rights to citizens of third countries in local elections, and a parliamentary inquiry referendum. These referendums were proposed by coalition members and the Resnica party, but opposed by the opposition. The opposition argues that the coalition is trying to divert attention from the parliamentary inquiry referendum and accuses them of misleading voters by equating it with a 'political police' referendum. The coalition claims the opposition is spreading fear and that the referendum process does not prevent the parliament from assessing public opinion on future arrangements. Additionally, there is debate over the legality of the referendum on the voting rights of third-country citizens, with the opposition claiming it is unconstitutional since the parliament already decided on this issue. The opposition has also proposed a legislative referendum and plans to collect signatures starting September 1st.

Bias read (Progressive): The article frames the coalition's proposal as an attempt to manipulate public focus and mislead voters, using terms like 'political police' which carry negative connotations. It highlights the opposition's accusations of fearmongering and misinformation, suggesting a left-leaning perspective that批评

Why factuality (85): The article accurately reports the details from the primary source document, including the date of the referendums, the topics covered, and the political positions of the coalition and opposition. It provides specific information about the proposed referendums and mentions the debate around them. Ho

Why objectivity (70): The article presents the information in a somewhat biased manner by emphasizing the arguments made by both sides but leans toward the coalition's perspective. The tone is not entirely neutral, especially when describing the opposition's concerns.

Nova24TVParty-alignedConservativeFactual 80Objective 605 days ago

At the 20th extraordinary session of the National Assembly, SDS MP Žan Mahnič highlighted the growing proportion of foreign citizens in Slovenia, citing official statistics showing a steady increase over time. He used Kranj as an example, noting that the share of foreigners there could reach 40% or even 50% within ten years. Official data from SURS indicates that as of January 1, 2026, 10.5% of Slovenia’s population were foreign nationals, with this percentage rising slightly by April 2026. The number of Slovenian citizens has been declining while the number of foreign residents continues to grow, driven largely by immigration from countries like Bosnia and Herzegovina, Serbia, Kosovo, North Macedonia, and Ukraine. Mahnič criticized opponents of his stance on a consultative referendum regarding voting rights for non-EU citizens, accusing them of ignoring demographic changes and prioritizing political gains over local community interests.

Bias read (Conservative): The article frames the increasing presence of foreign nationals in Slovenia as a significant issue requiring attention, particularly through the lens of a proposed consultative referendum on voting rights. It criticizes leftist opposition for allegedly ignoring demographic trends and prioritizing 'a

Why factuality (80): The article accurately reports the statistics and statements made during the parliamentary session, aligning closely with the primary source. It provides specific data about the percentage of foreign residents in Slovenia and the demographic trends mentioned by Žan Mahnič.

Why objectivity (60): The article exhibits a clear bias in favor of the coalition's position, using emotive language and framing the discussion in a way that supports the coalition's argument against expanding voting rights to non-EU citizens.

MladinaIndependentProgressiveFactual 75Objective 404 days ago

The article announces the launch of a new website, 'mocljudem.si', which aggregates all current citizen initiatives in Slovenia. The site aims to provide citizens with easy access to information about these initiatives and opportunities to support or participate in them. The editor, 'Danes je nov dan', criticizes the government for promoting harmful laws and creating public apathy, stating that they will not allow this. The article lists several specific citizen initiatives, including a referendum against a parliamentary investigation law, a law for restructuring, and a law that would revoke voting rights for women and third-country nationals with permanent residence in Slovenia.

Bias read (Progressive): The article frames the government's actions negatively, using strong language such as 'kaosa' (chaos) and 'škodljive zakone' (harmful laws), implying that the government is acting against the interests of citizens. It presents citizen initiatives as positive and necessary countermeasures, aligning a

Why factuality (75): The article provides specific details about the new website mocljudem.si and lists several public initiatives being promoted, including a constitutional referendum against certain laws. These claims appear consistent with the cross-source consensus, though some statements like 'Vlada si želi kaosa i

Why objectivity (40): The article uses emotionally charged language such as 'Vlada si želi kaosa in apatije javnosti' and frames the government negatively without presenting counterarguments or balanced perspectives. The tone is clearly biased in favor of the initiatives listed.

Svet24IndependentCenterFactual 65Objective 704 days ago

The Slovenian parliament has decided to schedule three referendums for October 11th. The decision was made by the parliament members, who have approved the dates for these referendums. The specific topics of the referendums were not detailed in the provided text. This development indicates a significant political move involving direct citizen voting on multiple issues.

Bias read (Center): The article presents the decision of the parliament to schedule referendums without apparent ideological framing. It focuses on the procedural action rather than taking a stance on the content of the referendums. There is no evident leaning towards any particular political faction.

Why factuality (65): The article reports that parliamentarians have decided to schedule three referendums for October 11th. Since no primary source document was available, factuality is judged based on cross-source consensus. The claim appears to align with similar reports from other sources, though specific details abo

Why objectivity (70): The tone of the article is neutral, presenting the information as a straightforward report. There is no evident bias or emotional language, though the headline slightly emphasizes the decisiveness of the action, which may hint at a slight editorial lean.

Slovenske noviceIndependentConservative4 hr. ago

The Slovenian parliament (DZ) passed legislative changes in June that revoke the voting rights of citizens of third countries who hold permanent residency permits and have registered permanent residence in Slovenia. The reforms were supported by parties including SDS, the trio NSi, SLS, and Fokus, along with the Resnica party. Opposition parties such as Gibanju Svoboda, SD, and Levici opposed the changes, arguing they violate constitutional principles by removing fundamental political rights granted since 2002. The parliamentary legal service (ZPS) has stated that the new law is constitutionally questionable, noting that no justification was provided for revoking the voting rights of foreigners. The opposition has announced plans to submit a constitutional review request to temporarily suspend the implementation of the law, which would affect local elections scheduled for November 15th. Additionally, the reform alters the electoral arrangements for smaller administrative units within municipalities, potentially allowing multiple polling stations within a single district. Several non-governmental organizations representing foreigners in Slovenia oppose the changes, claiming they cur

Bias read (Conservative): The article frames the legislative change as a necessary and justified action, emphasizing the support from right-leaning parties like SDS and Resnica. It highlights the opposition's concerns as politically motivated and notes the lack of justification provided for revoking voting rights, which is a

Siol.netState / PublicConservative6 hr. ago

The Slovenian parliament has implemented changes to the law on local elections, which revoke the voting rights of citizens of other countries who hold a permanent residence permit and have registered their permanent residence in Slovenia. The amendment was initially blocked by a referendum initiative but was withdrawn by the organizers on Monday, allowing the new law to take effect. The opposition plans to request a constitutional review of the law, arguing that revoking voting rights granted for 24 years may violate the principle of trust in the law. The parliamentary legal service has expressed concerns about the constitutionality of the change, noting that it undermines the fundamental political rights of foreigners who have lived in Slovenia since 2002. Additionally, the amendment affects the electoral system for smaller municipal units, requiring local communities to adjust their regulations accordingly. Several non-governmental organizations representing foreign residents oppose the changes, emphasizing that they limit the political rights of individuals who have contributed to Slovenian society over many years.

Bias read (Conservative): The article frames the law as a necessary reform while highlighting opposition concerns about its constitutionality and impact on foreign residents' rights. However, the emphasis on the implementation of the law, the withdrawal of the referendum initiative, and the support from certain political and

Žurnal24IndependentConservative7 hr. ago

The Slovenian parliament has passed amendments to the local election law, which revoke the voting rights of third-country nationals with permanent residency permits and registered permanent addresses in Slovenia. The changes were proposed by several parties including SDS, NSi, SLS, Fokus, and Resnica, and supported by the Democratic Party. Opposition parties such as Gibanje Svoboda, SD, and Levica opposed the amendment. The amendment initially blocked a referendum proposal but was withdrawn by the initiators before the signature collection began. Now, the opposition has called for a constitutional review of the law, arguing that it violates fundamental political rights granted to foreigners since 2002. The Constitutional Court could decide whether to temporarily suspend the implementation of the law, affecting the November 15 local elections. The parliamentary legal service (ZPS) also considers the new solution constitutionally questionable, noting that the law changes the electoral system close to election day and raises concerns about its feasibility. Non-governmental organizations representing foreigners in Slovenia oppose the changes, stating they limit the political rights of

Bias read (Conservative): The article frames the legislative change as a necessary adjustment to national sovereignty and security, emphasizing the removal of voting rights for foreign residents. It highlights support from right-leaning parties and mentions opposition from leftist groups. The focus on constitutional review,

DnevnikIndependent🔒Conservative7 hr. ago

Amendments to Slovenia's law on local elections have come into effect, stripping voting rights from foreign nationals with permanent residency permits and registered permanent residence in Slovenia. The changes were passed by the National Assembly in mid-June and were initially challenged through a proposed constitutional referendum, but the organizers withdrew their initiative before the start of signature collection. Opposition parties have announced plans to request a constitutional review of the amendments, arguing that they violate the principle of trust in the law by revoking rights granted for 24 years. The parliamentary legal service has also expressed concerns about the constitutionality of the new provisions, noting that they interfere with fundamental political rights. Several non-governmental organizations representing foreigners in Slovenia oppose the changes, emphasizing that those affected have lived, worked, paid taxes, raised children, and contributed to local communities for many years.

Bias read (Conservative): The article frames the removal of voting rights for foreign residents as a necessary legislative change supported by several right-leaning parties (SDS, NSi, SLS, Fokus, Resnica, and Demokrati). It highlights opposition from left-leaning parties (Gibanje Svoboda, SD, Levica, Vesna) and civil society

Zanima.meIndependentCenteryesterday

The organizers of a referendum on Slovenia’s Local Elections Act have decided not to collect the required signatures for the referendum. The law, passed by the National Assembly before summer, removes voting rights for non-citizens residing in Slovenia but lacking citizenship. While several civil society organizations had gathered over 5,000 of the needed signatures to begin collecting 40,000 verified signatures, they now plan to abandon the effort. Opposition parties welcome this decision and intend to challenge the law through a constitutional review once it takes effect, potentially requesting the Constitutional Court to suspend its implementation. The move is seen as responsible civic action by some, allowing the court to define the law’s constitutionality. Meanwhile, a consultative referendum on the issue, organized by the coalition, will take place on October 11 alongside two other consultative referendums.

Bias read (Center): The article presents both the decision to abandon the referendum and the opposition's plans for a constitutional challenge without overtly favoring either side. It includes perspectives from both the organizers and the opposition, and provides context about the law and its implications. There is no

Siol.netState / PublicCenter2 days ago

The State Election Commission (DVK) has approved the documents for conducting four referendums on October 11th. Early voting will be available from September 6th to 8th, with the referendum campaign starting on September 11th. Voters will decide whether to vote on all or individual referendums. The referendums include a constitutional referendum on amending the parliamentary inquiry law and three advisory referendums: abolishing mandatory payment of the RTV Slovenia contribution, linking financial social assistance to active participation of capable workers in socially beneficial work, and voting rights at local elections. Voters can choose which referendums they wish to participate in, and once they opt out, they cannot later vote on the remaining ones. Additional deadlines include submitting postal voting applications by September 25th for those abroad, by September 30th for domestic postal voters, and by October 5th for emergency cases. The final deadline for in-person voting and polling stations is October 7th.

Bias read (Center): The article presents factual information about the scheduling and procedures for multiple referendums without overtly favoring any particular political stance. It provides balanced reporting on the dates, rules, and voter options without emphasizing ideological positions or taking sides in the refer

N1 SlovenijaIndependentCenter2 days ago

The State Electoral Commission (DVK) has approved the acts for conducting referendums scheduled for October 11th. Early voting will take place between October 6th and 8th. The referendum campaign begins on September 11th, and voters will decide at their polling station whether they wish to vote on all or individual referendums. On October 11th, there will be a legislative referendum on amending the law on parliamentary inquiry, along with three advisory referendums regarding the abolition of mandatory contributions to RTV Slovenia, conditions for receiving financial social assistance linked to active participation in community work, and voting rights in local elections. Due to the simultaneous conduct of multiple referendums, voters who participate in the referendum voting can choose which referendum(s) they wish to vote on. Once this choice is made, they cannot later vote on any other referendums. Referendum procedures will start on Tuesday, and local electoral commissions must determine polling stations by September 8th. Voters abroad wishing to vote by mail must submit their application by September 25th. Those wishing to vote by mail within Slovenia, such as those in hospitals,

Bias read (Center): The article provides factual information about the scheduling and logistics of upcoming referendums without showing clear bias toward any political side. It outlines procedural details and dates but does not frame the content in a way that favors one perspective over another.