Last night, the union leaders failed to get the head of the State Council.

Marko Lotrič remains president of the State Council after a failed motion to remove him from office. In a secret vote, 19 members of the council voted for his removal, while 18 opposed it. To remove him, at least 21 members would have needed to support the motion. Following the vote, Lidija Jerkič assessed that Lotrič’s legitimacy as head of the State Council was now questionable. The motion for Lotrič’s removal was submitted by interest groups representing employees and non-economic activities. The discussion of the motion was added to today’s session of the State Council, with Lotrič’s lawyer present during the meeting. Speaking on behalf of the proposers, Jerkič cited Lotrič’s accumulation of roles as the main reason. She noted that Lotrič is not only president of the State Council but also president of the coalition party Focus, chairman of the strategic council for the economy, and at least two employer organizations. These roles overlap, making it difficult to determine his role clearly. Proposers also raised concerns about whether such events consume personnel and financial resources from the State Council. Jerkič stated that each member has their political beliefs. However, if the president collaborates with the government and prepares important laws, yet simultaneously withdraws work from the State Council and somehow dictates its dynamics, accelerating or delaying certain matters, it becomes “our common problem.” She added that there were several situations where this had already occurred, stating that the impartiality of the State Council president was already lost. In response, Lotrič argued that the motion itself contained self-serving arguments. He emphasized that all proposed laws regularly reached the committee meetings without delay, and any proposal from a state councillor or councillor for a veto was included in the session without delays. He assured that as president of the State Council, he always focuses on doing something beneficial for the country. “We are not representatives of any political party here; we ensure the interests of our groups,” he explained. He also clarified that he comes from the field of business, represents the interests of craftsmen and entrepreneurs, and that is his primary task. Much of his response focused on presenting the work of the State Council under his leadership. After being reminded by the proposers that he exceeded the allocated time, he devoted some sharp remarks to the topic. During the longer debate, Branimir Štrukelj, who represents employers in the State Council, described the situation as an “incestuous relationship,” noting that the State Council is an institution in the process of adopting laws, while the president of this institution is also part of the coalition holding executive power. He argued that this is not just a loss of reputation for the State Council but a complete slide regarding the responsibilities and functions the State Council holds according to the constitution in the legislative process. Radovan Stanislav Pejovnik, representing research activities, stressed that the issue concerned institutional integrity. “If we will accept our decisions solely as obedient executors of party instructions, we will devalue the meaning of the State Council, become an unnecessary extension of the National Assembly instead of being an independent representation of interests,” he said. On the other hand, several representatives of employers and local interests supported Lotrič, praising his work as president of the State Council. Marko Staroveški (employers) stated that Lotrič has done much for the recognition of the State Council. According to Milan Ozimič (local interests), previous presidents of the State Council were also members of political parties, but this orchestrated attack on the presidency had not been experienced before. He assessed that it was a public performance aimed at damaging the reputation of the State Council. According to his statements, the proposers did not cite any solid evidence of violations or specific inconsistencies in their justification; everything mentioned could be subject to discussion, whether it is controversial or appropriate for the president of the State Council. Rajko Fajt questioned whether Lotrič might have become somewhat annoying because he is gaining respect and some say he might be a candidate for future elections.