Freedom of the press in the eyes of Natasha Pirc Musar

In September this year, the magazine Demokracija, which you are currently reading, will exhale thirty candles. The name of the publication is significantly older, dating back to after World War II, when a group of democratically oriented coastal Slovenians, led by Andrej Slavko Uršič, advocated values that were rejected by Tito’s regime, despite his reconciliation with Stalin and efforts to prevent the party's murder of its founder. The journal Demokracija resumed publication towards the end of the 1980s, initially as the newspaper of the Slovenian Democratic Union, later of the entire Demos. It continued until the end of the transition period, surviving through intense storms, read: pressure from transitional populists, and remained active until today. In fact, we have never been left alone, neither at the beginning of 1996 nor today, despite all possible inspections. The fact that the current government might be more friendly than before plays little role, since our survival depends primarily on the market. Comparing ourselves with those who claim they operate in the “national interest” and have “special significance” and receive support is still very relevant, especially since our salaries have never been subsidized by tax money, and neither will they be. Why did I start thinking about this topic? Not solely because of pride in having chosen the path of “entering through narrow gates,” opting for a less comfortable life, supported by comparisons, threats, and even criminal measures. Rather, it was also due to my recent, somewhat more detailed investigation into the experiences Demokracija has had with Natasa Pirc Musar, the current President of the Republic of Slovenia, who frequently speaks about media freedom. She does so mainly in her role as the Information Commissioner, then later as a lawyer who filed complaints against the media. Her recent traffic accident near Kastelec and everything that followed, including concealment and playing on emotions, was the catalyst for us to look back into archives and revive knowledge about the unpleasant feeling one gets while reading the lamentations of the current president. Those with short memories will believe her at face value and strike out at supposedly rebellious media that allegedly lack integrity and respect for those elected by the people. Yes, we are quickly skating on thin ice, the mentality that officials are somehow “holy cows” is still strongly present. If these officials are “ours”, that is, of the correct political color and tied to the right parties, they are considered acceptable. Has Pirc Musar been attacked in the media? If the answer is affirmative, it must be understood why such speculation arose: primarily due to secrecy and silence, but much has also been contributed by her “past.” Her approach has largely been aimed at limiting media freedom. At least two severe examples are known, showing how the office of the Information Commissioner, under Pirc Musar’s leadership, penalized Demokracija. First in 2006, due to the publication of gross wages of employees at Delo, where inspector Jože Bogataj played a prominent role. He had already for decades penalized Demokracija for publishing names of former SDV agents. Then in 2011, when it was revealed that there was communication between the court and journalist Mladine. In both cases, it became clear that the publication of “official” information is not in the public interest, regardless of the fact that Delo, which was then majority-owned by Laško Brewery, fiercely attacked the first Janez Janša government (though it is not much different today). Media freedom? Yes, but only for “ours”, otherwise it must be heavily regulated and limited. This is something Pirc Musar should remember when she again appears as a victim of media investigation. It should also be noted that Golobova’s fatwa prohibiting the advertising of large companies in Demokracija has not yet been revoked. But we have survived that too. Thank God!