ON
← Back to feed
The Constitutional Court is expected to assess the amendment to the RTVS Law as constitutional
Slovenia🏛️ PoliticsCenter5 days ago

The Constitutional Court is expected to assess the amendment to the RTVS Law as constitutional

The Constitutional Court of Slovenia has ruled that the new law regarding RTVS (Radio Televizija Slovenija) is constitutional. The court initially temporarily suspended parts of the law in February 2023 but later revoked the suspension in May 2023. The decision was reached after a contentious process involving multiple legal challenges. The law, which was approved by referendum in November 2022, introduced changes to the governance structure of RTVS, including the appointment of new board members and leadership roles. Critics argued that the law allowed premature termination of mandates for certain officials, leading to legal challenges. The ruling allows the implementation of the law, though some justices were excluded from the final decision due to potential conflicts of interest.

After more than two years of waiting, the Constitutional Court has finally issued its decision on the amendment to the Radio and Television Slovenia Act (RTVS). The court ruled that the new law, which introduced a revised management structure for RTVS, is consistent with the constitution. This conclusion marks the end of a prolonged legal process that began in December 2022 when the amended law came into effect following a referendum held in November 2022.

The constitutional challenge was initiated by individuals who had previously served as members of the program committee and the supervisory board of RTVS. Among them was Peter Gregorčič, who had been the president of the previous program committee. They argued that the amendments had led to premature termination of mandates for several officials, including the general director and directors of radio and television. In addition, they requested a temporary suspension of the implementation of the amendment until further review could take place.

In February 2023, the Constitutional Court temporarily suspended parts of the amendment, specifically sections 24 and 25, as well as part of section 23, which dealt with the formation of a new council, drafting a new statute, and appointing the chairman and members of the management board. However, this suspension did not prevent the ongoing procedures for forming new bodies, but it halted the final establishment of the council.

By May 26, 2023, the court lifted the suspension, stating that a quick content-based decision would not be possible due to differing opinions among seven judges and justices. At that time, the composition of the Constitutional Court had already changed. There were nine judges in total, but some had been excluded from the decision-making process. Roka Čeferina was removed because her law firm, which she co-founded, collaborates with the public administration of RTVS. Similarly, Neža Kogovšek Šalamon was excluded due to her involvement with the Institute for Peace, which participated in the referendum campaign supporting the amendment.

Following the lifting of the suspension, the court continued its proceedings. According to reports from the Info360 portal, the judges have until July 20 to prepare any separate opinions. During this period, there may be a vote on individual judges' positions, allowing for potential changes in the outcome. The court’s final ruling, which declared the amendment to be in accordance with the constitution, was made on Thursday, though the exact date remains unspecified in the available records.

This decision brings closure to a complex and lengthy legal battle that has spanned over two years. It also highlights the procedural challenges faced by the Constitutional Court, particularly regarding the internal dynamics and changing composition of its bench. While the ruling affirms the legality of the amendment, it does not resolve all concerns raised by the petitioners, who continue to seek clarification on specific aspects of the law's impact on RTVS governance.

Looking ahead, the focus will likely shift towards implementing the new management structure outlined in the amendment. The newly formed bodies, including the supervisory board and management board, will need to be established according to the provisions set forth in the law. As the process moves forward, stakeholders within RTVS and the broader media landscape will monitor how these changes affect the organization’s operations and independence. The resolution of this case underscores the importance of judicial oversight in shaping public institutions and ensuring compliance with constitutional principles.

How each side covered it

The same event, grouped by the political lean of the outlets covering it.

How each side covered it

Support independent, bias-aware news and unlock the social pulse, community voting, and your personalized For You feed.

Become a Supporter

Covered around the world

The same event as reported in other countries.

Covered around the world

Support independent, bias-aware news and unlock the social pulse, community voting, and your personalized For You feed.

Become a Supporter

Claims check

Key factual claims, and how many sources assert vs dispute each.

Claims check

Support independent, bias-aware news and unlock the social pulse, community voting, and your personalized For You feed.

Become a Supporter

2 reports

Žurnal24 logoŽurnal24IndependentCenterFactual 85Objective 805 days ago
After more than two years of waiting, the Constitutional Court has just ruled on the RTVS law

The Constitutional Court of Slovenia has ruled that the new law on RTVS (Radio Televizija Slovenija) is constitutional after nearly two years of legal proceedings. The court initially suspended parts of the law in February 2023 but later lifted the suspension in May 2023, citing disagreements among judges. The ruling was based on a law passed in December 2022, which was approved by a referendum in November 2022. Critics argued that the law prematurely ended mandates for members of the program and supervisory boards and the general director, prompting a constitutional challenge. The court allowed further review and potential reconsideration of individual judges' votes before July 20. Key judges were excluded from the decision due to conflicts of interest.

Bias read (Center): The article presents the constitutional ruling as a balanced outcome, noting both the initial suspension and subsequent lifting of the law. It reports the positions of different judges without overtly favoring any side, though it highlights the controversy surrounding the law’s implementation and affi

Why these scores (Factual 85 · Objective 80): Accurately reports on the decision by the Constitutional Court regarding the RTV Slovenia law, aligning with the primary source. Mentions the 5-2 vote but does not confirm the content of the ruling, maintaining objectivity.

Dnevnik logoDnevnikIndependent🔒CenterFactual 75Objective 705 days ago
The Constitutional Court is expected to assess the amendment to the RTVS Law as constitutional

The Constitutional Court of Slovenia has ruled that the new law regarding RTVS (Radio Televizija Slovenija) is constitutional. The court initially temporarily suspended parts of the law in February 2023 but later revoked the suspension in May 2023. The decision was reached after a contentious process involving multiple legal challenges. The law, which was approved by referendum in November 2022, introduced changes to the governance structure of RTVS, including the appointment of new board members and leadership roles. Critics argued that the law allowed premature termination of mandates for certain officials, leading to legal challenges. The ruling allows the implementation of the law, though some justices were excluded from the final decision due to potential conflicts of interest.

Bias read (Center): The article presents the legal proceedings and outcomes objectively, detailing both the arguments against the law and the court’s eventual ruling. While the issue involves political stakeholders and public institutions, the framing remains balanced, focusing on legal interpretation rather than overt

Why these scores (Factual 75 · Objective 70): Reports on the Constitutional Court decision but lacks specific details from the primary source. Objectivity is slightly compromised by focusing more on the implications rather than the facts.

Keep the news honest.

ObjectiveNews is reader-funded and ad-free — we show you the bias instead of hiding it. Support independent journalism for €5/month.

Become a Supporter

Related stories