Kekin: Plenković i HDZ nastupaju kao trbuhozborci Medikola

Net.hrNeovisanSredinaČinjenice 97Objektivnost 94prije 7 dana

U članku se navodi da je tvrtka Medikol podnijela osam građanskih tužbi protiv parlamentarke Ivane Kekin, navodeći da je širila lažne informacije i oštetila ugled tvrtke. Svaka tužba traži naknadu od 10.000 eura, ukupno 80.000 eura. Tužbe su izabrane nad drugim pravnim radnjama jer parlamentarni imunitet ne štiti zakonodavce u građanskim slučajevima kao što to čini u kaznenom postupku. Spor između Kekin i Medikola traje mjesecima, a Kekin kritizira sustav u kojem Hrvatski fond za zdravstveno osiguranje (HZZO) plaća privatne zdravstvene usluge kao zlouporabu javnih sredstava.

Procjena pristranosti (Sredina): Članak predstavlja obje perspektive: Kekinovu kritiku modela privatne zdravstvene zaštite i Medikolovu obranu svojih operacija.

Zašto ove ocjene (Činjenice 97 · Objektivnost 94): The article accurately reports the number of lawsuits (eight), their value (10,000 euros each), and the reasons (false information damaging reputation). It also includes both sides of the dispute fairly, quoting Kekin’s claims and Medikol’s counterarguments.

Telegram.hrNeovisanSredinaČinjenice 95Objektivnost 92prije 7 dana

Farmaceutska tvrtka Medikol podnijela je sedam građanskih tužbi protiv Ivane Kekin, zastupnice iz stranke Možemo!, navodeći da je širila lažne informacije i oštetila ugled tvrtke. Svaka tužba navodno traži 10.000 eura odštete, ukupno 80.000 eura.

Procjena pristranosti (Sredina): U članku se prikazuju obje strane spora bez da se otvoreno favorizira jedna nad drugom.

Zašto ove ocjene (Činjenice 95 · Objektivnost 92): The article correctly states seven lawsuits instead of eight but otherwise aligns closely with the primary source. The slight discrepancy may be due to timing or reporting differences. The tone remains mostly neutral, presenting both perspectives without overt bias.

Index.hrNeovisanProgresivnoČinjenice 95Objektivnost 75prije 5 dana

Ivana Kekin, president of the parliamentary Committee on Health from the 'Možemo' party, criticized Prime Minister Andrej Plenković and President Zoran Milanović over their conflict regarding the Medikol case. She accused Plenković of protecting private interests by allowing millions of euros in public funds to flow to Medikol, a private healthcare provider, while violating the constitution. Kekin highlighted that Plenković has refused to establish an investigative committee into the Medikol case, similar to past refusals over the last decade. She emphasized that such committees are standard democratic tools used when there is suspicion of actions against the public interest. Kekin pointed out that Medikol has controlled the only PET/CT scanner in Dalmatia for years, leading to significant public spending on services that could be provided by state-run facilities. She also claimed that HDZ is blocking all discussions about Medikol and will block any investigation into the matter.

Procjena pristranosti (Progresivno): The article frames the situation as a violation of constitutional duties and highlights the protection of private interests at the expense of public welfare, using critical language towards the ruling party and its policies. The emphasis on constitutional breaches and the blocking of investigations,

Zašto ove ocjene (Činjenice 95 · Objektivnost 75): The article accurately summarizes Kekin's statements and provides specific figures about Medikol payments. The tone remains critical of HDZ but maintains reasonable balance by quoting Kekin directly without editorializing.

N1 HrvatskaNeovisanProgresivnoČinjenice 85Objektivnost 65prije 4 dana

Ivana Kekin, članica Hrvatskog sabora, objavila je da će dostaviti dokumentaciju o slučaju Medikol državnom tijelu DORH-u nakon što je saborska većina, vođena HDZ-om, odbila prijedlog za osnivanje istražnog povjerenstva. Kekin kritizira HDZ za njeno ponašanje prema slučaju bivšeg ministra zdravlja Vilija Beroša, smatrajući da stranka ne želi da odgovara na pitanja o nedostatku ključnih onkoloških dijagnostike u javnom zdravstvenom sustavu i usmjeravanju sredstava prema privatnoj tvrtki Medikol. Kodično da će, ako HDZ ostane u vlasti, osnovni istražni povjerenstvo dobiti bi odgovore. Također je napomenula da joj Medikol pokušava ušutkati, zastrašiti i upisati se u privatni financijski kanal ukupne vrijednosti od 80.000 eura.

Procjena pristranosti (Progresivno): U članku se radnje HDZ-a opisuju kao obstrukcionističke i sebične, koristeći snažan jezik kao što su "sabotiranje istrage", "zastrašiti" i "ortački kapitalizam".

Zašto ove ocjene (Činjenice 85 · Objektivnost 65): Factuality is high as the article reports on specific political actions and statements by Ivana Kekin regarding the Medikol case and HDZ's response. It aligns with cross-source consensus on the political dynamics. Objectivity is lower due to the charged language suggesting HDZ is obstructing justice

Telegram.hrNeovisanKonzervativnoČinjenice 75Objektivnost 55prije 5 dana

The article discusses the Croatian Democratic Union (HDZ)'s arguments against establishing an investigative committee into Medikol, a private healthcare company accused of receiving excessive state funding for PET/CT scans while public health facilities lack necessary equipment. HDZ parliamentarian Željko Glavić argues that there is no need for such a committee, claiming that if something is wrong, the legislature is not competent to investigate. The article criticizes this stance as logically flawed and politically motivated, noting that the law explicitly allows investigative committees to examine the legality of public institutions. It also highlights broader concerns about the ruling party’s suppression of democratic oversight, referencing past instances where similar committees were blocked, including one related to Agrokor. The piece suggests that these actions undermine transparency and democratic accountability.

Procjena pristranosti (Konzervativno): The article frames the HDZ's opposition to the investigative committee as reasonable and legally grounded, emphasizing their trust in institutions and the supposed overreach of parliamentary oversight. It uses dismissive language toward critics who argue for transparency, implying that those demands

Zašto ove ocjene (Činjenice 75 · Objektivnost 55): The article accurately reports HDZ arguments against the investigation but uses strong rhetorical questions and sarcastic language like 'Kad ste čuli nešto uvrnutije?' which introduces bias. It also contains some factual inaccuracies regarding the legal basis for parliamentary oversight.

Večernji listNeovisanProgresivnoČinjenice 70Objektivnost 55prekjučer

The article discusses the political dynamics within Croatia's ruling coalition, focusing on tensions between the Croatian Democratic Union (HDZ) and the Social Democrats (SDP). Political analyst Ankica Mamić comments on the situation, noting that while there are internal conflicts, HDZ still holds significant power due to its strategic Plan B, which maintains cohesion within the coalition. The article also addresses the controversy surrounding the private clinic Medikol and the refusal by HDZ to establish a parliamentary investigative committee into its operations. It suggests that this decision could further embolden opposition figures like Ivana Kekin, who has consistently pushed for such an investigation. The piece concludes by comparing the Medikol issue to past scandals involving HDZ members, implying that while it may generate public concern, it is unlikely to cause significant damage to the ruling party.

Procjena pristranosti (Progresivno): The article frames the HDZ's refusal to form an investigative committee as potentially giving more strength to opposition figures like Ivana Kekin. It implies that HDZ is avoiding accountability and downplays the potential impact of the Medikol scandal, suggesting a left-leaning perspective that is,

Zašto ove ocjene (Činjenice 70 · Objektivnost 55): Reports on Katičić's response to SDP's proposals, but frames it in a way that implies SDP's ideas are not original. This reduces objectivity by presenting a biased interpretation of the situation.

N1 HrvatskaNeovisanProgresivnoprije 12 h

Zastupnica Ivana Kekin (Možemo!) objasnila je da joj je podnio privatni operator Medikol sedam građanskih tužbi, koje opisuje kao klasične SLAPP tužbe tužbe namijenjene zastrašivanje i financijsko iscrpljivanje. Kekin navodi konkretne primjere iz njezine izjave, uključujući kritiku države za neosiguranje javnih PET/CT uređaja i pitanja o ulazi privatnog sektora u javna zdravstvena zavodova. Onače da građanića plaju Medikolove tužbe preko svojih prihoda za PET/CT pregledi, što stvara situaciju gdje građani financiraju privatnu tvrtku koja ih tuži.

Procjena pristranosti (Progresivno): Članak prikazuje situaciju kao borbu između demokratske odgovornosti i korporativnog utjecaja, naglašavajući korištenje pravnih taktika od strane privatnih subjekata protiv javnih ličnosti.

HRT (Hrvatska radiotelevizija)Državni / javniProgresivnoprije 12 h

Zastupnica Ivana Kekin (Možemo!) objasnila je da joj privatna poliklinika Medikol podnijela sedam građanskih tužbi, koje opisuje kao klasične SLAPP tužbe tužbe namijenjene zastrašiti i financijski iscrpati javne liječnike. Kekin navodi konkretne primjere iz njezinih izjava, uključujući kritiku državne nezainteresiranosti za osiguranje javnih PET/CT uređaja u Dalmaciji, te ističe da Medikol koristi građanska sredstva za financiranje tužbi protiv političara koji kritikuju njihovo ponašanje.

Procjena pristranosti (Progresivno): U članku se radi o borbi između demokratske odgovornosti i korporativnog utjecaja, naglašavajući korištenje pravnih taktika od strane privatnih subjekata protiv javnih ličnosti.