Kekin: Plenković in HDZ nastopajo kot Medikola

Net.hrNeodvisenSredinaDejstva 97Objektivnost 94pred 7 dnevi

V članku je navedeno, da je družba Medikol vložila osem civilnih tožb zoper parlamentarko Ivano Kekin, ki naj bi širila lažne informacije in škodovala ugledu družbe. Vsaka tožba zahteva odškodnino v višini 10.000 evrov, skupno 80.000 evrov. Tožbe so bile izbrane pred drugimi pravnimi tožbami, ker parlamentarna imuniteta ne ščiti zakonodajalcev v civilnih zadevah, kot v kazenskih postopkih. Spor med Kekinom in Medikolom traja že več mesecev, Kekin pa kritizira sistem, v katerem hrvaški zdravstveni zavarovalni sklad (HZZO) plačuje za zasebne zdravstvene storitve, kot zlorabo javnih sredstev. Medikol zanika te trditve in navaja, da ima HZZO pogodbe z več zasebnimi kliniki, vključno z Medikolom, in da je ta model pogost v številnih evropskih državah, da bi zagotovil hitrejši dostop do zdravstvenih storitev. Trdijo, da bi brez zasebnih objektov morali bolniki v tujini iskati takšno oskrbo, stroške pa bi še vedno pokrivala HZZO.

Ocena pristranskosti (Sredina): Članek predstavlja oba stališča: Kekinovo kritiko modela zasebnega zdravstvenega varstva in Medikolovo obrambo svojih operacij.

Zakaj te ocene (Dejstva 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.hrNeodvisenSredinaDejstva 95Objektivnost 92pred 7 dnevi

Farmacevtsko podjetje Medikol je vložilo sedem civilnih tožb zoper Ivano Kekin, poslanko parlamenta iz stranke Možemo! in trdi, da je širila lažne informacije in poškodovala ugled podjetja.

Ocena pristranskosti (Sredina): V članku sta predstavljeni obe strani spora, ne da bi očitno favorizirali eno nad drugo. Poroča o trditvah Medikol o obrekovanju in finančni škodi, hkrati pa podrobno opisuje Kekinove obtožbe o zlorabi javnih sredstev.

Zakaj te ocene (Dejstva 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.hrNeodvisenProgresivnoDejstva 95Objektivnost 75pred 5 dnevi

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.

Ocena pristranskosti (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,

Zakaj te ocene (Dejstva 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 HrvatskaNeodvisenProgresivnoDejstva 85Objektivnost 65pred 4 dnevi

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 zdravstva Vilija Beroša, smatrajući da partija ne želi da se odgovori na pitanja o nedostatku ključne onkološke dijagnostike u javnom zdravstvenom sustavu i usmjeravanju sredstava prema privatnoj tvrtki Medikol. Kekin navodi da će, ako HDZ ostane u vlasti, osnovati istražno povjerenstvo kako bi dobila odgovore. Također je napomenula da Medikol pokušava joj ušutkati, zastrašiti i financijski iscrpiti putem osam tužbi ukupne vrijednosti 80.000 eura. Sandra Benčić, predsjednica Kluba zastupnika Možemo, kritizira izjave premijera Andreja Plenkovića o sinergiji javnog i privatnog zdravstva, opisujući ih kao model ortačkog kapitalizma.

Ocena pristranskosti (Progresivno): The article frames the actions of HDZ as obstructionist and self-serving, using strong language like 'sabotiranje istrage', 'zastrašiti', and 'ortački kapitalizam'. It portrays HDZ as protecting private interests at the expense of public good, which aligns with left-leaning critiques of corporate or

Zakaj te ocene (Dejstva 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.hrNeodvisenKonservativnoDejstva 75Objektivnost 55pred 5 dnevi

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.

Ocena pristranskosti (Konservativno): 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

Zakaj te ocene (Dejstva 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 listNeodvisenProgresivnoDejstva 70Objektivnost 55predvčerajšnjim

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.

Ocena pristranskosti (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,

Zakaj te ocene (Dejstva 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 HrvatskaNeodvisenProgresivnopred 13 urami

Zastupnica Ivana Kekin (Možemo!) je pojasnila, da je podnijela zasebni operater Medikol sedam građanskih tužbi, koje opisuje kot klasične SLAPP tužbe tužbe namijenate zastrašivanje i finančno iscrpivanje. Kekin navodi konkretne primjere iz njezinih izjave, vključno kritiku države za neosiguranje javnih PET/CT uređaja i vprašanja o ulazi zasebnega sektora u javna zdravstvena zavodova. Onače da građanića plaju Medikolove tužbe preko svojih prihoda za PET/CT pregledi, što ustvarja situacijo, kjer državljani financirajo zasebno podjetje koja im tu. K podžijeti na prethodne tužbe protiv novinarke Slavice Lukić, su bile izgubljene koje. Predsjednica Kluba!

Ocena pristranskosti (Progresivno): Članek razlaga situacijo kot boj med demokratično odgovornostjo in korporativnim vplivom ter poudarja uporabo pravnih taktik zasebnih subjektov proti javnim osebnostim.

HRT (Hrvatska radiotelevizija)Državni / javniProgresivnopred 13 urami

Zastupnica Ivana Kekin (Možemo!) je pojasnila, da je njena zasebna poliklinika Medikol podnijela sedem građanskih tužbi, ki jih opisuje kot klasične SLAPP tužbe tužbe namijenate zastrašiti i finančno iscrpati javne zdravnike. Kekin navodi konkretne primjere iz njezinih izjav, vključno kritiku državne nezainteresiranosti za osiguranje javnih PET/CT uređaja u Dalmaciji, te ističe da Medikol koristi građanska sredstva za financiranje tužbi proti politikom, ki kritizirajo njihovo vedenje. Kekinče da isti takvi pohodovi povezani s HDZ-om, ki, prema njej, zatire demokratske metode i koristi pravni sistem zača za sprečevanje delnega javnega financiranja. Predsjednica Kluba Lahko!

Ocena pristranskosti (Progresivno): Članek obravnava vprašanje kot boj med demokratično odgovornostjo in korporativnim vplivom ter poudarja uporabo pravnih taktik zasebnih subjektov proti javnim osebnostim.