Za referendum o »politični policiji« zbrali že 30.442 podpisov

VečerNeodvisen🔒SredinaDejstva 95Objektivnost 85predvčerajšnjim

V članku so obravnavane težave, s katerimi so se srečali zagovorniki referenduma o predlagani spremembi slovenskega zakona o parlamentarnih preiskavah. Po pobudi "Proti politični policiji" so se nekateri državljani soočali z zamudami v lokalnih upravnih enotah, ko so poskušali predložiti podpise za referendum. Nekaterim je bilo sporočeno, da jih zaradi težav s sistemom ni mogoče obdelati. Zbiranje podpisov se je začelo 10. junija in naj bi se končalo 14. julija, skupina pa je zbrala 34.104 podpisov od potrebnih 40.000. Predlagana sprememba, ki jo je maja sprejela narodna skupščina, bi posameznike, ki so predmet preiskave, omejila na izpodbijanje odločitev pred ustavnim sodiščem in preprečila, da bi narodna skupščina po izdaji končnega poročila začela nove preiskave v isti zadevi.

Ocena pristranskosti (Sredina): V članku so predstavljeni tako izzivi, s katerimi se soočajo organizatorji referenduma, kot tudi vsebina predlagane zakonodajne spremembe, ne da bi se očitno naklonil nobeni strani.

Zakaj te ocene (Dejstva 95 · Objektivnost 85): Factual account of the challenges faced by signatories and the government’s response. Maintains neutrality while presenting both sides.

N1 SlovenijaNeodvisenSredinaDejstva 95Objektivnost 85predvčerajšnjim

The article reports on challenges faced by referendum organizers in Slovenia while collecting signatures for a referendum on a parliamentary inquiry law amendment. According to the organizers, some citizens cannot submit their signatures at local administrative units or via the eUprava portal. The Ministry of Internal Affairs and Public Administration attributes these issues to occasional technical problems, though they claim to have received no complaints. As of mid-July, 34,144 signatures have been collected, falling short of the required 40,000. The proposed law amendment would limit the ability of individuals subjected to inquiries to challenge the decision to initiate an inquiry before the Constitutional Court, which organizers argue removes a key safeguard against political abuse of parliamentary inquiries.

Ocena pristranskosti (Sredina): The article presents both the concerns raised by referendum organizers and the official response from the Ministry of Internal Affairs, without overtly favoring either side. It provides factual information about the signature collection process and the legal implications of the proposed law change,

Zakaj te ocene (Dejstva 95 · Objektivnost 85): Highly factual with detailed reporting on technical issues during signature collection. Slightly biased toward the protesters' perspective but remains mostly neutral.

DnevnikNeodvisen🔒LevoDejstva 90Objektivnost 80pred 4 dnevi

The article reports on a referendum initiative in Slovenia aimed at repealing a law amendment related to parliamentary investigations. As of June 30, 2026, over 30,442 signatures have been collected, exceeding three-quarters of the required 40,000 needed to trigger the referendum. The campaign warns that if the amendment passes, it would threaten human rights by limiting the ability of individuals subjected to investigation to challenge the decision to reopen the inquiry before the Constitutional Court. The signatories, including former members of the Human Rights Protection Committee, argue the change enables political abuse of parliamentary inquiries. They emphasize the importance of legal protection and democratic principles, urging citizens to submit remaining signatures through local authorities or the eUprava portal.

Ocena pristranskosti (Levo): The article frames the proposed law amendment as a threat to human rights and democracy, using emotive language such as 'threatening human rights' and 'political abuse.' It emphasizes the potential negative consequences of the amendment while highlighting the concerns of the petitioners, who are all

Zakaj te ocene (Dejstva 90 · Objektivnost 80): Accurate information on the number of signatures collected and the deadline. Language leans slightly towards the protesters' concerns but remains relatively balanced.

DeloNeodvisen🔒LevoDejstva 90Objektivnost 80pred 4 dnevi

An initiative seeking a referendum on a parliamentary inquiry law amendment has collected 30,442 signatures, meaning the petitioners need just under 10,000 more signatures within two weeks to trigger a referendum. The petitioners, former members of the Human Rights Protection Committee including Franco Juri, Pavel Gantar, and others, argue that the proposed law threatens fundamental rights by limiting the ability of individuals to challenge parliamentary inquiries. They emphasize that even if such inquiries seem unlikely to affect them personally, they could still become victims, similar to winning the lottery. The National Assembly passed the amendment proposed by SDS, NSi, SLS, and Fokus, supported by Democrats and Resnica. The amendment limits the ability to challenge the decision to initiate a parliamentary inquiry before the Constitutional Court, allowing only the Supreme Court or the Public Prosecutor to review compliance with the constitution and law within 30 days. Critics, including legal expert Barbara Rajgelj and the Democracy Protection Network, warn that the amendment narrows the possibility of verifying whether the inquiry is justified by public interest, potentially滥

Ocena pristranskosti (Levo): The article frames the issue as a threat to democratic principles, human rights, and legal protections, emphasizing the risks posed by the proposed law. It highlights concerns about the erosion of checks and balances, the potential for abuse of parliamentary inquiries, and the lack of judicial redem

Zakaj te ocene (Dejstva 90 · Objektivnost 80): Reports accurately on the situation with signature collection and the law change. The tone shows concern for human rights but stays reasonably objective.

DemokracijaStrankarsko povezanSredinaDejstva 85Objektivnost 75predvčerajšnjim

The article discusses proposed changes to Slovenia's parliamentary investigation law, which aim to limit blockages during investigations and strengthen oversight by the opposition. The amendments were passed by the National Assembly at the end of May 2026, supported by a coalition including SDS, NSi, SLS, Fokus, and Respublika. Critics, including activists from the left-wing parties such as Svoboda and Levica, argue that the new law enables the majority to abuse power and threatens journalists and civil society. Opponents are collecting signatures for a referendum under the misleading campaign title 'Against Political Police,' aiming to challenge the amended law. As of late June 2026, they had gathered around 25,602 verified signatures out of the required 40,000, but the campaign has slowed down recently.

Ocena pristranskosti (Sredina): The article presents both perspectives—supporters of the legal changes who claim they improve efficiency and prevent constitutional challenges, and opponents who criticize them as enabling political abuse. It does not favor one side through loaded language, one-sided sourcing, or omission of context

Zakaj te ocene (Dejstva 85 · Objektivnost 75): Provides context on the law changes and the opposition's stance. Uses some emotionally charged terms like 'political police,' showing a clear bias.

RTV Slovenija (MMC)Državni / javniSredinaDejstva 85Objektivnost 75predvčerajšnjim

Članek poroča o težavah, s katerimi se soočajo državljani pri zbiranju podpisov za referendum o parlamentarni preiskavi v Sloveniji.

Ocena pristranskosti (Sredina): Članek predstavlja uravnoteženo poročilo o izkušnjah državljanov in uradnih odgovorih, ne da bi odkrito naklonil nobeni strani, poudarja pomisleke, ki so jih izrazili zagovorniki referenduma, in priznava, da ministrstvo nima neposrednih pritožb, pri čemer ohranja nevtralnost pri oblikovanju.

Zakaj te ocene (Dejstva 85 · Objektivnost 75): The article reports on challenges faced during signature collection for a referendum, citing user experiences and quotes from a representative. It aligns with cross-source consensus on technical issues. Objectivity is slightly compromised by the inclusion of emotional quotes suggesting sabotage, tho

DomovinaNeodvisenLevoDejstva 85Objektivnost 75pred 3 dnevi

V članku se razpravlja o prizadevanjih pobudnikov referenduma glede reforme zakona o parlamentarni preiskavi, pri čemer je navedeno, da nekatere sindikate pomagajo pri zbiranju podpisov. V članku je poudarjeno, da se sindikati zakonsko lahko udeležujejo takih kampanj, njihov osrednji mandat pa se osredotoča na zastopanje gospodarskih, socialnih in delovnih pravic delavcev, kar je lahko v nasprotju z novo zakonodajo. V članku je kritizirana vsebina sindikalne publikacije, ki se odkloni od svoje tradicionalne vloge s spodbujanjem levičarskega političnega aktivizma, namesto da bi se osredotočila izključno na delovna vprašanja. Prav tako se omenja, da je pobuda zbrala več kot 30.000 podpisov, vendar jih še vedno potrebuje več, da bi dosegla prag, pri čemer je napredek počasen. V članku je še navedeno, da sta se Zveza sindikatov (SIZV) in njen glavni sekretar Branimir Štrukelj aktivno vključila v zbiranje podpisov, kljub temu, da to ni del njihovih primarnih odgovornosti.

Ocena pristranskosti (Levo): V članku se pobuda referenduma obravnava kot potreben demokratični ukrep proti morebitni zlorabi moči, pri čemer se uporablja jezik, ki poudarja krepitev vloge državljanov in zaščito demokracije.

Zakaj te ocene (Dejstva 85 · Objektivnost 75): Reliable information on the technical problems with signature collection. Uses activist language, indicating a leaning toward the protesters’ viewpoint.

DnevnikNeodvisen🔒LevoDejstva 80Objektivnost 70predvčerajšnjim

The organizers of a referendum on a proposed amendment to the law on parliamentary investigations are facing difficulties in collecting signatures. According to their reports, some citizens cannot submit their signatures either at local administrative units or through the eUprava portal. The Ministry of Internal Affairs and Public Administration stated these issues are occasional technical problems. As of July 2, 2026, they had collected 34,104 signatures out of the required 40,000 by July 14. The proposed amendment, passed by the National Assembly in late May, limits individuals under investigation from challenging decisions before the Constitutional Court and prevents the Assembly from initiating new investigations on the same matter after issuing a final report. Organizers argue this removes a crucial safeguard against potential misuse of parliamentary investigations.

Ocena pristranskosti (Levo): The article frames the issue as a challenge to democratic safeguards, emphasizing concerns over potential political abuse of parliamentary investigations. It highlights the opposition's perspective, describing the amendment as removing 'crucial protections' and focusing on the negative implications,

Zakaj te ocene (Dejstva 80 · Objektivnost 70): Includes some speculative commentary on unions’ involvement. Less neutral due to critical tone toward the new law and unions’ role.