Source: European Parliament
Priority question for written answer P-000655/2025/rev.1
to the Commission
Rule 144
Branko Grims (PPE)
Again and again we have seen obviously politically motivated proceedings being launched against Janez Janša in the run-up to elections. Then after the elections the proceedings are halted, only to be revived when the next elections are approaching. This has been going on for two decades, so it is obvious that this abuse is politically motivated.
In the Kafkaesque Patria case, which went on for a decade, Janez Janša was tried for having ‘somewhere’, ‘at some time’ made an ‘unknown promise’ and on the basis of that absurd construct was imprisoned ahead of an election. After the election, Slovenia’s Constitutional Court quashed the ruling.
Now he is on trial in what is referred to as the ‘Trenta’ case. Some thirty years ago, Mr Janša bought a plot with a house in the Trenta valley. It was in the national park, where new building is not permitted. But replacement construction is permitted so these properties change hands at higher prices. In 2005 he sold the property for a higher price. The prosecution argues that the acquisition of the property by the management of a private company was ‘financially detrimental’, even though many properties in tourist areas and in Ljubljana were bought and sold for a substantially bigger price difference in a comparable period.
What is the Commission’s opinion on this clear abuse of the judiciary to politically discredit the opposition in Slovenia?
Submitted: 12.2.2025