I would not like to make a direct comparison of 2021 or 2022 with 2025. Every year is different, but the results are black and white. Anyone can read our recommendations and whether they have been met. It is clear from last year’s report that there is still a lot of work to be done in the case of Slovakia. That’s why we’re here to have this honest and direct dialogue.
Mr. Fico is also interested in reports on the rule of law probably because if the country does not meet the standards, money from the EU can be frozen. Was the purpose of your visit to find out if the situation is so serious that this could happen?
We have a toolkit that applies to all Member States. This includes the conditionality mechanism, which was activated in the case of Hungary, or the horizontal conditions of the Charter of Fundamental Rights, which can slow down or stop the flow of certain funds. In addition, we have a Recovery and Resiliency Plan.
It contains supermilestones, i.e. conditions that must be met in order for payments to continue. This is not an accounting exercise. It is about respecting the rule of law throughout the EU. This is a fundamental value of membership and an obligation that does not end with joining the union, but lasts throughout membership.
Proceedings on breach of obligations (so-called infringements) take a long time, because they are decided by the court. They don’t have to directly trouble Robert Fico, because the fines for them may be paid by the next government. However, it seems that the Recovery Plan worked in the case of the Office for the Protection of Whistleblowers, where the government preferred to retreat in order not to lose 600 million euros. Is this the only thing that really works in Slovakia if you want to influence something?
I would not underestimate the importance of infringement proceedings. The Commission can ask the Court of Justice of the EU for interim measures, and if the Member State does not rectify the situation after the judgment, financial sanctions can follow. It is an important tool that we do not use lightly.
However, a recovery plan is undoubtedly a useful way to ensure compliance with important conditions. It is only fair that if a Member State is provided with EU taxpayers’ money, respect for the laws of the European Union must be guaranteed. We welcome that Slovakia has reversed the law in the case of whistleblowers.
Did you just realize this actually works?
Within the framework of the next seven-year budget of the European Union, we proposed an even closer connection between respect for the rule of law and access to funds. President von der Leyen is clear about this: respecting the rules is a condition for obtaining money. We will intensively discuss this proposal of ours with the member states in the coming months, and Slovakia will be one of the voices in this discussion.
In your statements, you also mentioned the high level of corruption and the need for mechanisms to fight it at the highest level. This is the point of conflict between Prime Minister Fico and Prosecutor General Žilinka. The Prime Minister wanted Žilinka to change his assessment of your report, which he refused and publicly declared that the fight against corruption in high places is disastrous. Did he tell you the same thing?
We had a very good meeting with the Attorney General. In Slovakia, as in any other country, the independence of the Prosecutor General must be respected. It is a key element of the criminal justice system. We will examine data on high-profile corruption cases – from disclosure to investigation and indictment to conviction rates.
We had a recommendation in this area in the 2025 report. As you know, the special prosecutor’s office and NAKA were abolished. It is up to the Member States to organize their bodies, but we need to see results and a functioning system of checks and balances. We will focus on this very carefully in our evaluation in the coming weeks.
The previous report stated “no progress” on many points. What if it happens again? Will specific steps follow?
I already mentioned our hard tools. However, we must use them judiciously, proportionately and in accordance with the law. I believe that dialogue should come first. That’s why I’m here to gain personal experience and understanding of the environment on the spot. The results of our work will be known in July.
Did you also discuss suspicions of misuse of European funds, which were supposed to go to support tourism, but allegedly ended up financing luxury housing for people close to the Smer party? The government claims that the reports of the European Parliament’s committees have no consequences for it.
Within the EU, we have institutions that are in charge of investigating such matters – be it the European Public Prosecutor’s Office, OLAF, the European Ombudsman or the European Court of Auditors. It is not the role of an individual commissioner or the commission itself to conduct investigations into specific suspected criminal activity. I trust the relevant authorities to fulfill their obligations.
Media freedom is also an important topic. Slovakia is in direct violation of the European Act on Media Freedom, especially with regard to public media, where there are coalition nominees in the governing bodies and there is a lack of independence. Why haven’t you started infringement proceedings yet?
We are currently conducting a so-called pre-infringement dialogue with Slovakia in connection with this act. The Media Freedom Act must be fully implemented in all states. It became effective in August last year. Based on the results of this dialogue and whether progress is made, we will decide on the next steps.
Compliance with this act is not optional. It is a key tool for ensuring the independence of public media and the safety of journalists. We will also update our recommendations regarding the safety of journalists and ensure that Slovakia, like others, follows the rules.
Won’t it be too late? Critical journalists from the public media are being fired right now. Perhaps they were counting on protection from the union, but it has not yet arrived.
We are in constant contact with the Slovak authorities. It is absolutely unacceptable for a member country not to follow the rules. The implementation of EMFA is a political priority for me as Commissioner and for my team. At the same time, we will oversee the transposition of the directive against so-called strategic lawsuits against public participation, which must be completed by May.
The coalition is also pushing legislation that would centralize power in the new National Media Authority in the hands of one person instead of a collective body. Will you react similarly to the Office for the Protection of Whistleblowers?
This is a proposed legislation that has not yet been approved by the NRSR. During the last few days, we have talked about this with various actors and we have taken their concerns into account. We will follow the development and after the adoption of the final version of the law we will assess it in accordance with the European Act on Freedom of the Media.
In conclusion, what is the current reputation of the Slovak government in Brussels?
Slovakia is a respected member state and an important partner for the European Commission. We apply exactly the same standards to Slovakia as to any other country. You mentioned the lack of progress in the last report and I would like to see some progress in July. My visit is to demonstrate the good will of the commission to help and support positive reforms. The process of evaluating the rule of law should not be perceived as hostile.
I ask this because the Slovak government, with every criticism from Brussels or the threat of freezing funds, claims that it is a punishment for a different opinion – for example, on anti-Russian sanctions or aid to Ukraine. Is it a punishment?
I have found absolutely no evidence of this. The proof is quite the opposite – I’m here to conduct dialogue at the highest level. We will be impartial and completely objective. We need to be consistent in applying the rules across the Union. We are ready to support Slovakia, but I must emphasize: respect for the rule of law is not à la carte in a restaurant. It is a fundamental and binding duty of every member. If it is violated, we have our tools and we have shown that we know how to use them. However, I believe that dialogue will lead to results and positive change.
If he doesn’t, we have no choice but to act. We are the guardian of treaties and rules, and we must ensure their compliance in the interest of the citizens of all 27 EU member countries.
