The EC’s 2024 Rule of Law report is yet another indicator of the deterioration of constitutional standards in Slovakia. Next to outlining selected key developments of Slovakia’s illiberalization in 2024, this post underscores how the small jurisdiction’s size in combination with its relatively isolated doctrinal legal academia could hamper the development of robust democratic constitutional discourse and thus legal academics’ contribution to democracy.
Slovakia’s parliament approved an amendment to its criminal code and associated legislation that, if it comes into effect, will significantly reduce the prescription periods for various crimes including rape, the penalties for others, and abolish the Special Prosecutor’s Office. Despite a narrative claiming to commit to restorative justice by reducing lengths for prison sentences and implementing a more diverse set of conviction options, the legislative changes perpetuate violence through autocratic legalism on the vast majority of the Slovak population, and especially those vulnerable to abuses of power. This assault on the criminal legal system in Slovakia by the ruling illiberal coalition is expected to put the Constitutional Court under pressure.
A few months before general elections that might result in Slovakia joining Hungary's and Poland's illiberal takeover in Central Europe, its technocratic government is in crisis. This post shows how the weaknesses of Slovakia’s constitutional design have fueled the present malaise, and details the lessons we should draw from it for ordering the relationship between the head of state, parliament and the executive in other parliamentary systems with a directly elected president.
On 21 January 2023, Slovak voters had the opportunity to use their constitutional right to vote in a referendum on a constitutional amendment on early elections. The referendum was, however, invalid, because a valid referendum in Slovakia requires a turnout of at least half of all eligible voters. The referendum took place less than six weeks after the no-confidence vote to the Slovak executive by the Slovak parliament. This development prompted steps towards amending the Constitution so that early elections become constitutionally permissible.
For those who read last week’s news in constitutional justice, it would have been easy to miss the Fifth Congress of the World Conference on Constitutional Justice (WCCJ) on the theme ‘Constitutional Justice and Peace’ that was organized in Indonesia five years after the previous edition held in Lithuania. While featured on the Venice Commission’s website, the Congress was no prominent news in constitutionalist platforms, despite bringing together judges from 94 countries, many of whom are prominent academics in their respective jurisdictions, or even internationally. As this congress shows, constitutional courts can engage with academics, and are well positioned to do so, given they often contain judges with academic careers and experience. Such engagement might empower both institutions to respond to global autocratization more effectively.
The European Citizens’ Panels (ECP) are part of the Conference on the Future of Europe and provide randomly selected citizens with the opportunity to articulate their visions of the EU. The author participated in the second ECP and points out the risk of separating EU values from each other by locating them in different deliberation streams.
Judges are prominent actors with a significant impact on European integration. Yet, no references to them appear in the Joint Declaration on the Conference on the Future of Europe. This corresponds to a view, unsustainable in the age of extensive access to information, that judges sit in ivory towers and speak exclusively through their decisions that other actors then explain to the broader public.
In spring 2020, Slovakia was praised for minimizing the instances of the COVID-19 pandemic. By early 2021, however, with Slovakia among the top five countries with the highest increase of COVID-19-induced death cases, a very different picture has emerged, highlighting the costs of neglecting democracy considerations (encompassing human rights and the rule of law) by the executive in particular.
On 3 September 2019, the Slovak Supreme Court ruled against an MP of the far-right political party Kotleba – People’s Party Our Slovakia. Due to the conviction, Mr Mazurek lost his seat and another candidate of the PPOS took his place. Depending on the factors considered, the case can be seen either as armament or as disarmament of democracy in Slovakia.
In 2019, Slovakia selects nine out of thirteen constitutional court judges and the hearings of the candidates for the nominees for the vacant seats were publicly broadcast. The atmosphere of the hearings and the overall context of the 2019 appointment process, however, yield at least five, and not that optimistic, lessons.
13. September 2025
Giovanni Capoccia
12. September 2025
Anne Peters
12. September 2025
Anne Peters