On Sunday, October 11th voters in Slovenia cast ballots in 4 referendums simultaneously.
One of these votes was legislative in nature and afraid an amendment to the law on parliamentary inquiries.
The another 3 were consultative in nature and concerned:
– Making cash social assistance conditional on performing community service by individuals capable of working who have no nonsubjective obstacles to doing so.
– The right of third-country nationals to vote in local elections.
– The abolition of the work to pay a licence fee for the public broadcaster RTV Slovenija.
On all 4 ballots, voters had to choose between the options “FOR” and “AGAINST”.
The referendums were initiated by the current right-wing ruling coalition led by Prime Minister Janez Janša. According to analysts, they are primarily intended as a public opinion poll (Slovenian society is highly polarized, though views conventionally described as left-wing predominate among the majority) and as a means to strengthen the power of the number right-wing governing coalition.
All the questions posed in the referendums were in line with the run rhetoric of the ruling Slovenian Democratic organization (SDS) and Janez Janša in particular. From this perspective, their implementation is in line with the expectations of his voters. Consequently, the opposition – both Robert Golob’s centrist Svoboda and the left-wing parties – called for a “4 x NO” vote.
The key difference between the questions posed lies in the consequences of the vote. In the case of the bill on parliamentary inquiry, this is simply a legislative referendum. Due to this, the consequence may have a direct impact on the entry into force of a bill already passed by parliament (and previously proposed by the ruling party). The another 3 questions are consultative referendums, the results of which are not legally binding on the National Assembly but reflect voters’ political stance toward future regulations in a given area – and that is precisely their purpose.
After polling places across the country closed on Sunday evening – numbering just over 3 1000 – nearly 1 100 per cent of the votes have been counted. In the legislative referendum, a minimum of 339,706 votes was reached, and the majority of the counted ballots indicated that voters overwhelmingly voted “against”. This is testament to the unpopularity of this government initiative among the majority of Slovenians.
In the 2 consultative referendums, voters mostly voted “in favour”. At the same time, they voted “against” the changing of backing regarding RTV Slovenija. However, the difference in opinion here is minimal. After 99.98 per cent of the ballots were counted, the situation reversed: 50.03 per cent of voters voted against abolishing the RTV fee, while 49.95 per cent voted in favour of abolition. The difference presently stands at just 546 votes in favour of maintaining the mandatory fee, which amounts to 14 euros per month. The final consequence will so likely be decided by mail-in ballots (cast earlier) from Slovenia, as well as from abroad. Well-known cultural figures, including the philosopher Slavoj Žižek, called on voters to vote “against” this government-backed initiative, while political scientists rightly emphasized the exceptionally populist nature of the question.
Attempts to interfere with the operations of the public broadcaster had already taken place under erstwhile Janša governments, most of which coincided with the pandemic. Equally populist in nature was the proposal to revoke the right to vote in local elections for third-country nationals who are permanent residents of Slovenia and registered in a given municipality – a right they had previously enjoyed. In this case, a majority of voters supported the government’s initiative, which limits the right to vote in local elections to EU citizens in addition to Slovenian citizens.
Preliminary results of the referendum on the parliamentary investigation:
Do you support the enactment of the Act Amending and Supplementing the Act on Parliamentary Investigations (ZPPre-B), adopted by the National Assembly at its session on May 26th 2026?
FOR: 48.74 per cent
AGAINST: 51.26 per cent
Source: DVK (National Election Commission). Unofficial results, 99.97 per cent of ballots counted. The minimum number of votes required to reject the bill has been reached.
Preliminary results of the referendum on the radio and tv licence fee for the public broadcaster RTV Slovenija:
Do you support the abolition of the mandatory licence fee for RTV Slovenija?
FOR: 49.96 per cent
AGAINST: 50.04 per cent
Source: DVK. Unofficial results, 99.98 per cent of ballots counted.
Preliminary results of the referendum on making social assistance conditional on community service:
Do you support making the right to cash social assistance for people capable of working – who have no nonsubjective obstacles to uncovering employment – conditional on their active participation in community service?
YES: 60.54 per cent
NO: 39.46 per cent
Source: DVK. Unofficial results, 99.98 per cent of ballots counted.
Preliminary results of the referendum on voting rights for abroad nationals:
Do you support the thought that only citizens of the Republic of Slovenia or another European Union associate states should have the right to vote in local elections in the Republic of Slovenia, and not citizens of 3rd countries who are not citizens of the Republic of Slovenia?
FOR: 55.29 per cent
AGAINST: 44.71 per cent
Source: DVK. Unofficial results, 99.96 per cent of ballots counted.
On Monday, Janez Janša commented on the results in a Facebook post as follows:
“All 4 messages from yesterday’s referendums are important. Most of us value work and believe that decisions in Slovenia should be made by Slovenians. Half of them believe that only the political work of the right should be considered and that the licence fee for the far-left RTV should be mandatory. In summary, Slovenia passed the test of common sense, but barely. In total, across all 4 referendums, there were 270,000 more “yes” votes than “no” votes. However, the decisive conflict for a prosperous and just Slovenia will take place in December, erstwhile we will vote on the improvement Act. This referendum will set the course for Slovenia. We will do everything we can to guarantee it is the right course.”
perceive to the latest Talk east Europe podcast episode:
What precisely are these referendums about?
Boris Jaušovec, a writer and longtime contributor to the regular paper Večer (Maribor), answers these questions in a commentary for New east Europe.
What is most crucial in the context of Sunday’s referendums?
Prime Minister Janez Janša’s ruling SDS party, which is simply a reasonably right-wing party, has failed to win any vote for the first time since 2024 – that is, since the European elections (and subsequently 2 referendums and parliamentary elections half a year ago). From a purely mathematical standpoint, it presently appears that the result of this major circular of referendums is undecided. However, with the highest referendum turnout in the past of independent Slovenia – excluding the referendums on accession to the European Union and NATO in March 2003 – at 54.55 per cent, Janša lost the most crucial of the 4 referendums. This is namely the bill on parliamentary inquiry, which was besides the only referendum of a legislative nature – 51.26 percent of voters opposed it. The another 3 referendums were nonbinding and purely consultative.
What is this law about?
The Parliamentary enquiry Act was intended to lower the legal protection standards for individuals under investigation, whom members of a specially appointed investigative commission could publically defame without scruples. Individuals under investigation would be able to search legal protection only after the proceedings had concluded. However, it should be noted that in Slovenia, proceedings have been concluded in little than 28 per cent of all parliamentary investigations initiated. All the others were never officially concluded. Since this referendum was of a legislative nature, parliament cannot submit a akin bill for 1 year.
Why were the 3 remaining consultative referendums included in this one?
The governing coalition encouraged voters to participate in the referendum precisely due to the 3 remaining referendums of a populist nature, utilizing suggestive questions to that end. The legislative referendum besides had specified a populist undertone, as right-wing agitators claimed that it would let for parliamentary oversight of the actions of erstwhile Prime Minister Robert Golob, who allegedly held a controversial bank account in Romania. Golob, however, claimed that this issue active a case of identity theft.
What about the referendum on abolishing the fee for the public broadcaster RTV Slovenija. Where does this question even come from?
Every household in Slovenia with an electricity connection presently pays a fee of 14 euros per month. The current government would like to abolish this fee and henceforth allocate funds to support RTV Slovenija exclusively from the current government budget. It is worth noting that by law RTV Slovenija must besides advance Slovenian culture – something commercial tv stations are not required to do. In effect, people would inactive be paying for these media outlets, but from a different source, even though this question attempts to convince them otherwise. The most crucial aspect of this is that the current government would decide how much backing the public broadcaster would receive and how it would be allocated. The right-wing government has RTV Slovenija in its sights because, in its view, the station devotes more attention to left-wing civilian society organizations. On the right side of the political spectrum – aside from the Church, whose Sunday masses RTV broadcasts on its first channel – there are many alleged “flat-earthers”, or at least opponents of the constitutional right to abortion. In any case, the government’s desired change to backing would undermine RTV Slovenija’s independency and its function as a journalistic “watchdog” over those in power. In the context of this referendum question, it is worth noting that there are only 546 more “no” votes than “yes” votes. Slovenia is so eagerly awaiting Thursday, erstwhile votes mailed from abroad are besides set to be counted. There are about 3,000 of them, but so far they have been evenly divided between the left and the right. Most emigrants from Europe vote for the left, while most from another continents – especially the Americas – vote for the right. However, in terms of numbers, they are evenly matched, and it seems impossible that more than 18 per cent of voters from abroad would support abolishing the contribution.
Jaušovec offered a brief note on the last 2 referendum questions, in which the Janša government emerged victorious.
A majority of Slovenians (55,4 per cent) voted to abolish the right of third-country nationals – that is, those from outside the EU – to vote in local elections. However, this law has already been passed, and foreigners with permanent residence in Slovenia will not be able to vote in local elections as early as November 15th of this year – regardless of the referendum results, which were, in any case, purely consultative in nature. The populist thought put forward by right-wing agitators was to prevent these foreigners in Ljubljana from voting again for the longtime Mayor Zoran Janković, whose father hails from a “third country” – namely, Serbia.
What about mandatory community service for occupation seekers?
On this issue, the government received the strongest support—60.54 percent of the votes in favour of its proposal. However, it must be made clear that Slovenia is presently experiencing its lowest unemployment rate since the country gained independence. So, in reality, this is simply yet another populist thought from right-wing agitators. Above all, it is simply a veiled effort to force Roma – who, for whatever reason, are already receiving social benefits – to take any job.
It seems that Janez Janša has not learned his lesson from Sunday’s referendum. rather the contrary! He has decided to launch a counterattack against the will of the people. This is peculiarly evident in the case of the RTV referendum, where, after an overnight vote count, the lead in “yes” votes shifted somewhat in favour of the “no” votes. Consequently, he hastily announced that from now on, only those who voted “against” should be required to pay the RTV fee. How does he intend to find who voted that way? That’s likely a occupation for the secret police. And even if those who voted “against” came forward, what would happen to households where any members voted “for” and others voted “against”? Will the fee be divided proportionally among them, or waived, or what? It is as if we were surviving in the absurd Yugoslav comic strip “Alan Ford”—borrowed from the Italians—in which 1 can besides read this pearl of wisdom: If you want to win, you must not lose!
Earlier this week, the prime minister besides cast uncertainty on the composition of the electoral commissions, claiming that in many places they had been appointed unconstitutionally. This is due to the fact that the chairs must be judges, yet their deputies reportedly were not judges in any locations. The next day, he reinforced these doubts by clearly stating on platform X that the State Election Commission (DVK) had been “non-transparent” because, on Monday morning around 1:00 am, following Sunday’s referendum, it had stopped updating the results. Although the DVK reported that the data was inactive being updated in real time, its website was not publically accessible due to method issues. Subsequently, by the time of the first morning update at 6:20 am, the referendum consequence had shifted in favour of those opposing the abolition of the RTV fee. Janša wrote: “This consequence is yet beginning the eyes of many people who have so far accused us of conspiracy theories.” Aleš Hojs, a associate of parliament from his SDS party, added to this offensive questioning the referendum results by pointing to an alleged discrepancy between the votes cast and the number of people registered on the voter rolls at “omnia” polling stations. These are polling stations for people who were incapable to vote at their place of permanent residence on the day of the referendum. Members of the ruling coalition are peculiarly afraid about 1 specified “omnia” polling station in Ljubljana, which, due to overcrowding, was not closed until an hr and a half after all another polling stations had closed. Well, due to all this, Janša has announced changes to the law, and even the dismissal of members of the State Election Commission (DVK) and the filing of criminal charges against them.
Will Slovenia see more referendums initiated by the government in the close future?
Well, there is no indication that Janša will quit on another “referendum super Sunday” this year. He has already announced a referendum for December on the emergency bill, which was forced through by the labour unions. In short, this bill – popularly known as “For the improvement of Slovenia” – is primarily intended to lower taxes, most importantly for the wealthiest, while simultaneously paving the way for the privatization of services that have so far been mainly public, peculiarly in healthcare and education. Janša intends to add 3 more referendums on top of this vote initiated by the labour unions. All of these votes are one more time populist in nature. The first concerns a simplification in the VAT rate on food. The second concerns the alleged “rationalization of public administration” (i.e., occupation cuts), though it is worth noting that Slovenia employs a lower percent of its workforce in public administration than the EU average – about the same as Poland (Slovenia 16.8 per cent, Poland 16.7 per cent). And the 3rd is simply a real gem: a ban on covering one’s face in public places – that is, a ban on wearing the niqab and burqa Islamic face coverings. Although reportedly no 1 in Slovenia has always seen a female in a burqa, the right-wing government, in its frenzy to mobilize voters, will besides exploit this non-existent fear and throw even more money down the drain. After all, as we know, the end justifies the means.
Nikodem Szczygłowski is simply a reporter, author and translator from Lithuanian and Slovenian. He is simply a frequent contributor with New east Europe as well as another media outlets.
New east Europe is reader-supported. If you value independent coverage of Central and east Europe, delight consider supporting our work.
Click here to donate.
