A member of parliament from Slovakia’s extremely pro-Kremlin Slovak National Party (SNS), part of the ruling coalition, has proposed legislation that legal experts say mirrors Russia’s “foreign agents” law and represents a direct assault on democracy. The amendment would impose sweeping controls on non-governmental organisations (NGOs), including vague lobbying rules punishable by fines or dissolution, forced disclosure of donor identities, and disproportionate oversight powers for state authorities. Exempting powerful corporate and political lobbies, the law institutionalises discrimination against civic actors. According to a legal analysis, it violates multiple constitutional rights—including freedom of expression, association, privacy, and participation in public life—as well as binding EU and international human rights standards. If enacted, the law would mark Slovakia’s most serious democratic backslide in decades, placing it on a collision course with core European values.
Submitted without consultation with civil society, the amendment significantly expands government oversight of non-governmental organisations (NGOs), imposes new penalties, and introduces vaguely worded provisions on lobbying that experts say can be easily weaponised. VIA IURIS argues the draft law is not only unconstitutional but also breaches EU regulations and the European Convention on Human Rights.
A Direct Assault on Civil Society
The amendment places excessive administrative burdens on NGOs while granting registry authorities sweeping and loosely defined investigative powers. These powers could be misused to retaliate against organisations critical of the government. Civil liberties at stake include freedom of association, the right to privacy, and the prohibition of discrimination — all of which are protected by the Slovak Constitution and international agreements.
VIA IURIS warns that the law’s “core purpose is to stigmatise and suppress the activity of civic organisations.” By requiring NGOs to disclose detailed personal information about their donors, it could discourage support for groups working on sensitive issues such as human rights or minority protections — a concern echoed by past EU Court of Justice rulings on similar legislation in Hungary.
Weaponising Ambiguity: Lobbying Redefined
A particularly concerning feature of the proposal is the state’s plan to monitor what it labels “lobbying” by NGOs — defined so broadly that it could include virtually any civic engagement. “Will an open letter to MPs count as lobbying? A petition? A public statement?” asks VIA IURIS director Katarína Batková. The law offers no clarity, increasing the risk that ordinary advocacy could be punished.
Penalties escalate from €1,000 to €10,000, culminating in the potential dissolution of the organisation. Given that even media commentary or a social media post could be deemed lobbying under the law’s wording, this ambiguity introduces legal insecurity that undermines democratic participation.
One-Sided Regulation Targets Only NGOs
Notably, the proposal singles out non-profits for scrutiny, leaving lobbying by corporate actors, business groups, labour unions, and sports federations untouched. This selective application violates constitutional protections against discrimination and raises questions about the law’s true intent — curbing grassroots influence while leaving powerful interest groups unchecked.
VIA IURIS highlights that by failing to regulate these larger entities, the amendment institutionalises a double standard, further marginalising the role of civil society in public discourse and policymaking.
Catch-22: The Transparency Trap
Among the most illogical provisions is one obligating NGOs to respond to public information requests, typically applicable only to entities managing public funds. Yet many organisations receive no such funding and cannot issue official decisions under Slovakia’s information law. This creates an absurd legal paradox: if they comply, they breach the law; if they don’t, they risk penalties.
For example, if a citizen requests details about an NGO’s property — such as whether it owns a car — the organisation may not legally be able to respond, even if it has nothing to hide. The legislation then compels them to involve a state agency, though no such agency may exist in their case. As VIA IURIS notes, this Kafkaesque mechanism sets up NGOs for failure by design.
Multiple Constitutional Violations Identified
The analysis concludes that the amendment violates several constitutional rights:
- The right to non-discrimination.
- The freedom of association.
- The right to privacy and data protection.
- The right to participate in public affairs.
- Legal certainty and prohibition of retroactive legislation.
- The right to freedom of expression and petition.
Experts argue these infringements amount to an existential threat to civil society in Slovakia, echoing authoritarian tactics seen in Russia and Hungary. The proposed law undermines the foundational principles of democratic governance and EU membership, where civic engagement is not only permitted but encouraged.
International Scrutiny Likely as Slovakia Follows Authoritarian Path
Slovakia’s turn toward restrictive civil society legislation comes amid broader concerns about democratic backsliding in Central Europe. If adopted, the amendment would not only invite legal challenges but could also trigger international condemnation and jeopardise Slovakia’s standing within the European Union.
According to VIA IURIS, the legislation seeks to monitor and suppress exactly those rights — free speech, association, petitioning, and public participation — that define a functioning democracy. “That is their primary purpose and function,” said Batková. Curtailing them would represent a decisive shift away from open governance and toward repressive state control.
Read or Download the Full Legal Analysis
Source: VIA IURUS
