Judita Laššáková, a Member of the European Parliament for Slovakia’s ruling Smer–SD party, is delivering public lectures across the country in which she presents the withdrawal of Slovakia from the European Union as a realistic and actionable scenario—telling audiences, including secondary school students, that the country must first understand how the EU functions in order to be able to negotiate its exit effectively. Her framing suggests that Slovakia should be prepared to exploit its position within the Union to secure the most favourable terms possible before leaving. The message stands in direct contradiction to the official line of Prime Minister Robert Fico, who has repeatedly denied any intention to pursue EU withdrawal. Laššáková, a former assistant to far-right MEP Miroslav Radačovský and close associate of recently detained extremist Daniel Bombic, has also reversed her previous defence of the digital euro, now depicting it as a threat to personal liberty. Her school visits have raised legal concerns over political advocacy in education, while the Smer party has not responded to requests for comment on her statements.
In recent weeks, Judita Laššáková, a Member of the European Parliament (MEP) representing the ruling party Smer–SD, has embarked on a national lecture tour across Slovakia. While officially framed as educational sessions about the European Union, her presentations have taken a sharp and unexpected turn: repeatedly and openly entertaining the prospect of Slovakia’s withdrawal from the EU. This message, delivered not only to general audiences but also to secondary school students, has triggered concern and confusion, even among those familiar with Smer’s populist rhetoric.
A video published by former Slovak prime minister and now MEP for the opposition party Progressive Slovakia, Ľudovít Ódor, captures Laššáková telling her audience: “If we want to leave, we first need to understand how the EU works so we can negotiate our exit.” The framing suggests a strategic orientation—not merely understanding the EU as a member state, but as a potential ex-member seeking to maximise leverage and extract and exploit every possible advantage from the Union while preparing to depart.
Laššáková, a law graduate and former assistant to far-right MEP Miroslav Radačovský, is also a known ally of the extremist YouTuber and disinformation peddler Daniel Bombic, who was detained by Slovak police a day before the Žilina event. Her proximity to such figures has fuelled criticism over her role in legitimising anti-European sentiment from within the EU institutions themselves.
Directly at odds with Smer’s official narrative
The content of Laššáková’s lectures starkly contradicts the public messaging of her own party. Prime Minister Robert Fico has consistently rejected accusations that his government seeks to pull Slovakia out of the EU or NATO, dismissing such claims as fabrications by the opposition and civil society. These denials formed a central theme of large-scale national protests earlier this year.
Yet, in January, Smer MP and former police chief Tibor Gašpar publicly stated that Slovakia should “keep its options open” regarding EU membership. Fico defended Gašpar’s position while insisting that no departure was currently planned.
Laššáková’s narrative abandons this ambiguity. Her message implies that Slovakia should begin laying the groundwork for departure—not as a theoretical exercise, but as a real policy trajectory. According to participants at her events, this rhetoric is not couched in hypotheticals, but rather positioned as a logical next step once the public understands EU mechanics well enough to negotiate from a position of strength.
Politicising schools under legal grey areas
One of Laššáková’s more controversial stops occurred at a private grammar school in Lučenec, a regional town in southern Slovakia. Her appearance prompted criticism from Naďa Bohinská, a former regional manager for the centrist Progressive Slovakia party, who attended the event and later raised concerns on social media.
Slovak law permits political figures to speak in schools, provided the discussion remains politically neutral. Explicit promotion of parties or candidates, or the use of school visits in campaign materials, is strictly prohibited. Despite this, Laššáková introduced politically charged scenarios involving national withdrawal from the EU—a move widely interpreted as ideological advocacy under the guise of education.
From digital euro advocate to anti-currency alarmist
Equally striking is Laššáková’s recent U-turn on the issue of the digital euro. During her 2024 European Parliament campaign, she positioned herself as a vocal defender of the EU’s plans for a digital currency. At the time, disinformation outlets in Slovakia were fuelling panic over supposed “programmable money” that could expire or restrict purchases. Laššáková took pains to refute these myths, explaining in detail—often in collaboration with Bombic—that the EU’s founding treaties explicitly prohibit such functionality.
She even suggested that if such restrictions were introduced without Slovakia’s consent, “we could say: You’re violating the EU founding treaties—goodbye, we’re leaving the EU.” In her view, such violations could also be challenged before the European Court of Justice.
Now, however, she portrays digital currency as a threat to freedom, casting cash as a symbol of personal liberty. According to notes shared by Bohinská, Laššáková recently described the digital euro as dangerous and implied that its implementation could justify Slovakia’s departure from the EU. The reversal comes in stark contrast to her earlier educational outreach, including a two-hour explanatory video she co-produced with Bombic during the 2024 campaign.
This abrupt shift reflects a broader trend among some Smer-affiliated figures, who increasingly echo anti-EU talking points from the radical far-right, even as party leaders deny pursuing any formal exit strategy.
No party response
The editorial staff of SME, the outlet that broke the story, contacted the Smer party for clarification on Laššáková’s messaging and to ask whether her lectures reflected an official change in policy. As of publication, Smer has not responded.
Her activities leave little doubt about the direction of her messaging: present withdrawal from the European Union not as a fringe idea, but as a credible and necessary policy objective. And by introducing such themes in school settings—under the pretext of civic education—Laššáková is not only undermining Smer’s official narrative but also pushing the boundaries of legal and ethical norms around political influence in classrooms.
Source: Martin Hodás | SME.SK
