Slovenia’s New Security Law Tests Europe’s Rule-of-Law Credibility

Ljubljana/Brussels, 11 November 2025 – The Slovenian government’s new draft Act on Measures to Ensure Public Safety (dubbed the Šutar Law), which was unanimously approved in less than two weeks following the death of Aleš Šutar in Novo Mesto, is nothing but a blueprint for permanent exception, argues the Roma Foundation for Europe. 

The legislation, sent to Parliament under urgent procedure, would let police enter homes without a court order in “specific circumstances”, authorise drone and video surveillance in undefined “security risk areas”, reinstate automatic license plate recognition, tie parts of municipal and welfare funding to “public safety projects” in Roma settlements, and permit the armed forces to assist the police in domestic operations. Though the government calls the package temporary and preventive. Roma see it as a path to permanent exception. 

Commenting on the situation, Mensur Haliti, Vice President at the Roma Foundation for Europe, said: “If the government conflates fighting crime with policing the Roma, it is not protecting public safety—it is punishing an entire group for the actions of individuals. Crime and violence must be addressed, but proportionality is what separates the rule of law from collective blame.”

The Roma community in Slovenia has been living in fear since the killing of Aleš Šutar outside a bar in Novo Mesto, in which a 21-year-old Romani man was detained as a suspect. The incident has sparked a wave of moral panic, with police occupying Romani neighbourhoods, hate speech spreading widely and protests organised under the banner of “Roma criminality”.

The proposed “security risk” zones overlap with Roma settlements, and funding mechanisms could condition inclusion on compliance with police-led initiatives, effectively turning integration into supervision. Observers point out that the rapid drafting of the bill, just days after the Novo Mesto incident, illustrates how political and emotional pressure can translate into legislative overreach. Calls are growing for constitutional review, judicial oversight and sunset clauses to restore legal balance.

While the law has not yet been made public, its proposed measures could conflict with several constitutional safeguards:

• Article 35 (privacy and dignity)
• Article 36 (prohibition of entry without judicial order)
• Articles 37–38 (communication and data protection)
• Article 124 (limiting military use to parliamentary-approved emergencies)

In addition, the law allows the use of illegally obtained evidence in some serious cases, extends pre-trial detention to up to three years and enables conditional reduction of social assistance. Critics say these shifts narrow judicial safeguards and risk transferring power to the executive. 

At the European level, the law raises concerns under the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights (Articles 7, 8, 21 and 47) and the European Convention on Human Rights (Articles 8 and 14). Analysts warn that, if left unchecked, the legislation could weaken the EU’s credibility on democracy and minority protection, especially as the Union continues to demand high standards from candidate countries.

The draft Act remains before the National Assembly, with final debate and vote pending. Civil society organisations and EU institutions are watching closely to see whether Slovenia—and by extension, the EU—can reaffirm that principle, not fear, defines what it means to be European.