Polonca Kovač

The rule of law requires public authorities to exercise power within constitutional and statutory limits, without arbitrariness and with reasons that can be explained and reviewed (Letnar Černič an...

The concept of the rule of law encompasses the regulation of rights and obligations, as well as their enforcement as materia legis. This is particularly relevant in administrative relations, where public and private legal interests often come into conflict. Laws create legal norms, which are constitutionally consistent only if they do not infringe upon human rights and fundamental freedoms. In the Republic of Slovenia, the Constitutional Court, acting as a negative legislator, is responsible for assessing the constitutionality of laws, particularly in the administrative field, most often through a combination of constitutional review and constitutional complaints in administrative cases. This study analyses cases of constitutional complaints arising from original administrative procedures over a ten-year period, from 2014 to 2024, in Slovenian constitutional case law. The research addresses especially the tax and social field, as constitutional unconformity is established most frequently in these areas. Special emphasis is dedicated to procedural safeguards that tackle constitutional rights, such as the right to be heard and the right to appeal. The main findings endorse the role of the Constitutional Court as a negative legislator, being crucial in limiting the tendency of the Executive to conduct administrative proceedings efficiently at the expense of constitutional guarantees. The findings aim to provide lessons not only for Slovenian regulators but also for those in other countries and comparative analyses across the region.

Purpose: This article examines the development of the legal competences of public officials within the Slovenian public administration who use the Administrative Consultation Platform (ACP) when conducting procedures under the General Administrative Procedure Act (GAPA). The ACP is an open-access legal clinic that serves as a supplementary source for interpreting procedural rules. To this end, a conceptual framework delineating legal competences for public officials was developed to assess how the use of the ACP affects the development of their acquired legal competences for the purposes of conducting administrative procedures. Based on this framework, a structural model was created to enable empirical testing of the impact of public officials’ affinity for the ACP and the frequency of its use on the development of their technical-legal and entrepreneurial-relational competences.Design/methodology/approach: The theoretical component employs normative, doctrinal, and comparative research methods to study legal competence models in the existing literature. The empirical component includes statistical analysis of data collected using a questionnaire measuring the technical-legal and entrepreneurial-relational competences of public officials who use the ACP, combined with an axiological-deontological evaluation of the results. Structural equation modelling was used to verify how affinity for the ACP and the frequency of its use when conducting administrative procedures affect the development of their legal competences.Findings: The empirical study conducted in spring 2025 involved 112 public officials who conducted administrative procedures in administrative bodies and used the ACP between 2023 and 2025. The results indicate that the use of the ACP contributed significantly to the development of public officials’ legal competences, particularly relational competences, such as the ability to communicate effectively and respectfully with parties involved in the administrative procedure, and entrepreneurial competences, especially the ability to uphold core ethical principles (e.g., integrity) and proactively seek solutions that balance the public interest with parties’ rights. However, they developed technical-legal competences— such as legal reasoning for resolving procedural issues, understanding of the GAPA, and data protection regulation—to a lesser, though still not negligible, degree. Academic contribution to the field: The article focuses on relatively under-explored aspects of public officials’ legal competences. The conceptual framework represents an original contribution, complementing existing research on legal competences in a narrower context, while in a broader context it can be categorised as dealing with the subjects of administrative law and public administration. The empirical study advances scientific understanding of the impact of public officials’ affinity for the ACP and the frequency of its use on the development of their legal competences, providing key feedback for ACP stakeholders.Research/practical/social implications: The conceptual framework of legal competences serves as the foundation for further scholarly examination of the legal competences possessed by public officials and functions as a baseline for the systematic upgrading of the ACP to continue fostering the development of public officials’ legal competences while they use it. From a societal perspective, this article contributes to raising awareness of the critical importance of cultivating legal competences and of the effective utilisation of the ACP as an instrument for more participatory and problem-solving-oriented administrative decision-making processes. Originality/significance/value: The article offers an original contribution by (1) establishing a conceptual framework that advances the study of legal competences among public officials who use the ACP when conducting administrative procedures, and (2) demonstrating the pivotal role of the ACP as a repository of accumulated collective knowledge, which aids public officials in developing their legal competences and facilitates the networking of stakeholders engaged in addressing administrative law challenges. The findings provide guidelines for enhancing the effectiveness of public officials and for fulfilling the objectives and principles of Good Governance in modern public administration.

This article examines the complex legal and policy dimensions of the European Union’s Artificial Intelligence Act (AIA), focusing on its implementation in Slovenia. Although the AIA is a binding regulation directly applicable in all EU Member States, its hybrid nature—part legal mandate, part policy guideline—creates interpretative and practical challenges, especially for national administrative authorities. Using a three-stage methodology (normative analysis, expert survey, and focus group discussions), the study examined how Slovenian authorities perceive the AIA’s legal character, scope of application, and implementation obligations. Respondents included both institutional (ministries) and operational (tax and social services) authorities. While most recognised the formal status of the AIA as law, significant discrepancies were found in terms of awareness and readiness. Operational authorities such as the Centre for Social Work often viewed the AIA as a guideline rather than a binding regulation. Knowledge of related EU legislation (e.g., GDPR, Digital Services Act) varied from authority to authority, which impacted implementation strategies. The findings reveal three critical gaps: legal misinterpretation, institutional readiness, and actual application. Despite a shared understanding of the importance of the AIA, implementation measures, such as training, clear role definitions, and inter-agency collaboration, were insufficient or delayed. In addition, the authorities did not sufficiently recognise their role and the need for national coordination. The study concludes that effective implementation of the AIA requires not only legal clarity, but also structured action plans, sustained intergovernmental cooperation, and practical support mechanisms. These findings are especially relevant for smaller EU states, where legal formalism and limited resources hinder policy implementation. Slovenia’s experience serves as a cautionary tale and a learning opportunity for other Member States grappling with the multi-level governance of AI regulation.

Social services within predominantly service-based public administration are undergoing constant reforms in response to evolving social circumstances. These reforms should align with international and constitutional principles, including the rule of law, the welfare state, and public governance, and rely on the assessment of the gap between the current state of affairs and the desired situation. Reforms of the competences and organisation of social work institutions should be analysed in comparison with related systems, taking into account national and sector-specific characteristics. The objective of this research was to examine, from a legal-administrative perspective, the reforms of social services in three systems building on the Rechtsstaat tradition: Slovenia, Austria, and Croatia. A qualitative approach was employed as the most suitable for evaluative research. The methodology included a literature review, semi-structured interviews, relational content analysis of reform policy documents and public administration performance reports, and a systemic analysis of the codification of administrative procedure as the formal legal framework for providing social services. The results show that the reforms of social services in Slovenia and Croatia share similarities as they focus on the Weberian context, with all the challenges associated with such formalised reforms. In contrast, Austrian reforms, influenced by a hybrid public management, are more results-oriented and thus able to provide user-oriented services.

Namen: Vključevanje umetne inteligence v avtomatizirano odločanje je prelomen trenutek za javno upravo. Prispevek obravnava uvedbo sistemov avtomatiziranega odločanja v upravne postopke, zlasti njihov vpliv na varstvo osebnih podatkov in temeljna načela upravnega prava.Zasnova/metodologija/pristop: Študija s pomočjo deskriptivne, normativne in dogmatske metode proučuje nedavne zakonodajne pobude in analizira izbrane primere uporabe avtomatiziranega odločanja v Sloveniji in tujini. Ob tem podrobneje analizira odločitev Sodišča EU iz leta 2023 v zadevi Schufa. S kombinacijo teoretičnih vidikov in praktičnih spoznanj študija ponuja primerjalno analizo evropskega in slovenskega zakonodajnega okvira.Ugotovitve: Prispevek presoja vpliv avtomatiziranega odločanja na ključna načela upravnega prava in varstva podatkov ter osvetljuje zakonodajne, organizacijske in tehnološke spremembe, potrebne za zagotovitev skladnosti avtomatiziranega določanja z obstoječo zakonodajo.Akademski doprinos k znanosti: Prispevek ponuja dragocene smernice za upravnopravno stroko in tako izboljšuje razumevanje uvajanja tehnologij avtomatiziranega odločanja v upravno prakso. Njegove ugotovitve so oblikovalcem politik in zakonodajalcem lahko v pomoč pri oblikovanju predpisov, ki vključujejo prednosti umetne inteligence, hkrati pa zagotavljajo, da so ti sistemi ustrezno nadzorovani.Raziskovalne/praktične/družbene posledice: Uvedba avtomatiziranega odločanja mora biti usklajena s pravnimi načeli, da se ohranijo preglednost, odgovornost in varstvo temeljnih pravic. Prispevek poudarja, da je pomembno ne le razumeti pravne posledice, temveč tudi zagotoviti, da tehnologije avtomatiziranega odločanja spoštujejo standarde dobrega upravljanja.Izvirnost/vrednost: Študija premika meje uveljavljenih pravnih okvirov in odpira kritična vprašanja o tem, kako temeljna načela upravnega prava in varstva podatkov prilagoditi novim tehnologijam. Umetno inteligenco vsekakor velja izkoristiti za povečanje učinkovitosti, hkrati pa je treba zagotoviti, da inovacije spoštujejo pravice posameznikov, varujejo javni interes ter podpirajo standarde dobre uprave in dobrega upravljanja.

Purpose: The article aims to identify systemic challenges in Slovenian administrative practice arising from an inadequately regulated right to appeal under the General Administrative Procedure Act (GAPA). For this purpose, an analysis of Administrative Consultation (AC), a legal clinic operating since 2009, was conducted. The study includes analyses of the content, complexity, and reasoning behind the occurring dilemmas as a ground for GAPA recodification.Design/Methodology/Approach: Considering the nature of the topic in the scope of administrative law, a combined qualitative approach is applied, including normative and dogmatic methods, literature analysis, case law review, basic statistics, and axiological method. Empirical research is based on over one hundred cases with questions and answers regarding GAPA interpretation in administrative practice.Findings: Administrative appeal serves multiple functions, from protecting the rights of the parties to ensuring consistent sector-specific legislation implementation. The analysis identifies systemic issues, such as: standing to file an appeal (especially for other affected persons or authorities), grounds for appeal, competence regarding appellate decisions, determining when the first-instance body can handle an appeal and when devolution is necessary, alternative dispute resolution in appeals, deadlines for lodging and deciding on appeals, and the possibility of waiving the right to appeal. In addition, the (lack of) options for digitalisedproceedings is notable. These insights serve as an empirical basis GAPA recodification.Academic Contribution to the Field: The article offers a regulatory and doctrinal analysis of the relevant legal provisions (including EU law, the Slovenian Constitution, and the GAPA) focusing on the aims, locus standi, time limits, grounds, and other elements of appeals. It also explores the key findings from Slovenian case law on administrative disputes regarding appeals, as reflected in decisions by the Supreme and Administrative Courts as well as in administrative practice.Research/Practical/Social Implications: The article provides a concise overview of the relevant literature and an analysis of the rules that underpin the implementation, evaluation, and improvement of GAPA as regards the right to appeal. Based on these insights, it proposes de lege ferenda solutions for a clearer GAPA. The findings can serve as a foundation for data-based decision-making.Originality/Value: The article brings forward the study of AC as a source for systemic overview of problems in the field. With more than a hundred cases from the past 15 years analysed, it offers an objective insight into recurring dilemmas in administrative practice. The approach to identifying key challenges is consistent through the use of established and combined social sciences research methods.

This study aimed to analyse the impact of digitalisation on good governance with respect to selected local public administrations during the COVID-19 lockdown in the spring of 2020. The overriding assumption made is that agile values mediate the relationship between digitalisation and good governance on this level of public administration. Data were obtained through a web-based survey conducted between June and August 2020. The empirical analysis was facilitated by applying partial least squares structural equation modelling (PLS-SEM) on a sample of 761 public managers from five Central European countries (Czech Republic, Germany, Poland, Romania, Slovenia). The results show that digitalisation acted as an essential driver of good governance during the COVID-19 pandemic. Three out of four agile values—“employees and internal relationships”, “working public services”, and “change management”—were also shown to help make digitalisation more effective and thereby facilitate good governance. Despite some limitations (e.g., respondents’ subjective evaluations, the study only being performed during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic in the observed countries with different situations and consequent measures in response, and differences in the broader environment and local administration systems in the studied countries), the findings of the study are important given the lack of similar empirical studies. Public administrations should be digitalised and reformed in a way that ensures that they effectively and efficiently design, implement, measure, and continuously improve their strategies, tactics, and services, which can all be accomplished by being agile. The paper offers insights into: (1) the lessons learnt about the nature of digitalised public services/processes and agile management approaches in response to the COVID-19 pandemic and their impact on good governance; and (2) proposals for policymakers and managers in public administrations with regard to operating in extreme VUCA circumstances in any next wave of COVID-19 pandemic or in a new pandemic/public health disaster.

U radu se daje komparativni prikaz poreznog nadzora u Hrvatskoj i Sloveniji te se ukazuje na nužnost razlikovanja pojma porezni nadzor od nadzora u poreznom pravu. Pored poreznog nadzora pojavljuju se i druge vrste ili oblici nadzora u oporezivanj...

Prohibition of conflict of interest prevents abuses of the rule of law in modern constitutional democracies. As a result, is ensures that persons working in state institutions do not use their posts and functions for private gain. The experience from Central and Eastern Europe (CEE) illustrates that state authorities have in the past faced challenges in how to internalise the prohibition of conflict of interest. Literature from CEE on the prohibition of conflict of interest has been scarse. Consequently, this paper aims to address this gap by examining the experience of the Slovenian state in coping with the risks arising from conflict of interest. It discusses and analyses on one hand theoretical and normative underpinnings of the prohibition of conflict of interest in the Slovenian, European and international frameworks. On the other hand, it examines the recent practice of administrative and judicial bodies concerning the prohibition of conflict of interest. It finds that normative frameworks in the Slovenian constitutional framework have been reformed in recent years. Nonetheless, there is still a risk of potential and actual conflict of interest for the implementation of the rule of law in state institutions. The normative prohibition appears not to have been fully internalised in the practice of state institutions. As a result, the authors submit that state institutions should not turn a blind eye to the risk of conflict of interest in order to show willingness to strengthen the rule of law in the Slovenian constitutional democracy. The Slovenian normative and empirical experience shows lessons that can be taken up in the constitutional democracies of Central and Eastern Europe experiencing similar challenges.