Slovak PM seeks control of 'national identity' issues in potential clash with EU law
June 10 (Reuters) - Slovak leader Robert Fico is seeking to change the country's constitution and install what he calls "a dam against progressivism" by declaring that Slovakia has legal precedence on "national identity" issues, such as family and gender.
Critics of populist Prime Minister Fico, including some legal experts, fear the amendment will threaten Slovakia's commitments to European Union laws and international treaties.
Fico has taken an increasingly anti-liberal stance in rights issues, building on his pro-Russian and pro-Hungarian international policy position. He has promoted closer relations with Russia and China and criticised sanctions on Moscow and the EU's military aid for Ukraine.
The amendment states that only male and female will be recognised as genders, and that school curriculums must respect the constitution, including its cultural and ethical positions. It will also tighten adoption rules.
"The Slovak Republic maintains sovereignty above all in issues of national identity," the amendments say, in particular on cultural and ethical issues.
A report accompanying the bill states it is fully in line with EU law, including the issues of precedence of European law.
Some opposition lawmakers however, as well as a group of lawyers including five former judges of the constitutional court, warn it could have far-reaching consequences.
"The proposed amendment is contradictory to the commitments resulting from European Union law and international law and creates a legal basis to diverge from values of the European Union and the Council of Europe," the group said.
"The amendment would weaken or even preclude enforcement of international law and European Union law in Slovakia," it said, adding that it included vague language, creating legal uncertainty and room for extensive interpretation.
Fico's fractious leftist and nationalist coalition has a thin majority dependent on independents, but the amendment has won backing from the opposition conservative Christian Democrats as well as two members of the opposition Slovensko party.
This may be enough for the amendment to reach the required 90 votes in the 150-seat parliament when it comes before lawmakers in the next days.
"This is not a defence of identity or sovereignty, this is a conscious and deceitful act aimed at severing Slovakia from the system and structure of international protection of human rights," Amnesty International said in a statement.
"The proposal threatens all people in Slovakia, but above all the most vulnerable - children, women, the poor, who are exposed to discrimination or inequality based on age or gender identity."
Fico's government has accused liberal protesters of planning a coup, changed laws to tighten rules for non-governmental organisations, increased control over public broadcasters, and attacked independent media as foreign agents.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Times
2 hours ago
- Times
Green firebrand challenges Corbynites: Join me in the radical left
On June 29, 2016, Jeremy Corbyn appeared at a central London rally and made an attempt to move on from the Brexit referendum held the previous week. The Labour leader was instead heckled by a 33-year-old hypnotherapist actor who, unbeknown to the left-wing activists present, had just launched his political career as a candidate for the Liberal Democrats. 'What about Europe, Jeremy!' Zack Polanski jeered. 'Where were you when we needed you?' Corbyn, brow furrowed, appeared speechless, leaving his supporters to hiss and drown out the noise. Today, Polanski is neither an unknown on the left nor a Lib Dem. The tiggerish London Assembly member is running to become leader of the Green Party, of which he is already deputy and whose politics over the past decade have tracked him in moving steadily leftwards. He is still generating headlines and posing complicated questions of Corbyn and the Corbynites. The surprising dynamic is that Polanski — a gay vegan Jew who long ago traded his native Salford for north London — is now doing so in the spirit of comradeship. Addressing the question of his transformation, he invokes Corbyn's hero, Tony Benn: he is interested in where people are going, he says, not where they are from. As such, Polanski has spent recent weeks positioning himself as the radical socialist and pro-Palestine — for which read Corbynite — candidate for the leadership not only of the Greens but of the British left in its entirety. The size and political complexion of the Greens' grassroots membership today is poorly understood (last year it was estimated to number about 57,000, albeit it is thought to have grown since) but his 'eco-populist' vision has generated more noise than his two rivals, MPs Adrian Ramsay and Ellie Chowns, who are running on a joint ticket. In the event that he wins the contest, the results of which will be announced at the start of September after a summer of campaigning, he wants the independent MP for Islington North in the tent. Speaking from the Glastonbury festival, where he is busy canvassing, and where Corbyn appeared on the Pyramid Stage at his peak in 2017, Polanski said: 'Anyone who aligns with our values in the Green Party is very welcome to join the party, and so I'd love to see progressive left-wing MPs in the party.' Does that include Corbyn? What of his parliamentary protégés, including those in the Socialist Campaign Group, the left-wing faction of Labour MPs? He confirms: 'Anyone who aligns — and I believe that Zarah [Sultana, the firebrand MP for Coventry South] and Jeremy do align with where the Green Party are — that's a decision for them.' He rattles off a list of socialist positions he would seek to enact: 'protecting the NHS'; 'building social homes'; a 'wealth tax'; and stopping the 'genocide in Gaza'. The reason such pronouncements are causing much debate, and a degree of discomfort, on the left is that it has spent the almost two years since October 7 discussing the future of progressive politics — but failing to identify a clear solution or leader before the next election. Polanski, as one Corbynite puts it, is threatening to 'eat [our] lunch'. Since last year, Reform UK has taken centre stage as the main opposition to Sir Keir Starmer and the established order in Westminster. Yet the Greens won four seats, their most so far and one fewer than Reform, secured two million votes, and came second in 40 seats. Elsewhere, disgruntled socialists and Muslim voters delivered five independent MPs, Corbyn among them. The difference is that Nigel Farage has long personified the anti-immigrant, anti-woke sentiment; is a dominant figure within Reform who has vanquished all internal allies; and has singular communications skills. The radical left has no such person. It has a more complicated relationship with hierarchy in the first instance. It is also less of the view that parliament is the only place where proper politics can be done, especially on the issue of Gaza. Parliamentary chicanery has had far less impact, and visibility, than weekly marches up and down the country, attacks on allegedly pro-Israel businesses and the recent infiltration of RAF Brize Norton. Polanski is adamant that opposition to Israel's actions in Gaza is not limited to the party's traditional urban base — in cities like Brighton and Bristol — nor the British Muslim community. He says of the Red Wall areas where Greens have performed surprisingly well — among them South Tyneside council, where they are the second largest party now: 'In fact, I think in those seats, people are equally concerned with the genocide in Gaza, and people are really affected by inequality.' The Greens — who were the first party in England and Wales to call the Jewish state an 'apartheid' and the first to say it was committing 'genocide' — has at times faced criticism for its track record on expelling antisemitic councillors, but also its focus on the Middle East. Its current leader hand-delivered a petition to her local council asking the mayor to write to the foreign secretary to demand a ceasefire, and prior to the last election circulated leaflets featuring the Palestine flag and images of rubble. Polanski is unapologetic about that. 'I think fundamentally, there's a genocide in Gaza. And actually, the Palestinian people are the story here,' he says. 'And I think often we can all get distracted by talking about groups and actions. And actually, I'd much rather focus on stopping the war, working for a ceasefire, and ending the occupation of Israel.' Adding to the complexity is the fact that many of the left's leading lights — such as Sultana — are still part of Labour, even if she is currently suspended. And others still suffer from what their nemesis, Lord Mandelson, has called 'long Corbyn': the trauma of his suspension from Labour, his repudiation at the ballot box in 2019 and the allegations of antisemitism. Still, leading figures on the left are increasingly of the view that something needs to be done to capitalise on the political moment. Gaza remains a galvanising force — and anti-Labour sentiment is not going away, either on the activist left or in the Muslim community. Support for Labour among committed progressives has fallen from 67 per cent in 2019 to 49 per cent at last year's election, and down to 39 per cent last month. Over the past week, three Greens have won council by-elections triggered by defections or resignations from Labour — including most recently its first in Greenwich. Current polling suggests that — even without a Corbynite tilt — the party would win ultra-safe Labour seats such as Huddersfield. Meanwhile, Luke Tryl, of the pollster More in Common, points to the fact that, in local elections in May, in seats where more than 30 per cent of voters were Muslim, half voted for independent candidates. Within a political tradition known for its splittism, there is unanimity within the left only about the fact such feeling demands one of three things: a new party, a parliamentary grouping or a national movement. To that, Polanski's rejoinder is simple: all three already exist in the form of the Greens. In the event he wins, he says, he intends to depart from the party's traditional identity — as a 'single-issue party' of polar bears and saving the countryside — and pivot towards full-fat leftism. He explains: 'So it's up to anyone what they want to do in terms of starting new things. But actually, I'd encourage anyone right now, whether they're a member of another party, or indeed, an MP from another party, if they align with our values, to join with the Greens.' While his party has a quixotic structure that requires leadership elections every two years and involves the grassroots in policymaking, Polanski has been unusually prepared to speak the usual language of conventional politics. He says the party needs to be less timid and to 'learn' from Farage, whose communications skills, and clarity of vision, have made him favourite to be the next prime minister. And despite the queasiness on the left about the role of parliament, Polanski has resolved, as Farage did, that all roads to power run through Westminster. He says: 'I actually have a constituency in mind, and I want to be one of the first group of new London MPs, or first group of London Green MPs.' • Baroness Jones: You're never too old to be arrested as a Green The question then — beyond the outcome of the race — is whether or not the rest of the left has a rival plan. After a More in Common poll suggested a party led by Corbyn could win 10 per cent of the vote, Andrew Murray, his former aide, last week revealed in an eyebrow-raising account in the socialist daily Morning Star two options had long been under consideration. One was Collective, a new national party founded by Karie Murphy, Corbyn's former chief of staff, whose central idea is to install him as interim leader. The other, which is nameless, seeks to create a looser parliamentary grouping of pro-Gaza MPs, possibly with Corbyn or Sultana as figureheads. Murray added that those two tendencies had now combined, indicating a new organisation could be launched imminently. For the Greens, or any new party, there is a final question. Even if the left found a way to unite, what is the best it could achieve at a general election in 2029? The idea of a progressive alternative to Starmer has acquired momentum precisely because of his rightward shift and his determination instead to court Reform votes. Yet if he continues to fall in the polls, would liberal and left voters not support him in order to avoid opening the door to Farage? More in Common says that most Green (57 per cent) and Lib Dem (51 per cent) voters would vote tactically to keep out Reform. For now, it appears that, whatever its configuration, in Westminster at least, the left is likely to remain on the periphery.
Times
2 hours ago
- Times
Class still decides our elections, even in this mixed-up world
A few years ago, while out gauging public support for Ukip in a by-election town, I asked a late-middle-aged couple leaving a supermarket if they had ever thought of voting for the party. The woman seemed on the verge of vomiting, and looked at me with the kind of hate-stare you get when you ask someone if they can perhaps move their bags from a train seat so you can sit down. The man was more avuncular and just raised his two shopping bags aloft. 'What do you think?' he asked, displaying the Waitrose logo. 'You're at the wrong supermarket. Try Morrisons, or the Co-op.' A year or two before this, I had been snapped at by a very smartly dressed elderly woman when I asked the same question. 'How dare you?' she hooted. 'You should be looking for elderly men with no teeth on mobility scooters.'
Times
2 hours ago
- Times
If there's one thing we Brits have to boast about, it's modesty
I'm the best columnist ever. My articles are the most beautiful in history, better than all the others, in fact. Literally millions flock to read them. They're the reason they buy The Sunday Times: that's what people are saying, I hear. Many, many people. Nope: I just can't keep that up. God, it must be hard being Donald Trump. As you may have noticed — and as those readers who comment in our digital editions will doubtless point out with speed and relish — the above statements are not entirely true. But for the purposes of this exercise, truth doesn't really matter, because I just wanted to find out what it feels like to be the president for a moment. Answer: exhausting, and a bit icky. Trump was on his usual self-effacing form last week, only taking a break from blowing his own enormous golden trumpet to receive tribute from that fawning crawler Mark Rutte. If there's one thing that's worse than a braggart, it's an arselicker. The Nato chief sent Trump a series of sycophantic texts, in which he told the sexually harassing compulsive liar how 'extraordinary' he is, and how grateful we should all be for his wisdom and beneficence. • Call him Daddy … How flattery and fanfare warmed Trump to Nato When Trump blithely published the texts to the world, Rutte didn't even have the common decency to squirm with humiliation. Instead he engaged the obsequiousness overdrive, and called him 'Daddy'. Remarkably, nobody threw up. The recipient of the praise didn't see anything embarrassing in it: he just took it as his natural due. 'I think he likes me,' Trump said, in a rare moment of understatement. The other Nato leaders didn't seem to think anything was amiss either: they were too busy doing their own sucking up. And I thought: I must have missed something. When did it become socially acceptable for people to be so very pleased with themselves? Perhaps it's a national character thing. I come from an age when, by and large, the British didn't like boasting. It wasn't in our cultural DNA. When people were pompous, we laughed at them. To some extent, that's still true. If Keir Starmer reposted a video showing an enormous gold statue of Keir Starmer, the Labour Party would slink away and die of shame. When the president of the United States does it, half his party reposts the repost. Or take the regular incumbent of this column. For the past four years, Jeremy Clarkson has documented his chosen life as a farmer, in print and on television. Has he spent this time telling us he is the best farmer ever, bragging about record harvests and Making Diddly Squat Great Again? No. He has spent it telling us he is comically useless and incompetent: he buys the wrong tractors, sows the wrong seeds, can't plough for toffee, and is only saved from disaster by the practical and knowledgeable people around him. As a result, his TV show was the most popular thing on Amazon UK. Good-humoured haplessness is our thing. • Jeremy Clarkson: I'm never starting an other business That may be changing, though, just a little, as the American love of self-promotion seeps into our daily life. Our fastest-growing social media platform, LinkedIn, is an orgy of boasting and self-congratulation; the burgeoning self-help and wellness industries are built on telling each one of us how special and wonderful we are; and the fact that Nigel Farage is not a notably modest man doesn't seem to have hurt his popularity. I hope this new trend doesn't go too far. There's a merit in modesty. People who really do great things don't have to tell us they've done great things: the things themselves do that. Einstein didn't go round saying he was a genius: he came up with a theory that changed our conception of the fundamental nature of reality, and left it there. Clement Attlee didn't say he'd personally built the welfare state. Jane Austen didn't proclaim that she was a great novelist: she just wrote Emma. We could do with her now. She would have had enormous fun with the Trumps of this world. The Bezoses, too. Austen had the keenest of eyes for boasting's bedfellow, ostentation, and The Wedding in Venice this weekend would have given her plenty to work with: the reported 27 outfits for Lauren, the $1 million worth of flowers, the fleets of accompanying private jets and superyachts. Some Venetians are outraged at the sheer, shameless showiness of it all. Protesters put a huge anti-Bezos banner in St Mark's Square, and expressed disgust that Venice is being turned into a playground for the super-rich. Hmm. Have they thought that through? Weren't all the city's most wonderful buildings created to be a playground for the rich in the first place? The Doges were not exactly a self-effacing lot: their palazzos were built for the express purpose of displaying their prodigious wealth, and they made them as showy as the technology of the day allowed. In that sense, Jeff and Lauren are more true to Venice's traditions than any of the protesters. The world's most beautiful city is a monument to more than 1,000 years of bling, and it's only the seductive patina of age that adds such venerable mystique to the baroque facades. And that's the awkward thing about all this showing off. The fact is that show-offs sometimes really do achieve stuff. The Doges built the world's most beautiful city. Bezos built the world's fourth biggest company. Trump — well, he got elected twice, and invented a previously unknown skin colour. And who knows, he may have done us all a favour in Iran. Our own national modesty isn't always a virtue: it might even be a self-fulfilling prophecy, one of the causes of our national decline. Still, I'm glad we are the way we are. At least we have a degree of insight. As I'm well aware, my columns are not the most amazing in history: like everyone, I'm just doing my best and muddling through. It's all any of us can do, in the end. How lovely it would be to hear the leader of the free world say that.
