The Slovak government led by Prime Minister Robert Fico has sparked domestic and international concern by deciding to abolish the Office for the Protection of Whistleblowers, an institution established in 2021 under EU directive to safeguard individuals exposing corruption and abuse of power. The office was long regarded as one of the few bodies maintaining independence from direct political influence.
Under the new law, the office will be replaced by the Office for the Protection of Crime Victims and Informants, whose leadership will be appointed directly by the government. The parliament passed the legislation on 9 December, coinciding with International Anti-Corruption Day, with enforcement set for 1 January 2026. Observers in Bratislava noted the timing as a political signal and provocation.
Concerns over independence and whistleblower safety
Public debate erupted immediately, centring on whether the new office can genuinely protect whistleblowers or will function merely as a government-controlled entity. Non-governmental organisations working on anti-corruption issues warned that abolishing an independent office effectively dismantles a mechanism that allowed citizens to report corruption at the highest levels without fear of reprisal.
President Peter Pellegrini, a political ally of Fico, surprised the government by vetoing the law, citing its hasty adoption and failure to address concerns raised by the European Commission. He argued that the new structure lacks adequate safeguards for whistleblowers and could undermine public trust in state institutions. Parliament overturned the veto on 12 December with 77 votes, yet Pellegrini subsequently announced he would still refuse to sign the law.
European criticism and wider implications
The move has also drawn sharp criticism from Brussels. The European Commission and the European Public Prosecutor’s Office highlighted that weakening whistleblower protections conflicts with EU law and could impede the detection and investigation of corruption. Analysts view the development as part of a broader trend of undermining anti-corruption mechanisms in Slovakia.
For many experts, abolishing the office represents another step toward subordinating the judiciary and oversight bodies to political control. The governing coalition, consisting of SMER-SD, Hlas, and the Slovak National Party, has previously dismantled the Special Prosecutor’s Office, which investigated sensitive cases linked to Fico’s circle, and reformed the Criminal Code to reduce penalties for economic crimes and shorten statute-of-limitations periods. Critics argue that transferring whistleblower oversight to the Ministry of Justice opens the door to direct political interference.
Political motivations and domestic reactions
According to Politico, NGOs and opposition figures see the move as political retaliation by Interior Minister Matúš Šutaj Eštok, whose ministry had previously been sanctioned by the former office for dismissing protected police officers investigating corruption among senior officials.
The consequences may be severe. Without independent protection, whistleblowers face increased risks, potentially leading to a sharp decline in corruption reporting. The move could also weaken the independence of the judiciary and prosecution services, prompting fears that Slovakia is heading toward a Hungarian-style governance model, where Viktor Orbán’s government gradually gained control over courts, prosecution, and anti-corruption bodies, resulting in systemic corruption and prolonged EU conflicts.
Public opinion in Slovakia is divided. Some see the abolition as a technical adjustment with limited impact, while others view it as a pivotal moment, either normalising weakened rule of law or galvanising civil society against political retribution. Transparency International’s 2024 Corruption Perceptions Index places Slovakia at 49 out of 100, below the EU average of 65 and close to Hungary’s 41, highlighting growing concerns about corruption.
For the European Union, the Slovak case is a test of its ability to enforce its values and rules. A failure to respond to the dismantling of anti-corruption institutions may embolden other governments in the region to follow suit. The fate of whistleblower protection in Slovakia has thus become both a domestic and European issue, shaping the country’s trajectory on governance and accountability.
