The Slovenian government has defended its decision to halt the nomination of former Foreign Minister Tanja Fajon for the position of the European Union’s Special Representative for the Sahel, arguing that the nomination process was unlawful and may have involved corruption.
In a statement issued by the Government Communication Office, officials rejected reports circulating in regional media, saying they did not accurately reflect the circumstances surrounding the blocked appointment.
According to the government, an investigation ordered by the new administration concluded that the nomination procedure had been conducted illegally and identified indications of possible corruption.
“An investigation commissioned by the new government found that the nomination process was unlawful and may have involved corruption. Based on the investigation report, which has been approved by the Government of Slovenia, a criminal complaint is currently being prepared,” the statement said.
The government stressed that adherence to legal procedures is essential in all appointments to European Union institutions and insisted that the decision to suspend Fajon’s candidacy was based on legal considerations rather than political motives.
“The decision to halt Tanja Fajon’s nomination was not a political move but a step taken to uphold the rule of law and address concerns over possible corruption,” the statement added.
Fajon Accuses Government of Undermining Her Candidacy
Responding to the government’s actions, Fajon said the administration led by Prime Minister Janez Janša had sent a letter opposing her appointment to the capitals of all European Union member states.
Speaking to Slovenian media, the former foreign minister said Slovenia had once again become an obstacle to its own interests in Brussels.
“I know and closely follow Brussels politics, and it often happens that we Slovenians are our own biggest obstacle and the reason we miss such opportunities,” Fajon said.
The dispute over Fajon’s nomination has sparked political controversy in Slovenia, with the government maintaining that its actions were necessary to ensure transparency and compliance with legal procedures, while Fajon argues the decision damaged Slovenia’s standing within the European Union.
