Transition from Communism

CRCE Briefing Paper

Transition from Communism:

Current Perceptions in Slovenia

By

Keith Miles OBE FCA

May 2018

Transition from Communism – Current perceptions in Slovenia

I recently wrote an article for the Slovene weekly magazine Reporter which was called ‘Transition from Communism – current perceptions in Slovenia’.This arose out of a survey of perceptions that I conducted as part of my research programme at the University of Buckingham, currently a very highly rated university in the United Kingdom.

The text of the major part of the article is as follows:

The area of research that I was interested in was the progress of transformation of an economy and society from a totalitarian system to a free market multiparty system. This was such a major change that many in the free democracies did not fully appreciate the magnitude of what was necessary. It was a change in almost every aspect of the way society worked.

As part of the research programme I carried out a survey of perceptions of many of the top main players at the timer of independence. I included as a benchmark a small number of the general public, foreigners who know Slovenia well, and a few from the Czech Republic. In all there were 79 replies of 81 requests, and this included senior politicians, judges, businessmen, journalists, lawyers, churchmen, bankers and diplomats. All could request anonymity to ensure privacy if they wished and 53% asked for anonymity.

Of the 79 replies 63 were Slovenes, 5 Czechs and 11 other foreigners.

As regards the age split it is estimated that there was a 50-50 split between those over 45 and those under 45.

I must emphasise that the survey was not intended to be a scientific opinion poll but the instant perceptions of those who took part and in a sense their gut reactions, so that many of the questions were of a Yes or No nature. Those who wished could add their additional comments. There were only 18 questions and it could be completed in10-15 minutes.

In many ways the results were for me not a great surprise but in others a revelation. The reason that they were a revelation is that after 25 years since the return to a multi-party democracy there are very major reservations of top democrats.

The top scoring negative perceptions in percentage terms were:

• 96% said crimes that were abuses of human rights had not been prosecuted
• 90% did not consider the courts to be fully independent
• 90% said the bureaucracy is too large
• 86% did not think the state had withdrawn enough from the business sector
• 85% did not consider the financial institutions , especially the central bank and the banks in general free of political interference
• 84% did not consider the press free and well balanced
• 82% did not consider that the history of the totalitarian regime had been fully exposed in schools.

These are staggering percentages after 25 years.

On the question of completion of the transition from a communism to a pluralist democracy the most common perception was that the country was only 75% or less than that along the road.

The question on whether a lustration process should have taken place received a 78% yes, which clearly shows the dissatisfaction with old elites continuing.

When one looking at the control benchmarks of foreigner comments on Slovenia and Czechs on their own country; foreigners were generally more positive than Slovenes and the Czechs were more happy with their transition. The obvious reaction that one would have to these results is that foreigners do not notice behind the scenes influences from the past and in the case of the Czechs they had a lustration process and their economy in purchasing power terms has recently overtaken Slovenia.

In terms of the additional comments made by respondents the more interesting ones were:

i)Lustration should be confined to top officials because party membership was the only way to get involved and try to change things.

ii)Totalitarianism was not emphasised in schools ‘due to political correctness’.

iii)The proportional representation system is inefficient.

iv)Party appointments in top positions follow the communist practise even with a multi-party system.

v)The mentality of the people inherited from communism still leads to reliance on the state and an anti free market attitudes

vi)Archives need to be completely open from the communist times

vii)Low trust in the court system, frequently commented upon

viii)Decision making is still suffering from a legacy of the past to avoid responsibility

ix)The education system needs overhauling, 50 years of brainwashing has had its effect

x)Communist regime not declared criminal

xi)Lack of support for entrepreneurism

xii)Civil Society still virtually non-existent

In the context of the results, albeit not scientific but very illuminating, it is worth considering the resolution of The Council of Europe No.1096 in 1996 and No.1481 from 2006. In addition the resolution of the European Parliament of 2009 (Ref P6_TA(2009)0213).

The earliest one of the Council of Europe specifically refers to the dangers of a failed transition process, and other matters such as de-bureaucratisation, and prosecution of criminal acts that took place under communism, and opening of archives, and consideration of lustration laws. The follow-up resolution ten years later No. 1481 draws particular attention to a failure to bring criminals to justice, and poor education of the younger generation of totalitarian crimes, and calls on all post-communist states to reassess the history of communism.

If we turn to the resolution of the European Parliament this draws attention to the need for objective historians to impartially study the past and to honour the victim by keeping the memory of totalitarianism alive in order to achieve truth and remembrance. It concludes that efforts must be made to strengthen teaching to achieve reconciliation.

It seems to me that there needs to be a thoroughgoing examination by The Council of Europe and the European Parliament as to what the current situation is in Central and Eastern Europe. The current dispute over the changes in Poland relating to Judges may be said to be a reaction to the failure of the EU and EC to closely monitor what has happened. Perhaps it has been too easy for old elites to perpetuate their positions of power and influence. (End of quote from article)

I concluded the piece by saying that

‘After all two extremely important aspects for the success of democracy are the rule of law and the independence of the judiciary.’

Given that the Council of Europe and the EU say that they put great store on these matters is it not time to have a review of all entrants that were for many years totalitarian countries?