Prime Minister Robert Fico’s leftist-populist government has suffered a setback after Slovakia’s top court temporarily suspended controversial legislation that would abolish the country’s whistleblower protection office.

“The Constitutional Court’s ruling confirms that the new law is so contentious that it was necessary to suspend its effects. We view today’s decision as a significant milestone in safeguarding the rule of law in Slovakia,” the whistleblower’s protection office told POLITICO in a statement. The decision entered into force on Tuesday.

The decision pauses the disputed law — which would otherwise have entered into force on Jan. 1, 2026 — until the court reviews whether it complies with the constitution.

Since returning to power in 2023 for a fourth term, Fico’s Smer party has taken steps to dismantle anti-corruption institutions, including abolishing the Special Prosecutor’s Office, which handled high-profile corruption cases, and disbanding NAKA, an elite police unit tasked with fighting organized crime. The ruling coalition has also cracked down on independent media and amended the constitution to grant Slovakia’s national law precedence over EU law in “cultural and ethical matters.”

The Fico administration — which bypassed a presidential veto after using a fast-track procedure to push through the bill — is not backing down yet in the whistleblower office dispute. “So far, it is only a decision to suspend the effectiveness … We are convinced that the Constitutional Court will confirm that the law is in order and will enter into force,” the interior ministry said in a statement.

The government’s plan is to replace the office with a new institution whose leadership would be politically appointed. This move would cut short the current director’s tenure and weaken protections for whistleblowers.

“It was a shock because it hadn’t been discussed, consulted, or even announced in any way beforehand. And in my first reaction I described it as the most blatant political interference in the activities of an independent state institution that I can imagine,” Zuzana Dlugošová, the head of the whistleblower’s protection office, told POLITICO.

She warned that with protections weakened, whistleblowers will be “less willing to help the state uncover violations of EU law and fraud involving European funds, which are significant in Slovakia.”

Political payback

NGOs and the political opposition said they view the move as political payback from Interior Minister Matúš Šutaj Eštok, whose ministry had been fined by the whistleblower office for suspending and reassigning elite police officers under whistleblower protection without the office’s consent. The suspended officers had been investigating corruption among senior Slovak officials.

The Interior Ministry told POLITICO in a statement that “the opposition’s claims of ‘revenge’ are false and have no factual basis.”

“The change is not personal, but institutional. It is a systemic solution to long-standing issues that have arisen in the practical application of the current law, as confirmed by several court rulings,” the ministry said, adding that the proposed changes are consistent with the EU’s whistleblower protection directive.

The European Commission, the European Public Prosecutor’s Office and several experts contacted by POLITICO disagree with ministry’s assessment.

Transparency International Slovakia Director, Michal Pisko, said that the decision to ax the office “was a power move against an independent institution with which the Ministry of the Interior has long been in conflict.”

Political scientist Radoslav Štefančík from the University of Economics in Bratislava said: “This office was one of the few that still operated independently of government power. The new office will be under government control and, as a result, ineffective. The main beneficiaries will be those who previously benefited from the criminal code reform: fraudsters and thieves, regardless of which political party they belong to.

“This isn’t just about a single office. It concerns the entire system of checks on government power by independent institutions. It reinforces a system in which 99 percent of people must abide by the law, while a chosen few believe they stand above it,” he added.

In a statement to POLITICO, the European Commission said it “regrets that the Slovak Parliament did not take the opportunity for thorough consultation and recalls that it had shared its concerns regarding several provisions of the law.”

“As a reminder: We had communicated our strong concerns about several elements of this law in relation to EU law … This regards notably the dissolution of the existing Whistleblower Protection Office and the resulting early termination of the mandate of the Head of Office,” the Commission said, adding that it will review the law and decide on next steps.

But experts point out that the Commission often moves slowly, allowing EU member countries to flout the rules with impunity.

“Can the Commission recognize that it should act before it becomes too late? Because when it becomes too late, and the Commission starts the infringement process a year, a six months from now, who cares? It’s a done deal. The dust has settled,” said Vigjilenca Abazi, director of the European Whistleblowing Institute.

“From experience, the European Commission usually ends up softening its stance and letting things slide. With all due cynicism, I think Fico will end up winning again,” Michal Vašečka, a political scientist at the Bratislava Policy Institute, said.