President Pellegrini signed the anti-NGO law. Ombudsman reacted and challenges its constitutionality

#THE PRESIDENT, DESPITE DISAPPROVAL FROM CIVIL SOCIETY,
SIGNED THE HARASSING RUSSIAN LAW

President Peter Pellegrini on 7 May, despite strong disapproval from the civil society, signed the "Russian law" (amendment to Act No. 213/1997 Coll. on non-profit organisations providing services of general interest, as amended) in the wording that is directed against non-governmental non-profit organisations.

#STATEMENT OF THE PLATFORM FOR DEMOCRACY

Platform for Democracy, a forum that bring together numerous Slovak civil society organisations, including MEMO 98, express disappointment at his decision.

Here is the statement (in Slovak):

"We are disappointed by the President's attitude, who has been approached by a number of helping - social, charitable, health and education platforms and organisations, as well as local government and public administration leaders, with concrete examples of how the law signed today bullies and threatens them. Ultimately, the negative consequences of this unnecessary law will be borne by the citizens who use the services of NGOs today," said Filip Vagač, Programme Director of the Platform for Democracy.

The Platform for Democracy remains convinced that the legal norm in question is unconstitutional and contrary to European Union law.

"Today we appeal to all those who have the power to appeal to the Constitutional Court, especially to the MPs of the National Assembly and the Public Defender of Rights, to use their right to have the law assessed by the Constitutional Court," added Filip Vagač.

In this context, the Platform for Democracy expresses its gratitude to all platforms, organisations and individuals who have engaged in activities against the "Russian law" and, based on the experience from Hungary, expresses its hope that the legal norm will be stopped in the next steps by the Slovak or European courts.

#MAIN OBJECTIONS

The main objections of NGOs to the changing versions were processed by VIA IURIS (in Slovak)- initial analysis (28 March 2025), explanations of the Government Office (2 April 2025).

1. Publication of donors' names without consent

The amendment mandates the disclosure of all donors. For legal entities from 1 cent, for natural persons over 5 thousand EUR. Even if they do not wish it.

Disclosure of personal data of donors who have contributed to the activities of an organisation is constitutionally problematic, as persons have the right to protect their privacy and to create lists of supporters. It is also problematic from the perspective of the rulings of the EU Court of Justice and the European Court of Human Rights, as it interferes with the right to privacy and may also discourage donors from supporting specific organisations on a larger scale.

2. Discriminatory disclosure & Bureaucracy

The inclusion of CSOs as obliged persons under the Info Law is discriminatory - e.g. neither political parties nor companies drawing public funds have such an obligation. Moreover, it will not bring any greater transparency, as all information is already available to the state or local government. The only thing it will do in practice is cause more administration for both organisations and state and local authorities.

Such an obligation will apply to NGOs that receive at least EUR 3,300 in one year from public funds, or EUR 10,000 in total.

3. Arbitral assessment of transparency

The audit powers of registry authorities to assess transparency statements are unclear. They will be able to ask for additional information that is not precisely specified (even repeatedly) and impose fines for the purpose of verification. The powers of scrutiny should be clearly defined, otherwise this violates Article 2(1) of the Constitution - public authorities can only act as the law allows them to do.

4. High fines

The Ministry has yet to prepare the statements that non-profits will be obliged to fill out. It is not clear what will be in those statements and what will be subject to scrutiny. What is clear is that there are fines of up to 10 thousand euros for failure to fill them out, even repeatedly.

#THE OMBUDSMAN APPEALS TO THE CONSTITUTIONAL COURT

On the same day (7 May), Public Defender of Rights (Ombudsman) Róbert Dobrovodský supported the non-profit organizations and informed them that he would file a petition to the Constitutional Court of the Slovak Republic to assess the constitutionality of this amendment to the law.

"I find particularly problematic the subordination of non-profit organisations to the regime of the Freedom of Information Act. I do not consider this step to be in line with the concept of the right to information," explained Róbert Dobrovodský.

Among other things, he mentioned that "the Constitution does not give Parliament a legal basis for a private law entity (for example, a non-governmental non-profit organisation) to have the same obligation as a public authority." I am therefore of the opinion that the introduction of additional obligations under the Freedom of Information Act for non-profit organisations is not necessary in a democratic society."

For a more detailed argument, see his Facebook page (in Slovak). Beforehand, on the official Ombudsman website, he presented his legal reservations prior to the bill approval in the National Assembly (14 April).

#LEGAL BASIS

On 14 May, Amendment No. 109/2025 was published in the Official Gazette, with effect from 1 June 2025.

Version of Act No. 213/1997 Coll. on non-profit organisations providing services of general benefit - until 31 May 2025.

Version of Act No. 213/1997 Coll. as amended - effective from 1 June 2025.