Two Years of Fico: How Slovakia’s Anti-Corruption Architecture Was Reshaped
Two and a half years into Robert Fico’s fourth term as Slovak prime minister, the institutional architecture of anti-corruption enforcement built during the 2020-2023 Hegerova and Ódor governments has been substantially dismantled. The European Parliament resolution due for a vote in Strasbourg on Thursday 21 May 2026 lays out a detailed list of grievances that, taken together, amount to one of the most serious indictments of a Member State’s rule-of-law trajectory since the long-running Hungary file.
The Special Prosecutor’s Office abolition
The centrepiece of the Fico government’s first-year legislative agenda was the abolition of the Office of the Special Prosecutor (USP), the body established in 2004 to handle the most sensitive corruption and organised-crime cases. The USP under successive heads, including the high-profile Daniel Lipšic, had built a portfolio of investigations against figures close to Fico’s first three governments. The 2024 amendment to the Criminal Code transferred those investigations to regular prosecutorial offices, in many cases with the effect of dropping or substantially reducing charges. The European Commission and the Parliament’s LIBE Committee both raised concerns at the time, but the legislation proceeded.
The National Criminal Agency restructuring
The National Criminal Agency (NAKA), the elite police unit that had built its profile through complex corruption investigations, has been substantially restructured. Senior officers associated with high-profile prosecutions have been reassigned or have left, and the unit’s operational autonomy has been reduced in favour of greater central coordination. Critics argue that the restructuring has eroded NAKA’s investigative capacity at the same time as the Special Prosecutor’s Office was dismantled, producing a double blow to anti-corruption enforcement at the institutional level.
Judicial appointments and council reform
The Judicial Council, the constitutional body responsible for judicial nominations and discipline, has been the object of two parallel reform efforts. The first concerned the composition of the council, with changes intended to alter the balance between judicial and political appointees. The second concerned the procedure for disciplinary cases, with new rules that critics argue create opportunities for political interference in cases involving judges who have ruled against government interests. The Venice Commission has been asked for an opinion on aspects of the reform package.
The postal vote restriction
The 2025 reform of postal-voting procedures for Slovaks abroad is among the most concrete grievances cited in the European Parliament’s draft resolution. The new procedure imposes additional documentation requirements and shorter deadlines that, in the assessment of Slovak civil-society organisations and the Renew Europe group, will reduce participation among diaspora voters. The diaspora is estimated at over 300,000 eligible voters, historically with a strong bias toward opposition parties. The reform is set to apply in time for the next general election and has been challenged before the Constitutional Court.
The Agricultural Paying Agency
The European Parliament resolution flags alleged misuse of EU funds through the Slovak Agricultural Paying Agency, the body responsible for disbursing direct payments and rural-development funds under the Common Agricultural Policy. Opposition MPs and investigative journalists have published documentation pointing to irregular awards, conflicts of interest involving politically connected recipients, and weakened internal-audit procedures. The European Public Prosecutor’s Office (EPPO) has confirmed that it has open investigations connected with the agency, although it has not commented on individual cases.
What Thursday’s vote would mean
A favourable vote on the resolution would not, in itself, trigger any binding EU action. The Parliament can only call on the Commission to act; the decision to activate the rule-of-law conditionality mechanism, which would freeze EU funds, lies with the College of Commissioners and ultimately with the Council. However, a clear plenary majority in Strasbourg would create significant political pressure on the Commission to advance from monitoring to action, and would put Bratislava on notice that the file has crystallised at European level. The vote takes place at 12:00 CEST on Thursday.
Sources: European Parliament LIBE Committee fact-finding mission to Bratislava 2025; Renew Europe Plenary Priorities 18-21 May 2026; Venice Commission opinions; European Public Prosecutor’s Office; Constitutional Court of the Slovak Republic.
