SLOVENIA: NO EASY SOLUTION FOR GUANTANAMO DETAINEE

C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 02 LJUBLJANA 000332

SIPDIS

DEPT FOR S/GC FRIED AND WILLIAMS

E.O. 12958: DECL: 10/20/2019
TAGS: PTER PREL PREF PHUM SI
SUBJECT: SLOVENIA: NO EASY SOLUTION FOR GUANTANAMO DETAINEE
RESETTLEMENT

REF: LJUBLJANA 274

Classified By: CDA Brad Freden, E.O. 12958, reasons 1.4(b) and (d)

1.(C) Summary. A/DCM and Pol-Econ Chief met with the
Ministry of Interior's (MOI) Director-General for Migration
and Integration to obtain a clearer explanation of Slovenia's
position on accepting Guantanamo detainees for resettlement.
MOI, as the lead Slovenian agency on this issue, conducted a
thorough review of domestic legislation in response to
Washington's earlier request for Ljubljana to accept several
detainees. Procedural barriers and/or legal restrictions
will not permit Slovenia to resettle the detainees in the
short term without a major change to existing legislation.
The will to tackle yet another politically sensitive issue is
lacking right now, as the current government is already
taking a beating over its approach to resolving the
Slovenia-Croatia border dispute. If the government is able
to push through an agreement to resolve the border dispute in
the coming weeks, we could likely get some additional
traction on Guantanamo. However, success will require a
strong, personal commitment by the Prime Minister. Even
under the best of circumstances, it may take the prospect of
a White House meeting to convince PM Pahor's government that
the rewards outweigh the political risks. End summary.

2.(C) A/DCM and Pol-Econ Chief met with Ministry of Interior
(MOI) Director-General for Migration and Integration Nina
Gregori on October 13 to obtain a clearer explanation of
Slovenia's position on accepting Guantanamo detainees for
resettlement. MOI European Affairs and International
Cooperation Service Head Suzana Ivanovic -- the MOI's point
of contact for this issue -- and several MOI lawyers were
also present. The meeting was a follow-up to informal
discussions held in New York and Ljubljana. A/DCM and
Pol-Econ Chief opened by stressing the importance of closing
the Guantanamo camp as soon as possible and explained the
need for European countries to assist with this process. DG
Gregori responded by noting that the MOI was lead ministry on
this issue in Ljubljana, and that the MOI conducted a
thorough review of Slovenian legislation in response to
Washington's earlier request to possibly resettle several
Uighur detainees in Slovenia. Gregori explained that while
on the political level many in the EU agreed to accept
Guantanamo detainees and close the camp, the legal reality in
some countries made the process very difficult if not
outright impossible.

3.(C) MOI officials explained that they examined two laws as
possible legal bases for resettlement. The first is
Slovenia's Alien Act, which governs travel by foreigners in
and out of Slovenia. Because this legislation is oriented
towards normal international travelers and migrants,
according to Gregori, it would not be relevant for the
detainees as it does not include articles that could address
their unique situation. The Alien Act does contain a clause
that could theoretically permit resettlement if it were in
the interest of the nation, but Gregori quickly cautioned
that this clause would not apply to the detainees because
they would need to fulfill basic requirements of the Alien
Act such as possessing a valid passport, insurance, and funds
to sustain their stay in Slovenia.

4.(C) The Law on International Protection is the second
theoretical option. MOI's lawyers determined that this law
would be the more appropriate mechanism for any potential
detainee to be resettled in Slovenia. The problem with the
Law on International Protection, however, is in the process.
According to the law, applicants for asylum must file their
application physically in Slovenia or at an embassy abroad.
The state cannot file an application on their behalf, thus
excluding the possibility that the Slovenian Government could
start the process itself. A third party can file an
application of intent on behalf of the asylee, but the
interview for asylum must be conducted in person at a
Slovenian embassy abroad, or in the case that the person is
already in Slovenia, at the Ministry of Interior. The MOI
lawyers noted that if an applicant were to apply at the
Slovenian Embassy in Washington DC, that person would need to
remain in the United States while the application was sent to
Slovenia where it would be reviewed by an Asylum Commission.
The process "could take years" according to one MOI lawyer,
during which time the detainee would not be able to enter
Slovenia. Even if the procedural barriers were overcome,
there was ultimately no guarantee that the Asylum Commission
would rule in favor of the asylees.

LJUBLJANA 00000332 002 OF 002



5.(C) In response to follow-up questions, Gregori and
Ivanovic explained that Slovenian law did not allow the
government to treat the detainees as a special group nor was
it possible to issue a special executive decision to allow
for their resettlement. Frankly speaking, Gregori claimed
resettlement was hypothetically possible, but that it would
be very challenging for the government in Ljubljana to
implement. If, in the end, the Asylum Commission ruled
against the asylee, the situation would turn political rather
than legal, a development the MOI "wanted to avoid."

6.(C) Comment. Our conversation with the Ministry of Interior
revolved mostly around legal hypothethicals, all of which
would be very difficult to implement due to procedural
barriers. MOI's message to us was fairly clear: current law
would not permit Slovenia to resettle detainees. Thus, the
fact that the MOI has been given the lead on this issue does
not bode well; as in many European countries, the Interior
Ministry is institutionally among the least sympathetic to
our arguments in favor of accepting detainees. The political
will to make legislative changes -- or to work more
creatively within the framework of existing law -- is also
lacking, at least for the moment. With Prime Minister Pahor
already taking a beating over negotiations to resolve the
Slovenia-Croatia border dispute, convincing the people and
parliament of this small, rather insular country to accept
detainees is probably more than the political traffic can
bear right now. If the border issue is resolved soon and in
a manner that strengthens -- or at least does not weaken --
Pahor, we may be able to convince him to take on this cause.
End Comment.


FREDEN