Author
In early 2017, Slovenia adopted amendments to the Foreigners Act which allowed for future restrictions on access to the asylum procedure. Pursuant to the amendments, the National Assembly (Parliament) could vote on suspending the right to asylum and the Police would be able to reject all intentions to apply for international protection as inadmissible as well as remove the individuals concerned to the country from which they entered Slovenia.[1] The adopted amendments were reviewed by the Constitutional Court at the initiative of the Slovenian Human Rights Ombudsperson, prepared with support from civil society organisations.[2] The Constitutional Court ruled that the amendments were in breach of Article 18 of the Constitution (prohibition of torture).[3]
Nevertheless, in 2021, the National Assembly accepted the amendments to the Foreigners Act that established the concept of a “complex crisis in the field of migration”. The provisions stated that the MoI had to regularly monitor the situation in the field of migration in Slovenia. If it detected that the situation regarding migration in Slovenia had changed, creating a “complex crisis”, the MoI could propose that the government activated the articles of the Foreigners Act that allowed the National Assembly to close the border for six months and restrict access to the asylum procedure. The proposal to activate the articles prepared by the MoI should include an assessment of the situation and the effects of the “complex crisis” on the security threat level for the protection of fundamental constitutional social values, especially regarding the effective functioning of the legal and welfare state, the protection of public order and peace, the efficient functioning of the economy, the protection of health and the life of the population, and the level of security.[4]
Upon activation of the articles the police would have the authority to determine whether a person can apply for international protection after they expressed the intention to do so. If the police determined that an individual can be returned to another country, they could return the individual regardless of the provisions of the IPA. Exceptions would apply to unaccompanied minors and individuals whose health conditions prevent a return. The assessment of whether someone is an unaccompanied minor would be made by the police based on the person’s appearance, behaviour, and other circumstances. An appeal against the police order would not have a suspensive effect.[5]
In February 2022, opposition parliamentarians submitted again the provisions to the Constitutional Court for constitutional review.[6] In July 2023, the new Government approved the opinion of the MoI regarding the legality of the amendments and lodged the opinion before the Constitutional Court. In the opinion, the Ministry argued that the amendments of the Foreigners act are in line with the Constitution.[7] The opinion and the procedure in which the opinion was approved by the Government was heavily criticised by NGOs and the parliamentarians that lodged the Constitutional review and called on the Minister to resign.[8] The decision of the Constitutional Court was taken in April 2025. The Constitutional Court ruled that the definition of the ’complex crisis on the field of migration’ is not in breach of the Slovenian Constitution. The Court noted that the use of indefinite legal concepts does not, in itself, constitute a breach of the principle of legal clarity as in some cases the legislator cannot foresee all future concrete and real-life events. Since the assessment that the complex crisis has occurred will be made by the Ministry and the Government, the Court emphasized that the assessment must take into account all the crucial circumstances at the time and the legal criteria set in the provision. In addition, the Constitutional Court again annulled Article 10.b of the Foreigners Act, as it considered it was not in line with the prohibition of torture enshrined in Article 18 of the Slovenian Constitution. The Court reiterated that the Slovenian Constitution allows the limitation of human rights only in 2 situations – in a state of war or emergency or in ordinary times. The Court first noted that the complex migration crisis as defined in Article 10.a does not constitute a situation that would allow a state of emergency to be declared. Therefore, the Court assessed if the limitations of rights enshrined in the provision were in line with the limitations allowed by the Constitution in ordinary times. The Court reiterated that the rights enshrined in Article 18 of the Constitution (prohibition of torture) cannot be limited and that any interference with this right is inadmissible and, therefore, not in line with the Slovenian Constitution. Therefore, the Court once again annulled the provision.[9] The amended provisions of the Foreigners Act were never activated.[10]
In June 2022, the MoI announced that Slovenia would remove its border fence with Croatia.[11] The works began in July 2022, however only 4,142 metres of the fence were removed by the middle of September.[12] By the end of 2025, 115 km of the panel fence and 52 km of the wire fence were removed.[13]
In October 2023, the Government reinstated internal border checks with Hungary and Croatia, while Italy reinstated the border with Slovenia,[14] however this did not result in an increased number of readmissions,[15] meaning that the majority of apprehended individuals were processed in the asylum procedure. In addition to internal border control, Slovenia carries out border control in mixed border patrols with all neighbouring countries. According to the Protocol on mixed patrolling on the Slovenian-Croatian border, mixed border patrols can operate 10km from the border line. If an individual is apprehended for irregular crossing of the border they have to be processed by the police of the country where they are present.[16] In 2025, 688 individuals were processed by the mixed border patrols.[17] In January 2025, the MoI signed an additional protocol with the Croatian and Italian police establishing tripartite mixed border patrols at the Croatian external Schengen border.[18]
Pushbacks, illegal police practices and other incidents at the border
In 2025, the police detected 28,200 irregular crossings of the Slovenian border. This is a decrease in comparison to the previous year when the police detected 46,217 irregular crossings. The most common countries of origin of people who were apprehended for irregular border crossing were: Afghanistan (4,046), Egypt (3,203), Bangladesh (3,148), Morocco (2,846), Türkiye (1,935), Pakistan (1,864), Syria (1,421) and Nepal (1,136) followed by other nationalities.[19] In practice, Ukrainians are allowed entry and are not processed for irregular border crossing even if they do not fulfil the entry requirements (e.g., a valid passport), which is evident from the statistics.
According to the statistics, 22,519 individuals expressed their intention to apply for international protection in 2025 (a decrease from the 44,408 individuals who applied in 2024).[20] Out of these, 3,946 were minors. Data on the number of unaccompanied minors expressing the intention to apply for international protection is not gathered.[21]
Between 2018 and 2022, there was a huge discrepancy between the number of irregular crossings and the number of expressed intentions to apply for international protection due to the systematic denial of access to the asylum procedure by the police and subsequent readmission of people to the neighbouring countries from which they entered, mainly Croatia.[22] Readmission to neighbouring countries was conducted based on readmission agreements Slovenia has with its neighbouring countries (Croatia, Italy, Austria and Hungary), which did not uphold the standards that EU legislation requires as, for example, individuals are not issued a return decision, do not have the right to appeal and do not have the right to free legal aid or representation).[23] The Ombudsperson observed that no assessment of whether the principle of non-refoulement could be violated by a return from Slovenia is conducted.[24] Moreover, it was also not evident from the police records if individuals expressed an intention to apply for international protection and whether the police informed the individual of the right to seek asylum.[25]
In February 2022, the practice changed, and the number of individuals readmitted dropped in comparison with the previous year. Although individuals continued to be readmitted on a monthly basis, the number of readmissions continued to drop in comparison with 2021. In 2022, 2,361 individuals were readmitted which is a 41% decrease in comparison to 2021. In 2021, 39% of individuals who irregularly crossed the border were readmitted to a neighbouring country while in 2022, 7.4% of individuals who irregularly entered were readmitted.[26] This decrease can be mainly attributed to the change of practice of the Croatian authorities who in the beginning of 2022 started to refuse to accept readmitted people back to Croatia. In 2025, only 123 individuals were readmitted to another country.[27]
Out of 123 readmitted individuals, 13 were from Serbia, 7 were from Morocco, 7 were from Afghanistan, 4 were from Albania, 4 were from Bosnia and Hercegovina, 4 were from Kosovo, 3 were from Egypt, 3 were from Iran, 2 were from China and 2 were from Türkiye. Out of 123, 54 individuals were readmitted to Croatia.[28]
In 2025, Slovenia also accepted readmissions into its territory for 345 individuals under readmission agreements. This is an increase from the 287 individuals it readmitted in 2024. 254 were readmitted through the airport, 14 from Italy, 65 from Austria, 7 from Croatia and 5 from Hungary. Out of 345 individuals, 73 were from Morocco, Afghanistan, 40 from Algeria, 19 from Syria, 14 from Türkiye, 14 from China, 9 from Serbia, 8 from Palestine and 7 from Kosovo.[29]
In January 2021, the Italian Court of Rome ruled that the 1996 readmission agreement with Slovenia breached Italian and EU law and, therefore, could not form a legal basis for returns to Slovenia.[30] Whereas most readmissions from Italy stopped following this ruling, 65 readmissions took place nonetheless in 2022 according to the official statistics.[31] Reportedly, at the end of 2022, the Italian authorities had started to strongly urge Slovenia to resume the use of readmission agreements between the countries.[32] The pressure from Italian authorities to resume the use of the readmission agreement continued during 2023.[33] In 2025, Slovenia readmitted 14 persons from Italy.[34]
At the beginning of 2022, the PIC and other organisations in Slovenia regularly detected pushbacks at the Slovenian border.[35] While lodging the application before the Ministry, asylum seekers stated that they have reached and tried to ask for asylum in Slovenia several times before being able to lodge the application for international protection. In February, the practice changed as the Croatian police refused to accept people based on the readmission agreements. Since then, reports on pushbacks and the use of readmission agreements have dropped significantly.
In 2025 the PIC did not detect any systematic physical or psychological violence conducted by the Slovenian national authorities during border procedures.
Border monitoring
There is no systematic border monitoring in Slovenia. Border monitoring is conducted by UNHCR. In 2024 UNHCR conducted 5 visits to police stations Petišovci, Nova Gorica and Maribor where they checked police records and conducted talks with the police.[36] In order to conduct border monitoring, UNHCR must notify the police station prior to the visit. UNHCR can only check police documentation regarding individuals who applied for international protection.
Border monitoring is also conducted by the Slovenian Ombudsperson within the National Preventive Mechanism framework.[37] The Ombudsperson can make unannounced visits to police stations and has the authority to check all the police records regarding migrants in the police procedures. Based on these visits, observations and recommendations are given to the MoI and the police station. In 2025, the Ombudsperson visited 13 police stations.[38]
In 2023, the Ombudsperson highlighted the extremely poor reception conditions at the Police station for Compensatory Measures Novo mesto, where the majority of individuals irregularly crossing the border are processed. The Ombudsman noted that the hall in which individuals are processed and accommodated, before being transferred to the asylum home, is dysfunctional and extremely inappropriate considering that a large number of foreigners is processed there and that they stay there for a long period of time (from 5-6 hours). The Ombudsman noted that the structure of the hall does not guarantee respect for personal safety and human dignity, especially for vulnerable groups, families with small children and unaccompanied children. The premises are also not adapted to the needs of people with mobility impairments. During the visit the premises were not sufficiently cleaned or regularly disinfected. The hall is equipped with air conditioning but does not ensure adequate ventilation as the air in the room when a large number of people is accommodated is very poor. There is also a risk of the spread of infectious diseases. Unaccompanied children are accommodated together with other foreigners.[39] In January 2023, the Government adopted the decision to install additional temporary facilities on the premises for the purpose of processing foreigners. The additional facilities will be installed for maximum 3 years. In the first phase, the fence and 2 sanitary containers will be built. In addition, 3 containers for accommodation and 3 tents will be installed. In the second and third phase, additional 2 tents will be built while additional sanitary containers will be installed if needed.[40] According to the police, 3 containers that are already installed but were not yet operating during the Ombudsman’s visit will be used for accommodating vulnerable groups, including unaccompanied children. The Ombudsman noted that such accommodation is inappropriate for vulnerable groups and recommended that suitable facilities for processing vulnerable groups are established.[41] During 2025, 71% of irregular crossings were detected and processed by the Police station in Novo mesto.[42] This Police station was not visited by the Ombudsperson in 2024. In 2024, access to the facility was denied to a reporter stating that the procedures and information gathered in the facility are marked as classified. The newspaper for which the reporter in question worked lodged a subsidiary judicial review claiming that freedom of the press includes access to such facilities as it is in the interest of the public that the media covers the way authorities process and treat migrants in such facilities. The judicial review was rejected as inadmissible by the Administrative Court, stating that other legal remedies should be used by the media company. The media company appealed the decision, which was annulled by the Supreme Court, ruling that the police should assess the public interest in conducting a journalistic investigation against the rights and legitimate interests of the police. The Supreme Court instructed the Administrative Court to assess the request of the media company and decide in line with the right to freedom of expression enshrined in the ECHR.[43] A new decision by the Administrative Court was issued in October 2025 and the Court ruled that by preventing the newspaper Mladina to conduct a journalistic investigation, the Police violated the right to freedom of expression and media freedom.[44] The journalist from Mladina visited the registration centre in Obrežje in December 2025. The investigative piece gave more information on the conditions in the registration centre. According to Mladina, the former distribution hall is comprised of five small steel cages, each containing a makeshift communal sleeping area made of plywood, exercise mats, and woollen blankets. The cages are visually separated from one another by tarps. According to the journalists, the whole facility looks exactly like the exterior of an older animal shelter. As the capacity of the facility is 50-80 people, each cage can hold up to 16 individuals.[45] In 2025, the centre was visited again by the Ombudsperson. The Ombudsperson noted that the conditions have not changed and reiterated that new suitable premises for processing foreigners should be established in the shortest possible timeframe. The Ombudsperson noted that foreign nationals are still being housed in metal enclosures that are completely unsuitable for human placement. A tent has been added to the existing facility which, in the opinion of the Ombudsperson, is even less suitable for placing people (here, too, foreign nationals are placed in metal enclosures; furthermore, the ground is uneven, leaks occur during rain, the tent lacks adequate insulation, and the existing ventilation does not sufficiently address problems with heat or cold). It was further noted that the facility and the tent do not provide police officers with adequate working conditions, nor do they ensure respect for the personal safety and human dignity of foreigners, particularly vulnerable persons such as families with small children and unaccompanied minors. The premises are also not adapted to the needs of persons with mobility impairments. Given that the Novo Mesto Police District has for years been experiencing increased border crossings by foreign nationals seeking international protection—and that no changes are expected— the Ombudsperson concluded that it is imperative to find more permanent and appropriate solutions. In addition, the Ombudsman noted the facilities should be cleaned more than once per day and properly sanitized in order to prevent the spread of disease, that EUAA brochures on asylum should be available to foreigners, that additional police officers should be trained for identifying and processing the applications of unaccompanied minors, and that translation during the procedures should be provided by ensuring the presence of translators in the facilities and remote translating.[46]
During 2024, the Slovenian Ombudsperson received 6 complaints from asylum seekers. Most of the complaints were lodged regarding the reception conditions and different aspects of the Dublin procedure. None of the complaints were lodged regarding access to the asylum procedure. The Ombudsperson also received 17 complaints regarding migration related issues, mainly the lengthiness of different procedures.[47]
Litigation and case-law on incidents occurring at the border
From 2019 to 2023 three cases regarding access to the territory and the asylum procedure were litigated before the national courts.[48]
ECCHR together with CRIN filed a complaint in the case of U.F. against Croatia and Slovenia with the Committee on the Rights of the Child. U.F is a Rohingya child who was a victim of a chain pushback from Slovenia to Bosnia.[49] The case was still pending by the end of 2025.
Legal access to the territory
The Slovenian legislation does not foresee any legal pathways, apart from family reunification, for access to the territory of persons in need of protection (for example as humanitarian visas). Strengthening the system of complementary pathways is set as one of the objectives of the new Immigration strategy adopted by the Government in March 2024.[50] Nonetheless, UNHCR enabled 4 refugee students to arrive in Slovenia through an education pathway in 2025. The students obtained a residence permit for study, a scholarship and assistance with social integration.[51] In 2023, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs issued a call to apply for “developmental scholarships” within the international development cooperation and humanitarian aid for 3 students, one from each of the following countries: Rwanda, Uganda and Ethiopia. While individuals in need of international protection could apply, this was not a prerequisite. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs would cover their tuition and scholarship. The call for the developmental scholarships is still open as the scholarships have not been allocated yet.[52]
In October 2022 the Slovenian Government made the decision to resettle 50 persons from Türkiye. People from Afghanistan and Syria were eligible for resettlement according to the decision of the Government.[53] Based on the decision 23 persons resettled in Slovenia in 2023 and, 27 persons resettled in Slovenia in January 2024. No resettlements were carried out in 2025.[54] Relocation has not been carried out since 2021.
[1] For more on the amendments see AIDA, Country Report Slovenia – 2021 Update: Access to territory and pushbacks, May 2022, available here.
[2] See also Council of Europe Commissioner for Human Rights, Slovenia: Commissioner concerned about adoption of amendments to Aliens Act that violate human rights’ 27 January 2017, available here.
[3] Constitutional Court, Application No U-I-59/17, 18 September 2019, available here. For more information on the Constitutional Court decision, see AIDA, Country Report: Slovenia, 2021 Update, May 2022, available here.
[4] Article 10a Foreigners Act.
[5] Article 10a and 10b of the Foreigners Act.
[6] N1, ‘Stranke KUL zahtevajo presojo ustavnosti določb zakona o tujcih’, available in Slovenian here.
[7] The lodged opinion is available in Slovene here.
[8] MMC: Vlada potrdila Poklukarjevo mnenje, da sta Janševa zakona ustavna. Pozivi k odstopu ministra, 20 July 2023, available here.
[9] Constitutional Court decision, U I 52/22, U I 202/23, April 2024, available in Slovene here.
[10] Information provided by the Ministry of Interior in the context of their Right of reply, July 2025.
[11] Infomigrants, Slovenia to dismantle border fence with Croatia, 10 June 2022, available here.
[12] Ptujinfo, ‘Vse manj žične ograje na meji s Hrvaško, skupaj odstranili okoli štiri kilometre žice’, 18 September 2022, available in Slovenian here.
[13] Information provided by the Police, February 2026.
[14] MNZ, Slovenija v soboto ponovno uvaja nadzor na meji s Hrvaško in Madžarsko, 19. 10. 2023, available in Slovenian here.
[15] Official police statistics, available in Slovenian here.
[16] Protocol between the MoI of the Republic of Slovenia, the Police, and the MoI of the Republic of Croatia, the General Police Directorate, on mixed patrolling along the state border between the Republic of Slovenia and the Republic of Croatia, available in English here.
[17] Information provided by the Police, February 2026.
[18] MNZ, Šefi policij treh držav podpisali operativni memorandum o soglasju glede delovanja skupnih patrulj na zunanji hrvaški meji, availbale in Slovenian here.
[19] Information provided by the Police, February 2026.
[20] Official police statistics available in Slovenian here.
[21] Information provided by the Police, February 2026.
[22] For more on pushbacks see AIDA, Country Report: Slovenia, 2021 Update, May 2022, available here.
[23] See for example: Agreement between the Government of RS and the Government of RC on delivery and reception of persons, whose entry or residence is illegal. – International agreements, Official Gazette of RS, no. 8/06., available in English here.
[24] Ombudsperson, Poročilo Varuha človekovih pravic RS o izvajanju nalog državnega preventivnega mehanizma po Opcijskem protokolu h Konvenciji OZN proti mučenju in drugim krutim, nečloveškim ali poniževalnim kaznim ali ravnanju za leto 2019, available in Slovenian here.
[25] Ibid.
[26] Official statistics available here.
[27] Ibid.
[28] Information provided by the Police, February 2026.
[29] Official police statistics, available in Slovenian here.
[30] Decision of Ordinary Court of Rome, N.R.G.56420/2020, 18 January 2021, available here.
[31] Official police statistics, available in Slovenian here.
[32] Nuova Europa, Migrants: Prisco, in force readmissions with Slovenia, 6 December 2022, available here.
[33] N1¸Italija zaradi migracij razglasila izredne razmere, Salvini žuga Sloveniji, 11 April 2023, available here. Delo: V Italiji izredne razmere, Salvini bi begunce vračal v Slovenijo,11 April 2023, available here. Dnevnik: Italija za okrepitev sodelovanja s Slovenijo pri reševanju množičnih migracij, 14 January 2023, available here.
[34] Official police statistics available here.
[35] Border Violence Monitoring Network, Testimonies, available here.
[36] Information provided by UNHCR, January 2026.
[37] The National Preventive Mechanism operates based on the Optional Protocol to the Convention against Torture and other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment.
[38] Official information provided by the Ombudsperson, February 2026.
[39] National Preventive Mechanism, Priporočila iz obiskov (preglednice), available here.
[40] Dnevnik, Vlada sklenila na območju Obrežja postaviti začasne objekte za obravnavo tujcev, 18 January 2024. available in Slovenian here.
[41] National Preventive Mechanism, Priporočila iz obiskov (preglednice), available here.
[42] Official police statistics available here.
[43] Mladina, Vstop prepovedan, available in Slovenian here.
[44] Mladina, Policija mora Mladinini ekipi omogočiti obisk migrantskega centra, available in Slovenian here.
[45] Mladina, Zavetišče za živali ali za ljudi?, available in Slovenian here.
[46] Information provided by the Ombudsperson, February 2026.
[47] Information provided by the Ombudsperson, February 2026.
[48] For more information see AIDA reports for 2019 – 2024, here.
[49] ECCHR, Rohingya child challenges Croatia and Slovenia over violent pushbacks, available here. CRIN, The story of U.F. and the campaign to end child pushbacks at EU borders, available here.
[50] Immigration strategy of the Government of the Republic of Slovenia, March 2024, available here.
[51] UNHCR: Education pathways: Slovenia opens new opportunities for refugee students, available here.
[52] The public call for students can be found here.
[53] Government of the Republic of Slovenia (2022), Resettlement of 50 citizens of Syria or Afghanistan, eligible for refugee status, from Turkey to Slovenia, 19 October 2022, available in Slovenian here.
[54] Official statistics of Ministry of Interior, available in Slovenian here.