The Human Rights Ombudsman condemns the repeated vandalism of the Mariborka bookshop in Maribor, as well as the homophobic comments directed at the young Slovenian athlete Mitja Zubin on account of his presumed sexual orientation. The Ombudsman points out that these two incidents serve as a serious reminder that humiliation, exclusion and hostility towards LGBTIQ+ people in Slovenian society have not disappeared and must be responded to clearly, swiftly and consistently. The Ombudsman also expresses support for Mitja Zubin, the Mariborka bookshop staff and the VigeVageKnjige publishing house, as well as all LGBTIQ+ individuals facing insults, threats, discrimination or violence. Victims and witnesses are encouraged to document such behaviour and report it to the relevant authorities.

The repeated vandalism of the bookshop, which is recognized as a space for culture, critical thought, dialogue, and support for minority rights and equality, goes beyond the issue of material damage. The circumstances of the incident raise serious concerns about a possible motive of intolerance or hatred. It is the task of the competent authorities to determine the specific motive and any criminal liability, and the Ombudsman urges them to conduct a thorough, effective and timely investigation into all the circumstances of the incident. Particular attention must also be paid to any possible hate motive.

The Ombudsman previously examined the authorities' response to several reported attacks on the Mariborka bookshop in 2025, including threats, verbal abuse, an attempted physical assault and the removal and damage to a rainbow flag. Following the Ombudsman’s intervention, the Prosecutor General ordered two expert reviews. These identified irregularities and inconsistencies, including the premature closure of cases. This was followed by the provision of guidance and case studies to public prosecutors during training sessions. This demonstrates that practices can be improved and that the findings must be consistently taken into account.

If a further attack occurs, it is necessary to ascertain whether it forms part of a broader pattern of conduct directed against the same place and community. Incidents should not be assessed in isolation if their sequence, choice of target, or manner of execution indicates targeted action.

Similarly, the homophobic comments directed at the athlete Mitja Zubin on social media following his performance for the Slovenian national team are unacceptable. Sexual orientation — whether actual or presumed — must not be used as an insult or a means of humiliation. Athletes representing their country should be judged on their performance and sporting achievements, rather than being subjected to attacks based on personal characteristics or other people’s perceptions. The Ombudsman welcomes the Slovenian Athletics Federation's swift and clear response and the removal of the offensive comments.

"As Human Rights Ombudswoman, I want to make this clear today: the rights of LGBTIQ+ people are not special rights. They are human rights. The right to dignity. The right to safety. The right to equal treatment. The right not to have to hide one’s identity for fear of the consequences," said Dr Simona Drenik Bavdek, Human Rights Ombudswoman, at this year’s Pride Parade.

For many years, the Human Rights Ombudsman has consistently warned of the deterioration of standards in public discourse and the dangers of hate speech. "This is not merely innocent rhetoric. It is not merely an ‘opinion’. When we dehumanize people, portraying them as a threat or as inferior, we create an environment in which discrimination and violence become more acceptable. History teaches us that violence almost never begins with actions. It begins with silent thoughts that first manifest themselves in words. Hate speech undermines the dignity of individuals, increases insecurity among vulnerable groups, and erodes trust in democratic institutions. Therefore, the response to it must be decisive, systematic and responsible. This must not only involve punishing the most serious forms, but also promoting education, dialogue and the clear message that discrimination has no place in a democratic society," warned Dr Drenik Bavdek, adding that social media spreads such messages rapidly and on a massive scale.

Freedom of expression is a cornerstone of a democratic society, but it does not constitute a licence to make threats, incite violence, or infringe upon the dignity of others. While not every homophobic insult necessarily constitutes a criminal offence under Article 297 of the Criminal Code (KZ-1), this does not mean that it is socially acceptable in any way.

The Ombudsman emphasizes the importance of distinguishing between criminal hate speech and hate crime. Article 297 of the KZ-1 concerns the public incitement of others to hatred, violence or intolerance. A direct attack on a person, community or place on the basis of a personal characteristic must also be assessed in terms of possible criminal offences, such as threats, violent conduct, violation of equality, or damage to property with a hate motive, as set out in Article 49 of the KZ-1.

An attack on a rainbow flag, for example, is therefore not merely a question of its material value. As a symbol of identity and belonging to the LGBTIQ+ community, deliberately damaging or removing it may convey a message of exclusion and infringe dignity, freedom of expression and freedom of association.

In the Sabalić v. Croatia and Hanovs v. Latvia cases, the European Court of Human Rights emphasized that violence motivated by homophobia requires particularly careful consideration by the authorities. If the element of hatred is overlooked and the attack is dismissed as a minor disturbance of public order, this may reinforce a sense of impunity and erode LGBTIQ+ people’s trust in the protection provided by the state.

An analysis of prosecutorial practice under Article 297 of the Criminal Code (KZ-1) for the period 2008–2018 found that LGBTIQ+ people were the most frequent targets among 115 cases with an identifiable target. Twenty-three cases were linked to them, the highest number among all personal characteristics. Approximately half of these cases targeted gay men, while the remainder were more broadly directed against the LGBTI+ community, including Pride parades and the rainbow flag. Eleven cases involving LGBTI+ people resulted in a conviction or deferred prosecution – the highest number among all the groups concerned. The analysis also highlights dismissed cases involving violent incitement against LGBTI+ people. Most of the inciting statements were posted on online forums and social media. However, the number of reports does not necessarily reflect the actual prevalence of such incidents, as not all cases are reported.

The Ombudsman is calling on website and social media operators to implement clear rules, ensure prompt moderation, and provide accessible reporting mechanisms. Public office-holders, the media, sports organizations, schools and others who help shape the public sphere have a particular responsibility to not normalize humiliation and to respond to attacks without downplaying or relativizing them.

Diversity is not a threat, but a source of societal richness. “When we defend the rights and freedoms of the most vulnerable, we defend the freedom of us all. And when we protect the dignity of every human being, we strengthen the foundations of democracy,” concluded the ombudswoman.