STA, 10 May 2020 - Slovenians with real estate or boats in Croatia are able to enter the country again without having to go into quarantine for two weeks after about two months of restrictions imposed in order limit the spread of coronavirus. Upon return to Slovenia, they are, however, still required to go into quarantine for seven days.

Croatia said on Saturday that EU citizens would be allowed to enter the country for business and urgent personal matters. Some 110,000 Slovenians have property in Croatia, mostly holiday homes and boats.

To cross into Croatia freely, EU citizens must show a property deed at the border, tell the border police where they will be staying and how long, as well as provide a telephone number.

They are no longer obligated to go into 14-day quarantine but they do have to limit their contact with other to a minimum for two weeks and observe social distancing rules.

They will also have to take their temperature every day and report to the nearest epidemiologist if the temperature exceeds 37.2C or if they show Covid-19 symptoms.

However, Slovenia's rules for entry remain unchanged, even though Slovenia's and Croatia's ministers in charge tourism have agreed on reciprocal measures.

The Slovenian police told the STA on Sunday that the rules remained unchanged in Slovenia and that those entering must undergo a 7-day quarantine. It added that the Health Ministry was responsible for changing the rules.

There are exceptions to this rule, under which normal crossing of the border is allowed for daily commuters, farmers in fields on the other side of Slovenia's national borders, cargo traffic and transit traffic.

STA, 29 April 2020 - The Slovenian and Croatian ministers in charge of tourism, Zdravko Počivalšek and Gari Cappelli, met in Zagreb on Wednesday to discuss the possibilities for relaunching the sector in the face of the coronavirus pandemic. They agreed that a solution should at least be found for Slovenian owners of real estate in Croatia.

Počivalšek, the minister of economic development and technology, noted that around 110,000 real estate units in Croatia were owned by Slovenian citizens and that it would be appropriate if they were able to visit their holiday homes.

Slovenia is optimistic about the possibility that cross-border traffic with Croatia is at least partially re-established, at least by the late summer, if not earlier, under special medical protection conditions, he added.

The press release from the Croatian Ministry of Tourism also said that the Slovenian minister labelled Slovenia and Croatia as traditionally tourism-oriented and friendly countries, with both nations being good hosts.

Počivalšek later told the press that Slovenia and Croatia had a good epidemiological situation, which allowed the countries to think about gradually opening the tourism sector and borders, which would be implemented in two phases.

In the first phase, which would start by the end of May, Slovenian owners of real estate and boats in Croatia and vice-versa would be allowed to cross the border.

In the second phase, which is the most likely to start in the second half of June, travel by other tourists would also be allowed, the Slovenian minister said, adding that he and Cappelli would propose this to their respective governments.

Počivalšek said it was too early to speak about specific dates, as the opening of borders must be based on epidemiological criteria. A protocol for crossing the shared border and accommodation in tourist destinations needs to be laid down first, he added.

"The National Public Health Institute will contact next week the relevant Croatian centre so that the protocol is drafted, because it will not be possible to cross the border without it," the Slovenian minister said.

Cappelli meanwhile said as he met Počivalšek that Slovenians were among the most numerous tourists in Croatia, and the countries cooperate very well in tourism. Croatia last year recorded almost 1.6 million visits and just under 11 million overnight stays by Slovenians.

Cappelli added that the relevant bodies were already discussing the possibilities to open borders and on how to secure all needed measures and procedures so that Slovenian citizens could spend their summer holidays in Croatia.

Slovenian citizens who own real estate and movable property in Croatia are a special issue, he said, adding that a solution was being sought under which they would be able to visit their property while respecting all epidemiological measures.

Cappelli and Počivalšek assessed that such an agreement could serve as a case of good practice in the EU, with Croatia as the current EU presiding country having already launched an initiative for a similar solution to be implemented at the EU level.

The ministers also stressed the need to improve the state of tourism, especially in the light of the availability of funds for the sector in the future financial frameworks of the EU.

They also discussed the current state and options for maintaining the stability of tourism companies and jobs in the sector.

It was agreed that both national tourism organisations should prepare for the coming period together. "So that we jointly promote this party of Europe in remote markets when airline transport gets revitalised," Počivalšek said.

STA, 23 April 2020 - Mayors of 23 border municipalities have called on the National Assembly to back the activation of an emergency clause that grants soldiers limited police powers to patrol the border, citing a likely mass spread of Covid-19 among migrants as the main reason.

While the government has been unable to secure the two-thirds majority in parliament to activate Article 37.a of the defence act, the mayors argue the army "is the only institution left with a sufficient number of equipped and trained staff to protect the southern border".

The mayors, whose petition is dated 20 April but was published by Defence Minister Matej Tonin on Wednesday, are surprised by the reservations concerning an expanded use of the army on the border in a time when Slovenia is trying to contain the coronavirus epidemic.

They fear a larger number of infected persons could enter Slovenia, since the virus is already present among migrants and a major spread among them will be impossible to prevent given their accommodation situation in Europe and Turkey.

The mayors are aware of proposals to activate backup police and retired officers and "do not oppose them, but it has been shown in the past that such measures do not enable the activation of several thousand additional people",

While soldiers are already assisting the police on the border, the mayors believe that not being able to restrict the movement of persons and take part in crowd control along the border - the powers granted by Article 37.a - renders the soldiers meaningless.

The mayors moreover argue that the likelihood of a certain number of police officers falling ill also needed to be taken into account in a situation where there are not enough officers on the border to protect it effectively as it is.

It was Emil Rojc, the mayor Ilirska Bistrica which borders on Croatia, that handed the petition to Tonin. According to the minister, the mayors "claim the people are not afraid of the Slovenian army and want greater security".

The coalition has failed to the get the opposition on board for the temporary activation of the additional army powers. The parties mostly claim there has been no significant uptick in migrant numbers that would warrant this, while some have unsuccessfully proposed restrictions to the extra powers.

The government has however remained determined to push ahead with the plan, also getting the backing of President Borut Pahor, the commander-in-chief of the Slovenian Armed Forces, who visited the southern border area along the Kolpa river in the company of the interior and defence minister last Wednesday.

Interior Minister Aleš Hojs told the press last Thursday that the government plans to nevertheless deploy soldiers if needed, using a different legislative provision that allows a more limited form of deployment.

Article 37.a was adopted at the peak of the migration crisis, in October 2015, and invoked in February 2016 to help police patrol the border. Over 442,000 migrants had entered the country between 16 October 2015 and 1 February 2016.

Police recorded 1,835 illegal crossings of the border in the first three months of 2020, which is 6.5% more than in the same period last year.

However, according to Monday's report by TV Slovenija, the number of illegal crossing recorded halved after the coronavirus epidemic was declared in Slovenia. The total figures for 1 January to 20 April were 2,396 in 2019 and 2,038 in 2020.

STA, 22 March - The Krško Nuclear Power Station (NEK) said on Sunday that a preventive examination of systems and equipment had not detected any damage or impact on operations caused by a severe earthquake in Zagreb that was felt in Slovenia as well. However, Austrian politicians reiterated their calls for the closure of Slovenia's sole nuclear power plant.

The power station, situated roughly 50 kilometres north-west of Zagreb and hence close to the earthquake's epicentre, is operating normally, said the Nuclear Security Administration, adding that no safety alarm had gone off either.

NEK spokeswoman Ida Novak Jerele told the STA that the nuclear plant had various and specific protocols prepared in case of potential natural or other disasters. Nuclear experts performed their tasks and analyses in line with them today as well, she added.

Meanwhile, the Austrian press agency APA reported that cross-partisan calls for the NEK shutdown followed the 5.3 magnitude quake. A number of Austrian politicians said that the plant posed a great risk to the region's security and that its lifespan was coming to an end.

"It all turned out well this time, but what about next time," the governor of the Austrian state of Carinthia, Peter Kaiser, told the media. He said that a transition to alternative energy resources did not have an alternative in the medium-term and long-term.

The Austrian politicians highlighted that NEK had a limited lifespan and would have to be closed by 2023, saying that today's earthquake should be a wake-up call reminding Slovenia to shut down its sole nuclear power plant.

They all agreed that plans to build a new reactor at the power station would have to be dropped. The last time Austria protested over this issue was last year in August when the then Prime Minister Marjan Šarec said that all the efforts had to go into the construction of another reactor.

Slovenia sending quake aid to Croatia

STA, 22 March 2020 - Slovenia has dispatched emergency relief aid to Croatia in response to the neighbouring country's appeal for help via the European civil protection mechanism after a magnitude 5.3 earthquake hit the capital Zagreb on Sunday morning.

In line with a decision taken by the government earlier in the day, Slovenia dispatched ten tents equipped to accommodate up to 80 people with 60 beds and 60 sleeping bags and 20 heating devices.

The lorry carrying EUR 107,000 worth of material aid was sent off from the civil protection facility on the northern outskirts of Ljubljana by Defence Minister Matej Tonin, who called for continued solidarity in Europe in the face of the coronavirus outbreak and natural disasters such as the latest quake.

"That's the least we can do to help our neighbours in these moments of crisis," he said. "If ever, Europe needs solidarity today and this aid is Slovenia's expression of that solidarity."

Prime Minister Janez Janša offered Croatia help in a phone call with his counterpart Andrej Plenković in the morning, as did Foreign Minister Anže Logar in a phone call with his counterpart Gordan Grlić Radman.

Solidarity with Croatia has also been expressed by President Borut Pahor in a longer telephone call with his Croatian opposite number Zoran Milanović.

The quake, which was also felt by people throughout Slovenia, left at least 15 people with injuries, including a gravelly injured 15-year-old girl. It also caused considerable damage to buildings and cars.

Janša tweeted that the quake did not cause any significant damage in Slovenia and the Krško Nuclear Power Station on the border with Croatia has not been affected.

STA, 12 February 2020 - President Borut Pahor said after Wednesday's farewell meeting with Croatian counterpart Kolinda Grabar-Kitarović in Ljubljana that her picking Slovenia for her last visit had not been a coincidence, since Slovenia and Croatia were neighbouring and friendly countries.

And not only that, "it is also that the two of us personally strived very hard" for the two countries to be on friendly terms, Pahor told the press after the meeting.

This was the 39th meeting of the pair, with Pahor noting that after Croatia's unilateral withdrawal from the border arbitration agreement they agreed to nonetheless continue with dialogue and preserve the bridge between the two nations and countries.

Predsednik Republike Borut Pahor na delovnem in neformalnem srečanju s predsednico Republike Hrvaške Kolindo Grabar-Kitarović. To je njen zadnji poslovilni obisk v tujini. pic.twitter.com/7PpHC0niPp

— Borut Pahor (@BorutPahor) February 12, 2020

With the exception of arbitration, which is closed in Slovenia's eyes but not in Croatia's even though it is bound by international law, the two countries have resolved all other fields, Pahor believes.

He thanked the Croatian president, who failed to get re-elected for a second term in January, for choosing Slovenia for her final visit.

According to Grabar-Kitarović, Slovenia was a logical choice, since she always highlighted the friendship and ties between the two countries were far stronger than the issues that remained open, in particular those resulting from the dissolution of Yugoslavia.

She took the opportunity to call on the Slovenian authorities to continue talks with the Croatian side to reach bilateral solutions for all open issues.

Grabar-Kitarović agreed that the two presidents' cooperation had been exemplary, even if they feel differently about open issues, especially arbitration.

"But this does not mean we'll say goodbye without talking - on the contrary, it is necessary to discuss problems to solve them," she said.

STA, 31 January 2020 - The EU Court of Justice has decided that a lawsuit Slovenia has brought against Croatia over its refusal to implement the 2017 border arbitration award is inadmissible, but it said in a decision issued on Friday that both countries nevertheless had to endeavour to resolve this dispute in accordance with international law.

The decision is not surprising given that in December the court's Advocate General Priit Pikamäe proposed that the suit be ruled inadmissible. While his opinion was not binding on the court, it was seen as a strong indication of the court's course of action.

Slovenia had built its case around the argument that Croatia infringes several articles of EU law by refusing to implement the award of a border arbitration tribunal that both countries had pledged would be binding.

The advocate general however argued that "the infringements of EU law of which Slovenia accuses Croatia are ancillary to the issue of determining the boundary between those two states, which is a matter of public international law".

The court's Grand Chamber used exactly the same argument in its decision. It said the arbitration tribunal was founded on the basis of international law, whereby "neither the arbitration agreement nor the arbitration award formed an integral part of EU law".

While it is true that the Act of Accession of Croatia to the EU makes a reference to the arbitration award, which Slovenia has interpreted as a strong argument in favour of its position that the court should take on the dispute, the judges did not see that as making the arbitration award a part of EU law.

They said the reference to the arbitration agreement "could not be interpreted as incorporating into EU law the international commitments made by both member states within the framework of the arbitration agreement".

Despite the inadmissibility, the court indicated that both sides needed to respect the arbitration agreement. It said both countries were required by the EU Treaty to "strive sincerely to bring about a definitive legal solution to the dispute consistent with international law, in order to ensure the effective and unhindered application of EU law in the areas concerned".

In order to achieve this, they may use other means of settling their dispute, including a submission to the Court under a special agreement pursuant to Article 273 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the EU, which gives the court jurisdiction in any dispute between member states "if the dispute is submitted to it under a special agreement between the parties"

Slovenia had brought the case under Article 259 of the EU Treaty.

Mojca Menard, Slovenia's agent in the case, described the decision as a "dangerous precedent" that is not in line with the court's case law and potentially paves the way for violations of EU law by member states by invoking "allegedly open international issues".

She said it raised the question of how the court may act in the event of violations of fisheries regulations or the Schengen Code by Slovenia of Croatia in the border area. "Which country will then be considered an infringer by the EU Commission," she wondered.

The court's decision is final and cannot be appealed. Menard said it "changes nothing" with regard to the arbitration award or for the border line that the arbitration award determines.

Slovenia sees EU Court ruling as vindication of its position

STA, 31 January 2020 - While the EU Court of Justice did not admit Slovenia's lawsuit against Croatia over its refusal to implement the award handed down by the border arbitration tribunal, Slovenia feels vindicated. Foreign Minister Miro Cerar said the ruling showed the court saw the border arbitration award as "valid and binding," which was an important goal.

The decision is "not a legal victory for Croatia," which will be "reminded every week that it must respect the arbitration award," he told the press on Friday after the court handed down its decision.

The court said the border between Slovenia and Croatia is determined with the arbitration award, "yet another proof that Slovenia has been right all along - that Croatia must implement the arbitration award as well," said Cerar.

"No antics by the Croatian side can change this fact, which is finally written down black on white in the [court's] statement," said Cerar, who was confident Croatia would gradually recognise it needs to behave more constructively and in line with the law.

"Slovenia must be patient. The law is on our side. The border has been determined and we have signed it into law. There is no reason for any excitement or rushing, but we have to persistently exert legal pressure."

Cerar, a jurist by profession, also expressed disappointment at the court not having had the courage to decide the matter on substance. "This is a defensive stance about the rule of law, the European legal order as well as international law," he said.

If the judges decided to delve into the substance of the matter, they would be bound to decide that Croatia is violating EU law, he said.

Marko Vrevc, a senior Foreign Ministry official who has worked on the border arbitration brief for years, sees the decision as a confirmation that "implementation of the law as interpreted and implemented by Slovenia is fine, and Slovenia will continue to pursue it."

He was particularly pleased with the court's appeal that the two countries should endeavour to bring about a legal solution to the dispute. "We're now counting on Croatia realising in a foreseeable time that this dialogue is needed on this basis."

The court today announced that it was not within its purview to hear the case, but it nevertheless urged both sides to "strive sincerely to bring about a definitive legal solution to the dispute consistent with international law".

Croatia, on the other hand, interprets the decision as a victory of its arguments. Prime Minister Andrej Plenković thus reiterated Croatia's long-held stance that the dispute should be resolved in bilateral talks and urged Slovenia to engage in "dialogue and bilateral negotiations".

STA, 24 January 2020 - The EU's Court of Justice will announce on 31 January whether it will admit Slovenia's suit against Croatia over the latter's failure to implement the 2017 border arbitration award, according to a posting on the court's website.

In early December 2019, the court's Advocate General Priit Pikamäe proposed to the court to rule the case inadmissible, which came as a surprise to many in Slovenia.

However, while many agreed the opinion did not bode well for the fate of the procedure, the opinion does not prejudge the court's final decision on admissibility.

Slovenia, arguing Croatia infringes several articles of EU law, brought its case to the EU court in July 2018, after the European Commission refused to do do.

In his no-binding opinion, Pikamäe argued that "the infringements of EU law of which Slovenia accuses Croatia are ancillary to the issue of determining the boundary between those two states, which is a matter of public international law".

His understanding is that since the award has not been implemented, the border between Slovenia and Croatia has not been set, which is why Croatia could not be accused of violating relevant provisions of EU law.

The advocate general interpreted Slovenia's suit as an attempt to force Croatia to implement the border decision, which he argued does not fall under the EU's jurisdiction.

If the court agrees with Pikamäe's opinion, the procedure will stop there. If it admits the case fully or partly, the case will be further processed, followed by another opinion by the advocate general and the final ruling.

Slovenia and Croatia signed the arbitration agreement in November 2009, agreeing to task an international tribunal with settling the border after years of futile attempts to determine the course of the border in the aftermath of the break-up of Yugoslavia in 1991.

STA, 6 January 2020 - President Borut Pahor has congratulated Croatia's newly elected President Zoran Milanović over the phone. "I am happy that he reiterated in our conversation that he wanted to improve relations with Slovenia and that this will be one of his priorities," Pahor told the press on Monday.

"I replied that, in this sense, Slovenia has a friend, somebody completely devoted to dialogue, to finding solutions. But added that he must be aware of my position about the arbitration agreement and that these must be taken into account."

He expressed hope that the dialogue will lead to the implementation of the border arbitration decision through agreement of both countries and to benefit of them both.

Pahor said he would attend Milanović's inauguration in early February, to convey the message that Slovenia and Croatia are neighbouring countries and must also be friendly countries.

He believes that his presence at the inauguration will also be that relations between the two countries were mostly good, bar one, very complicated chapter.

However, a tribunal has decided on the issue and the decision will have to be upheld sooner or later, added Pahor.

Milanović was Croatia's prime minister at the time when Croatia withdrew from the border arbitration procedure, declaring it null and void after a wire tap showed inadmissible communication had taken place between Slovenia's arbitration agent and the tribunal member nominated by Slovenia.

The agent and the tribunal member resigned immediately and the tribunal decided that the breach was not such as to warrant a discontinuation of the arbitration process.

Nonetheless, Croatia withdrew and has been refusing to implement the border arbitration decision ever since it was presented in mid-2017.

Pahor, who signed in his capacity as prime minister in 2009 the arbitration agreement with Croatia that led to the arbitration procedure, said today that he would approach his relationship with President Milanović "with open arms and open doors".

Social Democrats (SD) president Dejan Židan also congratulated Milanović, who is a member of the Croatian Social Democrats (SDP).

Židan expressed confidence that the countries will be able to renew friendly relations "based on the rule of law, mutual respect and dedication to common European values".

The Croatian entrepreneur Mate Rimac, 33-year-old founder of Rimac Automobili and producer of the world's first electric supercar, has announced his cooperation with Lastinski inženiring, as reported on Total Croatia News. The Slovenian company is run by Samo Omerzel, a former Minister of Infrastructure, Energy, Transport and Spatial Planning.

The Hyper E-Car Lab, to be based in Novo Mesto, will be used by Rimac Automobili to test battery and propulsion systems for its own cars, and will also offer these services to other companies.

Mate Rimac is quoted as saying: "The testing of electric powertrains and battery systems is a relatively new area and all manufacturers are struggling for testing capacities, and although we have certain capacities for that in the company in Croatia, which we're also upgrading, we still need more capacity. He added that with the rise of electric vehicles this project should help Slovenia to develop its own capacities and skills in this area, with cars already being one of the country’s most important export industries.

Slovenian media reports claim that Rimac and Samo Omerzel have received €3.4 million euros from Slovenia’s Ministry of the Economy to develop the test centre project, which is intended as "a high-tech laboratory, which will allow for the testing of batteries, propulsion motors and electronics for the batteries of high-capacity electric vehicles."

Jump to the Slovenian reaction

STA, 11 December 2019 – The ECJ Advocate General Priit Pikamäe has stated that the EU Court of Justice is not competent to rule Slovenia's case against Croatia over its failure to implement the border arbitration award, having assessed that the case is an international border dispute outside the scope of EU law and thus outside the court's jurisdiction.

"The infringements of EU law of which Slovenia accuses Croatia are ancillary to the issue of determining the boundary between those two states, which is a matter of public international law," the advocate general stated in his opinion, released by the court on Wednesday.

The opinion is not binding on the court. Available statistics show that the court's Grand Chamber, which is deliberating on Slovenia's case, agrees with the advocate general's opinion in about half of the cases.

In its case Slovenia argues that Croatia infringes several articles of EU law by refusing to implement the award as declared by the mutually appointed arbitration tribunal in June 2017.

Slovenia alleges Croatia's infringements of the principles of the rule of law and sincere cooperation, regulation on the Common Fisheries Policy, Schengen rules governing the movement of persons across borders and the directive establishing a framework for maritime spatial planning.

Slovenia has been insisting that its legal action against Croatia is not about the border dispute, which has been resolved through the arbitration award, which is final.

In his opinion, Pikamäe notes that the purpose of an action for failure to fulfil obligations under Article 259 of Treaty on the Functioning of the EU is to obtain a declaration that the conduct of a member state is in breach of EU law and to terminate that conduct.

The advocate general notes that the situations in which the EU is bound by international law are well-established; "it is bound by international conventions concluded by the EU pursuant to the provisions of the Treaties, by international conventions where the EU assumes powers previously exercised by the member states, and by rules of customary international law when the EU exercises its powers".

"International conventions that do not fall within those categories are not acts of the EU and do not bind it," the advocate general finds.

Relying on the court's case law, he points out that "the territorial scope of the Treaties is an objective fact predetermined by the member states which the EU has to accept".

Consequently, he is of the opinion that "delimitation of national territory does not fall within the sphere of competence of the EU or, therefore, of the Court of Justice".

As regards the relationship between, on the one hand, the arbitration agreement and the arbitration award and, on the other hand, EU law, the advocate general says that it does not fall within any of the situations in which the EU is bound by international law.

Concerning the alleged infringement of the value of the rule of law and of the principle of sincere cooperation, he finds that those "are merely ancillary to the issue of delimitation of the land and maritime boundaries between the two member states concerned and that, accordingly, the Court does not have jurisdiction to hear and determine those complaints".

Citing case law, the advocate says that the principle of sincere cooperation has constituted an independent basis for obligations in cases where the EU was party to a mixed agreement or where the obligations being fulfilled arose under the EU Treaties. "However, the conduct at issue does not fall within either of those two situations."

Regarding the alleged failure to fulfil obligations related to the common fisheries policy, border control and maritime spatial planning, Pikamäe says that "Slovenia is relying on the premiss that the boundary has been determined by the arbitration award.

"However (...) the award has not been implemented in the relations between the two member states concerned," so the advocate general "is of the opinion that, from an EU law perspective, the boundary between those two member states has not been established".

Hence, Pikamäe infers that "Slovenia is seeking, by implication, to have the arbitration award implemented, which falls outside the EU's sphere of competence".

His conclusion is that "the alleged infringements of EU law are ancillary to the issue of determining the boundary between Croatia and Slovenia. Determining that boundary is, by its very nature, a matter of public international law in respect of which the Court does not have jurisdiction."

In releasing the advocate general's opinion, the court made a point of noting that the opinion is not binding on the Court of Justice.

"It is the role of the Advocates General to propose to the Court, in complete independence, a legal solution to the cases for which they are responsible."

Now the court's judges will start deliberations on the admissibility of the case. "Judgement will be given at a later date," the release said. Unofficially, it is expected in the first quarter of 2020.

If the court finds the case outside its jurisdiction, the case is closed. However, if it finds the case admissible or partly admissible, another hearing will follow, followed by another opinion of the advocate general and another judgement.

Slovenia rejects Advocate General's opinion

STA, 11 December 2019 - Slovenia did not expect the EU Court of Justice (EJC) advocate general would deem the country's lawsuit against Croatia over EU law violation inadmissible. Foreign Minister Miro Cerar believes the advocate general's reasoning is weak, indicating that the court's decision might be different.

President Borut Pahor said the opinion of the advocate general does not change the fact the border between Slovenia and Croatia had been drawn by a Hague-based international arbitration tribunal.

Meanwhile, Prime Minister Marjan Šarec said that Slovenia remained determined to implement the arbitration decision and that bilateral talks or returning to square one was out of the question.

The Foreign Ministry stressed in a release that Advocate General Priit Pikamäe's position was not binding on the court, noting the procedure at the ECJ would not affect the fact the border arbitration decision from 2017 was valid and binding for Slovenia and Croatia.

Cerar, who called a news conference to comment on the opinion, said the court had so far decided in only five cases brought against a fellow member state and that the court followed the advocate's position in only three of the cases.

He added that the decision had "absolutely no effect on the validity of the arbitration award" and that arguments were on Slovenia's side.

Cerar also highlighted the fact that nobody had ever said Croatia did not have to implement the arbitration award, while many countries had urged it to do so.

When asked whether Slovenia had plan B if the court decided the case was inadmissible, Cerar said plan B was not needed because "there is plan A, which is completely clear: Croatia must implement the arbitration award".

The lawsuit brought against Croatia is in no direct relation to the border arbitration as such, but discusses violations of EU law committed by Croatia, the ministry said in a release.

Slovenia has taken measures and adopted legislation to implement the border arbitration decision, while Croatia is yet to fulfil this obligation, it added.

Pahor and Šarec commented on the matter following a tradition December meeting of the president, the prime minister, the presidents of both chambers of president.

Pahor stressed Slovenia would insist on setting up a Slovenian-Croatian demarcation commission which will set the land border, as envisaged in the arbitrtaion award.

Šarec explained Slovenia had called on Croatia to appoint its members to the commission four times now, but Croatia had failed to respond.

Slovenia's agent Maja Menard meanwhile believes Pikamäe ignored Slovenia's claim and was deciding as if Slovenia had expected the EU court to define the border. On the basis of Croatia's refusal to implement the arbitration award, he also argued the border had not been drawn.

Menard is however reserved in any further comments, saying she must read the full opinion first. This was also echoed by Marko Vrevc of the Foreign Ministry, who said that the advocate general's position was not what Slovenia had expected.

"Slovenia is not taking Croatia to court because the course of the border was unclear but because it realised Croatia was hindering Slovenia from following EU law," Vrevc said, expressing belief that the Luxembourg-based court would decide differently than Pikamäe.

The opposition New Slovenia (NSi) regretted the advocate's position and hopes the ECJ will decide differently. A decision by a panel of judges is expected in a few months' time.

On the other hand, head of the National Party (SNS) Zmago Jelinčič said Slovenia displayed a poor understanding of international law.

Democrats (SDS) head Janez Janša tweeted the Slovenian government had known the outcome in advance and that Cerar, who was prime minister when Slovenia decided to sue Croatia, should cover the expenses from his own pocket.

When asked whether Cerar should be held responsible if thecourt follows the advocate's position, Šarec said the decision to take Croatia to court was a political one, taken after consultations of parliamentary party leaders.

Speaker Dejan Židan was very happy that the prime minister, the president, the upper chamber president and himself displayed complete unity in the face of today's development.

Alojz Kovšca, the National Council president, meanwhile, warned the border dispute between Slovenia and Croatia was a bad signal for other nations with unresolved border issues in the Balkans.

On the other hand, the opposition Left believes Slovenia should take a different approach instead of taking Croatia to court. MP Matej Vatovec reiterated the party's position the lawsuit was barely legitimate.

The coalition Alenka Bratušek Party (SAB) said Slovenia must persist in getting Croatia to implement the arbitration award even if the court decided the lawsuit was indeed inadmissible.

The SAB, as well as the coalition Social Democrats (SD) underlined the advocate general's position had no bearing on the validity of the arbitration award, which remains a binding element of international law.

All our stories on the border dispute can be found here