A TV panel (Apr. 22) shared the view that the recent disclosure of alleged collaborators and monitored persons of UDBA was inappropriate, yet it posed no threat to Slovenia's stability. As historian Jerca Vodušek Starič told TV Aktualno, the public has the right to know what its politicians are doing. She therefore does not consider the publication of the data about incumbent public figures on the web a violation of the personal data act. Ljuba Dornik Šubelj of the Slovenian Archives explained that out of a total of one million alleged names that have recently appeared on the Internet, files of only some 3,000 people exist. A record of a person from the list means nothing, said Drago Ferš, the director of the Slovenian Intelligence and Security Agency (SOVA) from 1993 to 2000. As he explained, this is "merely a record which also changed over time, it is not a written file which would say who exactly that person was and what they did". According to Dornik Šubelj, the Slovenian Archives received the documents of security and intelligence services in the period from 1991 to 2000. "We first received files of some 860 deceased people, and then an additional 2,000, which makes it around 3,000 files altogether in hard copies," said Šubelj.

Delo (Apr. 25) says the government should have probably dismissed Lajovic as Slovenia's honorary consul. The post of an honorary consul is not a professional post. Less strict rules apply for them and their duties should be fulfilled for honour, not for the money. The post is not connected to diplomatic privileges; there is no such level of protection as for a professional consul and there is no immunity from criminal prosecution. An honorary consul does not represent a country. However, according to the Vienna Convention, an honorary consul protects interests of a country and its citizens. The main question therefore, is not whether Lajovic acted against the law on the protection of personal data, but whether his act is compatible with the principle of an honorary consul's responsibilities - to protect the interests of a country, and not to jeopardise them.

Dnevnik (Apr. 23) also believes it would be somewhat unusual if the government did not respond to Lajovic's "provocation". Lajovic finally lived to see the moment when he can provide lessons in democracy to his homeland and present accusations against Slovenia's leading political elite, which is supposed to be the successor of the former totalitarian regime. He has obviously established that he does not have much time anymore to wait for his dream to come true, namely that of replacing the liberal-left government by a government of a different colour - in this case obviously one run by the Social Democrats (SDS). The publication of files is a well known tool of Slovenian political intrigue, the aim of which has not always been clear. Instead of resolving the issue back in 1991, the story of secret dossiers has been recurrent, each time taking on a bigger and more grotesque form. The reason may be the fact that some politicians were indeed collaborators of UDBA, which can be relatively easy to cover up by publishing new dossiers over and over again.

Mag says the UDBA files should have been brought to light in 1990. "The Internet records - which experts right away confirmed were authentic, whereupon police sowed the seeds of doubt as to their authenticity - show that Slovenia has not ceased to be a para-police para-state. The consequences of this notion are as terrifying as was the Internet event itself surprising; it pleased numerous freedom-loving Slovenians and angered as many Slovenians with dirty hands." The paper also criticises the ban on access to the udba.net web page and labels it "censorship". "Man's right to be informed about who was their hangman is superior to the manipulation of protective legislation. The lists are not fiction, they are a snapshot of reality in 1988."

Censorship on the Internet is only known in a few totalitarian states, such as China or Iran, says the Koper-based daily Primorske Novice (Apr. 19). It is not difficult to guess what foreigners will think of the latest Slovenian version of censorship on the Internet. Politically - particularly in terms of international politics - the news is really a disaster, as it shows the country as a skilfully masked parliamentary democracy in which, even now when it is entering the EU and NATO, old personnel from totalitarian times truly hold the levers of power. The measure is a disaster tactically, because the censorship has only raised interest in the dusty, actually desperately boring, bureaucratic lists of names. Among them, one can probably find those that are responsible for the censorship, directly or indirectly. Technically, the measure is stupid, as a skilful Internet user can avoid it easily. The most unbelievable things can be found on the Internet, from Mein Kampf to lists of alleged collaborators of the former East German secret police Stasi. Yet nowhere in Europe has access to such sites been blocked. Slovenia is the first country to do so, and what is going on is shameful.

The news that the Slovenian president has found himself on the list of collaborators of the former Yugoslav secret police is most unpleasant, even if it were only an allegation, Mladina notes (Apr. 22). The man who arranged for the documents to be published on the net is Honorary Consul Dušan Lajovic, appointed by Janez Drnovšek when he was still prime minister. Lajovic is a supporter of the Slovenian "spring" (centre-right) parties. "Yet it would be too simple to say that the release of the records was an orchestrated campaign of the 'spring-opposition'", because Lajovic seems to have harmed right-wing politicians, who are on friendly terms with Drnovšek, as much as he did those in power. Secret files work only as long as they do not become public; the proof of this is that the names of some influential members of the "spring camp" also appear in the files. There are dirty details behind every file and these may be even more unpleasant than the mere fact of the file's existence. Yet the logic of the opposition's operation requires matters to be cleared up and, in case of the files' authenticity, a demand for the president's resignation and an early election.