"Lex Haščák" - which is named after the main partner of the investment firm Penta, and mainly aims to prohibit cross ownership in healthcare - has stirred the political waters a hundred days before the general elections. Proposed by the extra-parliamentary Progresivne Slovensko (PS)-Spolu coalition, and supported by three other opposition parties, it also aims to make it illegal to own media and do business with the state at the same time. It targets Penta, which currently owns the second largest health insurance company Dôvera, a network of hospitals and outpatient facilities, as well as a pharmacy chain. It also owns stock in two major dailies and a business magazine. The bill is due to be debated at the upcoming parliamentary session.
"Lex Haščák is a courageous, yet realistic and feasible proposal to curb the power of the oligarchs who have been abusing their power and money against the public interest for years," said PS leader Michal Truban - hinting at owner Jaroslav Haščák, whose voice allegedly appears in recordings of conversations with a number of politicians regarding commissions from state-related business in 2005 and 2006. Head of the opposition Freedom and Solidarity (SaS) party Richard Sulik didn't rule out support for the draft. However, he added that the law "shouldn't run the risk of arbitration for Slovakia." The draft bill is considered "mere pre-election populism" by the head of the senior governing Smer-SD party and former Prime Minister Robert Fico. "It would be credible if it was aimed at all financial groups as a whole and not only one, namely Penta," he said, noting that Tuesday will most likely mark the beginning of the final parliamentary session of the current electoral term, which is why the bill doesn't stand a good chance of making it to its second and third readings.
Penta regards the legislative proposals as "unconstitutional, and an inappropriate and unjustified interference in property rights," according to its spokesperson Gabriel Toth. The company considers the ban on cross ownership in healthcare as discriminatory, as it only concerns private investors, ignoring the state and public sector. According to Penta, the bill doesn't clearly define which types of media should be concerned, including online media. It also remains unclear why the bill is only aimed at companies doing business with the state because the threat of other companies interfering in editorial independence also exists. Toth added that three law firms that Penta has approached regarding this matter have confirmed these claims via their analyses.
