Ljubljana, 10 December (STA) - Corruption is one of the key problems in Slovenia, a panel of jurists agreed on Tuesday as they received the recognitions from the law consultancy portal IUS Info, whose users recently chose them as the ten most influential jurists in 2013.

In the debate, moderated by Human Rights Ombudsman Vlasta Nussdorfer, who is also on the top ten list revealed earlier this month, law professor Miro Cerar pinned the guilt to political parties, who have been in power for more than 15 years. He said the parties had taken part in or allowed different criminal acts.

Cerar also highlighted the role of lobbies and other informal networks, while adding that even jurists were partly to blame for being too naive, passive or scared and allowing these trends to develop.

Some may have even written laws in order to help legalise systemic corruption, he said.

Ernest Petrič, who recently ended his term as Constitutional Court president, added that the fight against systemic corruption would only start when Slovenia cut the roots feeding it.

He noted that the high level of state ownership in companies strongly supported corruption, while Slovenia inherited a weak legal culture, similar to most transition countries.

Moreover, Petrič said that to overcome the crisis, Slovenians would need to overcome the negativism and hate that are overwhelming in the society and the tendency to deny the achievements of others.

Prosecutor Jože Kozina meanwhile focused on the whole in the Slovenian banking system, pointing out that political elites were often involved, while "certain people were also favoured" out of fear of foreign investors.

The debate further covered a wide array of different topics, including the election system, with maritime law expert Marko Pavliha, who has been named the most influential jurist for several years, advocating a mixed voting system.

Pavliha prefers the German-style system as it allows people to vote for concrete people, not only for parties.

The "partikracy serves only itself and high political figures, who actually only swap functions among themselves," he argued.