Protection of Persons in the Republic of Slovenia

Based on all the findings, I can conclude that the Republic of Slovenia is still a very safe country. This is naturally reflected in the level of security culture amongst the population. Likewise, ** the training of security personnel, at least in the private sector, is still at a ** very low level. I substantiate this with the fact that national programmes are theoretically well designed, but the implementation of training is of very poor quality. Thus, I can conclude that much still needs to be done to meet the high criteria and standards set by the legislator when preparing legislation in the field of security at all levels in the Republic of Slovenia. Private entities and the state should come together and ** help each other mutually**.

Problem

Based on all the findings, I can conclude that the Republic of Slovenia is still a very safe country. This is naturally reflected in the level of security culture amongst the population. The security culture of the population is very low.

For the most part, the mentality is still such that nothing can happen to me. At the state level, there are quite a few projects, published warnings and brochures that warn how to live more safely. However, people rarely reach for this type of literature. Raising security culture means not only increasing personal safety, but also fewer accidents or harmful events, thereby reducing risk.

By reducing the risk of unpleasant events occurring, we also reduce costs and lower the possibility of lawsuits. Therefore, if everyone consciously decided to act safely and educate themselves in this direction, awareness could consequently also increase that we ourselves must do a great deal for our own safety, as well as the safety of our loved ones, the immediate and wider environment, and the state as such. If the state, by which I mean all citizens, behaved preventively and with security awareness, the security situation in the wider region would consequently also improve.

I believe that quite a lot of effort will still be needed for security culture to reach a satisfactory level.

Solution and Method

Likewise, the training of security personnel, at least in the private sector, is still at a ** very low level**. I substantiate this with the fact that national programmes are theoretically well designed, but the implementation of training is of very poor quality. Internal training in companies engaged in private security is mostly merely formalised. Rarely does any company truly implement an internal training programme as it should be.

Likewise, supervision of the implementation of internal training is carried out extremely superficially and inadequately. Furthermore, programmes for internal training are written solely to comply with legislation. Supervision of the operation of security services in the private sector is more or less 'looking for a needle in a haystack'. By this I mean that internal supervision takes place only to the extent that legislation is complied with. The Inspectorate of the Republic of Slovenia for Internal Affairs carries out supervision in order to be able to issue a fine.

As regards police supervision of security guards in the field, it is mostly correct and fulfils the role prescribed by legislation for the implementation of police supervision over security services.

Results

Thus, I can conclude that much still needs to be done to meet the high criteria and standards set by the legislator when preparing legislation in the field of security at all levels in the Republic of Slovenia. Private entities and the state should come together and help each other mutually. Both in the field of organisation and in the field of unfair competition and dumping.

The fact is also that security guards of all types are senselessly exposed not only to security-unfavourable situations, but also to other risks due to disconnectedly written legislation. The very example that a private sector security guard is legally obliged to arrive at the scene of an intervention within a maximum of twenty minutes for catering establishments, but has no possibility of using a siren and blue light and has no priority whatsoever in traffic, is ** in an extremely worse position** compared to the police. A security guard who misses this deadline can be penalised by the inspector.

Likewise, the legal entity is also penalised, as is the responsible person of the legal entity. The police, however, arrive at the scene in the shortest possible time, which in practice can also mean one hour or more, and are not penalised for this. Why is this a security risk?

Simply put, the security guard will usually have to commit quite a few offences in order to arrive at the scene on time. Likewise, he is more nervous and the level of stress is higher than would be necessary. This also belongs in the consideration of raising security culture.

The first in line who should take action to raise security culture in these cases is the legislator. A security guard will never be paid so poorly that he could not work even worse. This means that satisfied security personnel are truly those we can rely on. [deof_form download_text="DN-žnidarič-mitja.pdf" download_url="http://academia.eu/news/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/DN-žnidarič-mitja.pdf"]