Slovak News Back to the news
Hlina Brings Sheep to Parliament to Protest at MPs' Behaviour
Tuesday 02 March 2010 Zoom in | Print page
Bratislava, March 2 (TASR) - Reacting to a protest held in front of the Parliament building by civil activist Alojz Hlina, Slovak National Party (SNS) parliamentary caucus chairman Rafael Rafaj said on Tuesday that he won't provide publicity for mud, clay or any other sculpture from another material. [an allusion to Hlina's name, which means 'clay' in the Slovak language - ed. note].
Hlina brought ten sheep to the front of the Parliament building in order to point out that the Slovak people aren't a stupid flock, even if some MPs think they are. He also protested against MPs drinking alcohol at Parliament, and held up a sign stating: 'We aren't sheep. We're aren't a stupid flock. We want our money from the emission quotas back. We don't want drunkards in Parliament'.
Rafaj said that Hlina's conduct reminds him of "a small animal that's rather slow-witted, but reacts with a loud 'hee-haw' when it finally understands what's going on". He reiterated that he refuses to provide publicity for Hlina, adding that Hlina should look at the way he meets his tax obligations first.
Former defence minister Martin Fedor (SDKU-DS) expressed his pleasure at the fact that democracy is still alive and well in Slovakia, with everyone free to express their views - even in unusual ways at times. "I've got no alcohol problems, nor would I ever treat someone like a sheep," he said.
"Parliament represents an institution of a certain level, but I'm not sure what Mr. Hlina's level is," Parliamentary Vice-Chairman Tibor Cabaj (LS-HZDS) told TASR. Cabaj added that he can envision any kind of protest, but "if someone thinks he's a know-it-all ... there are lots of people in psychiatric hospitals who think that they're irreplaceable know-it-alls with solutions to everything."
All rights reserved. Any publishing or further dissemination of press releases and photographs from TASR's resources without TASR's prior written approval constitutes a violation of the Copyrights Act.
