In 2023 and 2024, the approved budget of the Office did not reflect its actual needs. The Office of the Constitutional Court was established on 1 January 1993, following the establishment of the Court as one of the pillars of the newly independent Slovak Republic. It provides professional support primarily to Constitutional Court judges and ensures the organisational, human resources, economic, administrative and technical operation of the Court. Between 2023 and 2025, the Constitutional Court had an average of 121 employees.

In particular, the Office’s 2023 budget did not cover expenditure arising from contractual commitments made in 2022 to expand and modernise its information system. These investments were linked to Slovakia’s commitments under a national project aimed at improving the efficiency of public administration networks and data sharing.

Between 2023 and 2025, the Office’s budget was subsequently increased by 6% to 24%, with an average of 17 budgetary measures adopted each year. This meant that the Office could not be certain to what extent the Ministry of Finance would approve the necessary budget adjustments during the year, potentially affecting its ability to carry out its tasks.

“It is not appropriate to leave independent state institutions in financial uncertainty. Every budget chapter—whether the Constitutional Court, the President’s Office or Parliament—has clearly defined tasks and priorities that must be supported by a realistic budget. Instead of focusing solely on fulfilling their constitutional missions, key institutions are forced to devote significant attention to securing funding for their statutory activities and contractual commitments needed to ensure their operations,” said Jaroslav Ivančo, Vice-President of the SAO.

The SAO found no significant breaches of generally binding legislation in the management and administration of the Office’s budget chapter. “The Court’s Office can be considered a responsible steward of public resources. Its internal control system is appropriately designed for the nature and scale of its activities and can generally be considered functional and reliable,” Ivančo added.

As part of its strategic audit programme, the SAO regularly examines the management and functioning of constitutional institutions. It has audited, among others, the Office of the President, the Office of the National Council, the Office of the Supreme Administrative Court and, most recently, the Office of the Constitutional Court. In the coming period, auditors also plan to examine other independent institutions, including the Commissioner for Children and the Office of the Public Defender of Rights.

The audit also raised the question of whether it is efficient for smaller institutions to rely exclusively on their own capacities for certain support services, particularly in cybersecurity. The Constitutional Court needed a separate building to establish a backup workplace. It acquired a building in Turčianske Teplice, which is currently being reconstructed.

In light of the identified risks, the SAO proposed that the Constitutional Law Committee of the National Council of the Slovak Republic recommend that the Government initiate a security project to establish a shared backup IT facility for independent constitutional institutions. Such a solution could strengthen their protection while enabling more efficient information and cybersecurity management at the central state level.

As part of the audit, the SAO also assessed the status and development of the Office’s assets, including receivables and liabilities, during 2023–2025. The value of state assets managed by the Office increased by approximately €1 million, exceeding €23.7 million at the end of 2025.

Most of the increase resulted from the acquisition of software, which accounted for approximately 81% of total expenditure, as well as the purchase of passenger vehicles, modernisation and reconstruction of buildings managed by the Office and the reconstruction of the backup workplace in Turčianske Teplice.

Following the Supreme Administrative Court, the Constitutional Court is another state institution that can serve as an example of good practice. The SAO identified no systemic deficiencies or risks in its management.