Navigation path


Regulated profession

Back to homepage Back to previous screen

konservatorsko-restavratorski tehnik (Slovenia)

  • Proportionality information

    1. Have you examined whether the requirements under your national legal system are
    directly or indirectly discriminatory on the basis of nationality or residence?
       The requirements under our national legal system are neither directly nor indirectly discriminatory on the basis of nationality or residence. The requirements to pursue the profession are based on the professional qualification.

    2. Which of the following overriding reasons relating to the general interest justifies the measure(s)?
    • Public policy
    • Preservation of cultural, historical, archaeological and artistic heritage

    3. What specific risks or benefits have you identified that your measure(s) is designed to, respectively, minimise or maximise?

       Please try to be specific in describing the nature of the risks/benefits you have identified
       Where you have selected more than one overriding reason relating to the general interest in question 2 please be sure to address each of these in your response. Wherever possible please include evidence.

       Our measures are intended to provide high quality standard of cultural heritage protection for future generations and preservation of material evidence of the human and animal world. The measures have to comply with the ICOM Code of Ethics in terms of institutions being open, accessible for the public, considered for non-commercial use and in the service of the community and its sustainable development.

    4. How specifically do your measures operate to minimise the risk(s) or maximise the benefit(s) identified in question 3?

       When addressing this question please try to explain how the measures prevent the risks or guarantee the benefits.
       Where you have selected more than one overriding reason relating to the general interest in question 2 please be sure to address each of these in your response. Wherever possible please include evidence.

       Highly qualified cultural heritage protection professionals are able to connect and use the gained knowledge in complex, no determined and diverse circumstances.  Professionals are equipped with the competences needed in daily contact with visitors of different ages, levels of knowledge and needs, and are able to provide users with specific materials and information on the protection cultural heritage.

    5. In so far as you are able, please provide information that you have gathered regarding the concrete effects of the measure(s).

       For example, through impact assessments or information gathered during implementation or review of a measure. Member States who have recently undergone reforms may in particular be able to contribute helpfully to this field. Where you are able to provide cost-benefit analyses this would be particularly valuable.
       Information on whether the measures indeed successfully prevented risks from being realised (e.g. the number of sanctions imposed, a drop in transgressions since the measure was introduced or consequences from previous modifications of the regulation) would equally be helpful.
       Where you have selected more than one overriding reason relating to the general interest in question 2 please be sure to address each of these in your response. You may also wish to include evidence on consumer satisfaction or other measurements of the impact.

        No specific analyses regarding the effects of profession regulation have been made because some level of its regulation has been present since the beginning of the museum public service. Public service of the cultural heritage protection is legally regulated and has traditionally taken into account international expert guidelines, recommendations and standards for its operation. The basis for the EU heritage protection are the recommendations of the Council of Europe and the umbrella International Council of Museums (ICOM), which is considered the most important museum non-governmental organization.

    6. Is the general interest objective you indicated in question 2 pursued in a consistent and systematic manner?.

       In approaching your response to this question please consider examples where you have addressed similar risks for comparable professions, not necessarily within the same sector. Is the approach you have adopted in this particular profession comparable or distinct from such similar cases and why?

       Yes. The general interest objective is pursued in a consistent and systematic manner; the regulation measures are comparable for all professions in museums and organizations for cultural heritage protection.

    7. Please explain in how far the degree of complexity or the nature of the activities
    which are reserved justify that these activities can be exclusively performed by professionals possessing a specific professional qualification?

       For example: when the tasks are essentially of a straightforward nature (such as preparing and printing pay slips etc.), or involve essentially the execution of instructions, specific professional aptitudes should not be required.

       Because of high complexity of competences required for pursuing this profession holding of specific knowledge, skills and abilities is necessary. The complexity of qualification includes specialist knowledge of the field and other special qualification to work with different groups of users in the field of cultural heritage protection, as well as general competences in the fields of co-operation with working and social environment, organizational and leading competences.  

    8. Where you have indicated several measures in place in the screening tab,
    have you reviewed the cumulative effect of all these measures on professional activities?

       If not, why not?
       If yes, please outline for us how you approached assessing this issue as well as the results and conclusions or any learning you drew from this. Where possible please include evidence.

       The review of the cumulative effect of the measures has little or no sense since all measures constitute an entire qualification.

    9. Have you considered the use of alternative mechanisms to achieve your objective(s)?

       Please briefly explain. Where you have selected more than one option, please be sure to address each of these in your response.

       No, we have not considered the use of alternative mechanisms because the current regulation is appropriate.

    10. Conclusion

       Following your internal examination of this regulated profession, which of the following have you concluded?

    •    Maintain current system

       Explain where relevant:

       The current regulation is appropriate.

    11. Any other comments?
Each country is responsible for updating information, on its regulated professions, competent authorities and statistics.
The Commission cannot be held responsible for the accuracy of the information. However, if errors are brought to its attention, the Commission undertakes to correct them, if deemed appropriate.

The Commission is in the process of updating some of the content on this website in the light of the withdrawal of the United Kingdom from the European Union. If the site contains content that does not yet reflect the withdrawal of the United Kingdom, it is unintentional and will be addressed.