The triggering of the special system would require the Interior Ministry to establish that migrations have become a threat to law and order or internal security in the country. The ministry would then ask the government to petition parliament to adopt special measures for a six-month period with the possibility of extension in a pre-defined area.

The National Assembly would decide on such a motion with a majority of all MPs. The original proposal envisaged that a two-thirds majority was needed, but this was toned down at the request of the centre-right opposition.

The measures to be triggered by the motion would involve refusal to admit aliens who do not meet entry criteria, and the expulsion of aliens who have already entered the country unlawfully.

If such aliens expressed the intention of asking for asylum, police would ID them; this requirement is supposed to address concerns about the lack of individual treatment of asylum requests expressed by many human rights groups.

But notwithstanding the law on international protection, such requests would be rejected by police as unfounded unless there were systemic shortcomings with regard to asylum in the EU country from which such a person entered.

Such systemic shortcomings would include the risk of torture, inhumane or degrading behaviour.

Any appeals against the rejection of asylum requests would be processed by the Interior Ministry.

The provisions of the bill would not apply if asylum requests were made by persons of poor health or unaccompanied minors.

Parliament would also be in charge of rolling back the measure upon the ministry's assessment that the threat had passed. An absolute majority would be necessary to terminate the measures.

The bill was confirmed with a majority of 47 to 18 votes, thanks to the support of the centre-right opposition, indicating that the legislation remains as controversial as it has been since its inception.

Several high-profile coalition MPs, including Speaker Milan Brglez, voted against along with the centre-left opposition; Brglez said the motion "signed violation of human rights into law". The missing votes were provided by the centre-right opposition.

Indeed, the Democrats (SDS) and New Slovenia (NSi) wanted stricter rules and berated the government for dragging its feet with the legislation.

The SDS even wanted to extract the National Assembly out of the decision-making process altogether, arguing that the law would hamstring future governments; in the end, it accepted the NSi amendment that reduced the required majority.

The vote caps months of talks, for the most time behind tightly shut doors, that focused predominantly on whether the legislation was compatible with the Constitution and international treaties, and if not, how it could be corrected.

International organisations, including UNICEF, UNHCR and the Council of Europe, in particular objected to the initial proposal that would have denied asylum seekers any kind of individual processing of their claims. It remains to be seen whether the system now put in place will placate them.

These concerns have been brushed aside by the government, in particular by Interior Minister Vesna Györkös Žnidar, whose department authored the law and who has been its staunchest advocate.

The minister defended the legislation in parliament today as "an exceptional measure in the event Slovenia is so overburdened it can no longer implement the act on international protection".

She said Slovenia was not inclined to waiting for the situation to get so bad it would be forced to declare a state of emergency, echoing the government's position that Slovenia may not become a pocket for refugees travelling north and getting stuck on the Austrian border.

"Such passive waiting for a state of emergency is inadmissible and even constitutionally contentious. A responsible government must do everything to prevent a state of emergency from occurring," she said today.