The daily Delo reported today that the reason for the cabinet's failure to endorse the report was that some of the cabinet members maintained Slovenia should argue a somewhat different position than so far before the arbitration tribunal.

However, unofficial information obtained by the STA indicates the reason for postponement of a decision in the matter was that the documents debated by the government last week contained two different proposals of the subject matter of the dispute.

Citing unofficial, but "reliable" sources, Delo reported that certain party leaders who pushed for a referendum on the border arbitration agreement almost three years ago maintained that Slovenia should argue the land border in accordance with the "historical border of the municipality of Piran", which ran up to the tip of the cape of Savudrija.

The camp opposing the border arbitration agreement with Croatia in the June 2010 referendum included the Democrats (SDS), the People's Party (SLS) and New Slovenia (NSi), members of the incumbent ruling coalition. The agreement was advocated by the coalition at the time, which consisted of the Social Democrats (SD), the Liberal Democrats (LDS), Zares and the Pensioner's Party (DeSUS).

The government debated last Thursday a report of the Foreign Ministry's task force for arbitration, which included a proposal of the subject matter of the dispute. Since the document is confidential, no details were disclosed except for Minister for Slovenians Abroad Ljudmila Novak confirming that a classified document dealing with arbitration was one of the lengthier points of debate at the session.

Chair of the parliamentary Foreign Affairs Committee Jožef Horvat (NSi) confirmed for the STA today that the government did not adopt the report on the preparation of Slovenia's case in front of the arbitration tribunal. The document needs to be debated by the committee once it has been endorsed by the government.

The Foreign Ministry has also confirmed for the STA that the government debated the report last Thursday, but did not endorse it and was expected to debate it again at the regular session this Thursday. On Monday, the Strategic Council for Foreign Policy was briefed on preparations for arbitration.

Saying that it was unable to discuss the details of the Slovenian document on the subject of the dispute, the ministry highlighted that the procedure before the arbitral court was secret. This is also why the government procedures have been confidential.

The ministry added that 11 February was the deadline for filing the memorandum and that "everything will be done so that Slovenia will send the document and accompanying materials to the arbitral tribunal on time".

The ministry would not comment further, but the STA has learnt from other sources that apart from the "official" proposal of the subject matter of the dispute drawn up by the task force, the documentation presented to the government also included a separate, diverging proposal drawn up by the history subcommittee of the task force.

Due to these two different proposals, the government decided to wait and to urge experts to form a unified position, the STA has learnt unofficially.

Unofficial information obtained by the STA also has it that there is legal grounds enabling the Slovenian government to ask the arbitration court to extend the deadline for the submission of the memorandum but that the government is currently not considering the option.