41725 | 19 May 2025 | 15:23

There is also a decision by the Constitutional Court, which two years ago clearly regulated that until a new judiciary inspectorate is elected, the current composition should continue to function

Bulgaria has been making judicial reforms for three decades.

Six amendments to the 1991 Constitution have been related to changes in the judicial system.

First, we reformed our justice system to become members of NATO and the EU, then to lift the "monitoring" over our country and to join the Schengen and Eurozone. Hundreds of millions of dollars and as many euros have been spent by analysts, judges, lawyers, lobbyists, politicians, civic activists, and professional protesters, in order for Themis to start working.

A judicial inspectorate was created to monitor corruption among magistrates and to motivate them to resolve cases more quickly. The Supreme Judicial Council - the highest governing body of the system, has undergone several transformations - it used to be functioning inconsistently, but now it has become a permanent body. There used to be one for prosecutors and judges, but for over ten years it has been divided into two - one for judges, the other for prosecutors and investigators. The special judiciary was also established and dismissed.

At the beginning of this year, another innovation was born - a six-month rotation of the "big three" - the presidents of the two supreme courts and the chief prosecutor, if they are not titular. This is only a small part of the exoticism with which Bulgaria has so far tried to ensure swift and fair justice and the supremacy of law.

However, nothing like that is happening, on the contrary - the reform of the judicial system is on its way to self-destruction. Something that appears to have been planned by its ideologists.

A decade ago, a scruffy lawyer appeared on the public and political scene in our country. Using linguistic acrobatics and philosophical theories, he explained how Bulgaria has a long way to go in order to reform its judiciary and become a full-fledged member of the EU.

His name was Hristo Ivanov. Of course, it was later revealed that the unsuccessful philosopher and lawyer was the author of the drafts of the so-called monitoring reports for Brussels, which were used by Eurocrats every year to criticize the Bulgarian political class and the top figures in the judicial system.

As Minister of Justice, Hristo Ivanov presented a detailed "roadmap" which, by today's date, should have long ago put Bulgarians at the top of the ranking for the rule of law in the Old Continent.

In the end, few remember that in 2015 Ivanov resigned from his position after theatrically throwing a resignation, as he failed to push through a lobbying amendment to the Constitution and the Judiciary Act, which would have given him control over the newly-formed judiciary and prosecutor panels of the Supreme Judicial Council.

Ten years ago, once again at the proposal of Hristo Ivanov - the main ideologist behind the judicial reform - it was decided, with a constitutional majority, that the parliamentary quota for the Judicial Council would be elected with at least 160 votes from the deputies. Despite the fact that at that time this exceptionally high threshold created problems with the election of the members of the Inspectorate of the Supreme Judicial Council. Since then, especially practicing magistrates, who are in the courtrooms every day, unlike Hristo Ivanov, have been warning that the constant lobbying amendments to the basic law, the Law on the Judiciary, the Penal Code and the Criminal Procedure Code, ultimately begin to harm the judiciary more and more. But no, reform, reform. 

What is the balance sheet as of today?

After failing to control the judicial system, Hristo Ivanov and those above him, as well as those who were and still are part of his cohort, have implemented a new tactic - to destroy the foundations of the rule of law. Perhaps with the hope that after everything has crumbled, there will be no one else but these progressives to rebuild it in their own image and likeness. And based on everything, it seems that they might actually succeed.   

The Supreme Judicial Council is already in its third mandate, even though it was not elected for a second one.

Despite having an incomplete composition. The High Council of Justice is in its second mandate, even though it was not elected for it, and also has an incomplete composition. It should not be forgotten that if for the Supreme Judicial Council this absurd model of election was established since its creation, then for the highest personnel body of the judicial system, Hristo Ivanov bears the political and moral responsibility for this blockade.

Some may say that Ivanov, after failing as a party leader, has already taken on his political responsibility, but he has not. Because the circles that promoted and led it, as well as the accomplices of the "lair" of judicial reform - the politicized judges from the top of the Union of Judges in Bulgaria, the law firm of the accused and defendants leaders of "We Continue the Change", "Democratic Bulgaria" and the circle "Capital", as well as their affiliated foundations, mercenaries, protesters and biased media, they do not stop destroying the little that remains of Bulgarian Themis.

Less than a month ago it was revealed that the Court of Justice of the European Union, not without active and behind-the-scenes lobbying from the aforementioned circles in our country, has decided that the Supreme Judicial Council cannot have an eternal mandate, and its decisions in disciplinary proceedings and investigations because of this would be flawed and overruled. Oh, what a surprise, lovers of neoliberalism, same-sex marriages and drug legalization in Luxembourg have discovered "hot water". Without surprise, the referral of the EUC has been done by a local judge, of course from the top of the BJA (Bulgarian Judges Association), namely Andrey Georgiev from the Sofia Regional Court, currently the executive secretary of the party wing of "Yes, Bulgaria" in the judicial system.

A professor of European law, Assoc. Prof. Hristo Hristev, a former youth socialist, then briefly a founder and party activist of "Yes, Bulgaria", does not stop teaching in his media statements the legal guild that you see - the decision of the CC must immediately lead to the following - the ICHR and the SCC to stop functioning altogether. Regardless of the consequences. It is well known that the decisions of the Court of Justice in Luxembourg are binding for the EU member states, but there are some particularities. How exactly does this judicial act create an obligation for the national representation to elect new members of the Inspectorate of the Supreme Judicial Council and the Supreme Judicial Council as early as tomorrow.

If it were that easy, it would have happened by now for sure. For the first body, more than five years ago, and for the second, three years ago. Let's not forget that there is also a decision of the Constitutional Court, which two years ago clearly regulated that the current composition should continue to function until a new Inspectorate is elected.

The lobbyists for the destruction of the judicial system rushed to conclude that the EU Court is above the decision of the national constitutional judges. Even a panel of the Supreme Administrative Court rushed to make a statement on a pending case, which practically freezes the functioning of the State Agency for National Security.

However, the real issue is elsewhere - behind the scenes, the powers that failed to control the judiciary and the prosecution, simply decided to destroy them and are now making another attempt to block the functioning of the Inspectorate of the Supreme Judicial Council. With all the consequences that such action would have for the state.

They are using an interpretation of the Constitution, according to which the decision on the mandate of the State Agency applies to the work of the Supreme Judicial Council as well, meaning the judicial and prosecutorial councils must stop any competitions, elections for administrative leaders, and appointments. Who will govern the system then, the officials themselves ask? And especially Atanaska Disheva asks this a lot, who is known for her loyalty to the "Capital" circle and all its derivatives.

Is this excitement in the lobbyist circles just a coincidence? Of course not - they simply see an opportunity if they manage to push through their candidates through the parliamentary quota of future elections for the Supreme Court and the Inspectorate. But how they will ensure 160 votes is a question without an answer.

Confused by the chaos, the members of the Supreme Court have decided to turn to academic circles? It's not clear whether they will ask Assoc. Prof. Hristev, but it's certain that he will support this decision, which is favorable to the mentors who have the biggest interest in blocking the administrative body. It's incompetent and completely wrong for the Supreme Court to expect lobbyists to shed light on their practices.

A far more appropriate approach, also adopted by human resources specialists, is to seek urgent consultations with the parliamentary legal committee in order to vote on urgent amendments to the judicial law, which would ensure continuity of the functioning of the judicial authorities. It would be good if reason prevails in parliament and they reconsider another absurd decision - that of rotating the "Big Three" in Themis. This was also proposed by the CC-DB, whose implementation would have serious consequences for the functioning of courts and prosecutors.

The chaos in the judicial system is inevitable. And the responsibility for this is personal, and it is good that the names of the authors of the failed "judicial reform" are well-known. Due to this, they no longer have the right to even be asked or make threats, recommendations and attempt to mentor, as once again the leadership of the State Agency for National Security (SANS) tried to do last week with a letter in which they threatened to complain to Brussels that in Bulgaria a court decision of the European Court of Justice was not being implemented, which they themselves provoked, in order to serve their hidden dependencies on oligarchs, their lawyers and political brokers. Let it be clear, Bulgaria is not obliged to immediately apply the decision of the ECJ, at least because nothing fatal will follow from it.

Nevertheless, let us remember that years ago the Court in Luxembourg declared that the Istanbul Convention should be applied in EU member states, regardless of whether they have accepted it or rejected it, like Bulgaria. As of today, the principles of the Istanbul Convention are not directly applied in Bulgarian legislation. Thank God!

From now on, it is the responsibility of the political elite and the judiciary to ensure the normal functioning of institutions. And it is high time for the focus in the judiciary to shift - instead of constantly discussing the "judicial reform" and who, how, when and where to choose the Chief Prosecutor, the Chairperson of the Supreme Court or the Supreme Administrative Court - to initiate a real reform that guarantees speed and efficiency in the judicial process, accountability for dependent and controlled magistrates, an updated criminal legislation that addresses modern forms of criminal activity.

It is time for the chicanery of the saboteurs of the rule of law to be silenced by rational, timely and decisive actions that will restore normalcy in the country and the justice system. To start with - it would be good if the Supreme Judicial Council continues to fulfill its duties without being influenced by hysterical attempts to "explode" the justice system by failed amateur reformers. And the selection of new personnel for the council and the judicial inspectorate will happen sooner or later, but it must be clear from now on that there is no place for puppeteers in the background.