The Sofia City Prosecutor’s Office sent an opinion to Minister Maria Pavlova full of disagreements on the project for the ZSV

City prosecutor Iliana Kirilova sent, on behalf of the prosecutors to the SGP, a summary statement on the draft Law on the Judiciary (JSV), published for public discussion on 03/25/2024, they reported. The opinion contains an analysis of the tests of the project, which to the greatest extent affect the activities of the prosecutors of the SGP without exhausting the criticisms towards it.

“The proposed project was prepared before the decision of the Constitutional Court on the pending k. e. No. 1 of 2024, to which was added k. e. No. 2 of 2024, concerning the structural changes in the judiciary and in this sense is hasty, says Kirilova.

The opinion contests the decisions that require mandatory initiation of pre-trial proceedings in cases of annulment of a decree refusing to initiate pre-trial proceedings, as well as in cases where the author of the report is a certain person or state body.

The regulation of the preliminary inspection, which is introduced in Art. 211a of the Civil Code. The term for the preliminary examination does not take into account the nature and complexity of a large part of the cases that are brought to the attention of the prosecutor’s office and which are impossible to examine in such a short two-month period without the possibility of its extension.

In this regard, the SGP calls to take into account the fact that for the past year 2023, only 0.087% of the total number of rulings on refusal to initiate pre-trial proceedings were canceled by the Sofia City Court. This shows that the prosecutors in the SGP carry out qualitative checks and correctly issue rulings on refusal to initiate pre-trial proceedings precisely in these factually and legally complex cases, the opinion says.

Disagreement was also expressed with the provisions on the composition of the High Prosecutorial Council (HCC) and its functions, as they suggest the legislative idea that the Prosecutor’s Office of the Republic of Bulgaria should be placed under full control for the current political situation and it is not just formal, but in a way that it can actually be managed by her. The SGP also objects to the unjustified division between judges on the one hand and prosecutors and investigators on the other (taking into account the indisputable fact that they do not and do not need to have completely the same status), limiting the functions of the Prosecutor General in a way that deprives him of the possibility to lead the prosecution, but at the same time accountability is expected from him.

City prosecutors object to the provisions that limit the ability of the professional quota of prosecutors and investigators to participate in the VPS at the expense of the legal profession, which does not bear the obligation to reveal the objective truth. Serious criticism has been leveled at the prioritization of certain non-governmental organizations at the expense of others, on the basis of stereotyped experience, determined according to vague criteria, as a prerequisite for them to be able to make proposals for candidates in both councils.

Regarding secondment, the proposed provisions in the bill will create an imbalance between judges and prosecutors. It is proposed that the judges be seconded for 1 year, and the prosecutors for twice as short a period – up to 6 months within a year, according to the city prosecutors.

Such a deadline will not lead to the necessary improvement of the work. It may even lead to a delay in criminal proceedings, since with the completion of one prosecutor’s secondment, another will have to familiarize himself with the materials in the case and take legally prescribed actions.

In addition to the arguments related to the character and nature of the cases that are considered by the SGP, it is also noted that the prosecutor’s office does not work independently, but in close connection and interactions with other state bodies, which are also unable to provide an investigation in the main two-month term. Last but not least, the exercise by defendants and victims of their right to appeal the acts of the pre-trial proceedings bodies either before the court or before the upper levels of the prosecutor’s office, which they exercise of their own free will, is also important for the duration of the proceedings.

On the other hand, the period for secondment should be tied to the competition procedures in such a way that the regular and rhythmic conduct of the latter ensures the filling of the jobs in the relevant prosecutor’s offices and investigative departments, and that the secondment as a measure is only exceptional. In fact, although instructional deadlines are set for the announcement and holding of the tenders – which is similarly laid down in the current ZSV, the tender procedure itself does not suffer any change in the project under discussion, which is why it cannot be expected to lead to rhythmicity and speed in conducting the tenders, respectively to reducing the need for secondments.

The formal approach adopted in the attestation, without taking into account the real work of the magistrate, as well as the transfer of disciplinary activity to the Air Force by removing the possibility of the administrative head to impose a “remark” penalty, have also been criticized.

Disagreement is expressed with the decision to impose a disciplinary penalty of “disciplinary dismissal” for actions that damage the prestige of the judiciary, as it contains a real danger that magistrates who exercise the right to express their views will be removed from the judiciary for subjective and conjunctural reasons in matters affecting the judiciary.

The opinion states that the activities of the SGP, which is the largest prosecutor’s office in the country, would be significantly hampered without interaction with the administration of the chief prosecutor. As in the position of the I.F. the Prosecutor General, as well as the SGP argues the need for an addition to the draft law regarding the need for an administration to the Prosecutor General to carry out a significant volume of activities such as procedural representation in cases, awarding of public contracts, institutional and international relations, etc., writes in the opinion .