COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT 2023 Rule of Law Report Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Bulgaria Accompanying the document COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT, THE COUNCIL, THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE AND THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS 2023 Rule of Law Report The rule of law situation in the European Union
Date: 2023-07-05
Institutions: European Commission, Secretariat-General
Subjects: Bulgaria, administrative transparency, corruption, democracy, independence of the judiciary, infringement of EU law, pluralism in the media, political rights, rule of law

EN 

  EN 

   EUROPEAN COMMISSION  Brussels, 5.7.2023  SWD(2023) 802 final  COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT 2023 Rule of Law Report     Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Bulgaria Accompanying the document COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT, THE COUNCIL, THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE AND THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS 2023 Rule of Law Report                  The rule of law situation in the European Union {COM(2023) 800 final} - {SWD(2023) 801 final} - {SWD(2023) 803 final} - {SWD(2023) 804 final} - {SWD(2023) 805 final} - {SWD(2023) 806 final} - {SWD(2023) 807 final} - {SWD(2023) 808 final} - {SWD(2023) 809 final} - {SWD(2023) 810 final} - {SWD(2023) 811 final} - {SWD(2023) 812 final} - {SWD(2023) 813 final} - {SWD(2023) 814 final} - {SWD(2023) 815 final} - {SWD(2023) 816 final} - {SWD(2023) 817 final} - {SWD(2023) 818 final} - {SWD(2023) 819 final} - {SWD(2023) 820 final} - {SWD(2023) 821 final} - {SWD(2023) 822 final} - {SWD(2023) 823 final} - {SWD(2023) 824 final} - {SWD(2023) 825 final} - {SWD(2023) 826 final} - {SWD(2023) 827 final}  
 
 
ABSTRACT 
Until 2019, reforms in Bulgaria in the area of justice and anti-corruption were followed by the 
Commission under the Cooperation and Verification Mechanism (CVM) and are, since then, 
being monitored under the Rule of Law Mechanism. By a letter of 26 June, the Prime Minister 
informed  the  Commission  about  the  measures  taken  by  Bulgaria  which  fulfilled  the  last 
outstanding commitment that was listed in the conclusions of the 2019 CVM report, as well as 
including further measures to continue upholding the rule of law 
The  Parliament  adopted  a  law,  as  part  of  the  rule  of  law  commitments  under  the  RRP, 
establishing  a  mechanism  for  the  effective  accountability  and  criminal  liability  of  the 
Prosecutor General and his/her deputies, as well as judicial review of prosecutorial decisions 
not to open an investigation. This law addresses the long-standing concerns from previous Rule 
of Law Reports and meets  the last specific commitment made by Bulgaria under the CVM. 
Concerns  remain  related  to  the  composition  of  the  Supreme  Judicial  Council  and  the 
Inspectorate to it. Pending competitions for promotion were concluded but a significant number 
of  judges  remain  seconded  for  an  extended  period.  There  is  some  improvement  in  the 
availability of electronic communications within the justice system, and some steps were taken 
to amend the legislation on the introduction of fully digitalised justice. Administrative justice 
continues to be efficient, but a lack of disaggregated data hampers the evaluation of the overall 
efficiency of justice. New laws regarding the expansion of legal aid and mandatory judicial 
mediation were adopted and have been welcomed by most stakeholders. 
The National  Anti-Corruption Strategy continues to be implemented. Corruption prevention 
measures  aimed  at  improving  the  integrity  of  specific  sectors  of  the  public  administration, 
including the police and the judiciary,  continue to  be deployed.  Whistleblowers’ legislation 
was adopted. The reform of the Anti-Corruption Commission will still need to be adopted as 
part  of  the  commitments  under  the  RRP,  and  draft  legislation  is  being  discussed  in  the 
Parliament. The effectiveness of investigations and a robust track-record of prosecution and 
final convictions in high-level cases of corruption continues to be an issue. Serious gaps remain 
on integrity measures for top-level functions. Rules on asset and interest declarations for public 
officials are systematically implemented but the control mechanisms need to be improved. A 
working group has been set up to examine the issue of lobbying as part of the commitments 
under the RRP, and a public debate will be organised based on ongoing work by this group.  
The Government took measures to set up a working group to reflect on updates to the legislative 
framework  on  media  freedom  and  pluralism,  including  the  protection  of  journalists  from 
SLAPP cases. The lack of a clear framework to ensure transparency in the allocation of state 
advertising remains a concern despite the creation of a working group which is meant to start 
working also on this topic. As regards media ownership transparency, reflections are ongoing 
about  a  more  effective  enforcement  of  media  ownership  obligations.  Journalists  have  been 
faced with lawsuits and encounter various threats, such as online harassment which is on the 
rise. Some positive trends as regards access to public information can be noted. 
An improved national Post-monitoring Mechanism was established and is functioning, with an 
expanded  scope  to  cover  the  EU  Rule  of  Law  Report.  The  renewal  of  the  mandates  of 
independent and regulatory authorities has been delayed due to the political situation. There 
are new procedural rules in place, but concerns regarding the law-making process persist. The 
Council for Civil Society Development has begun functioning and is working on a national 
funding  mechanism  for  the  sector.  Concerns  were  raised  as  regards  a  draft  law  on  foreign 
agents, which was resubmitted to the legislature by one of the political parties in Parliament 
despite the negative opinion of the Minister of Justice on the first draft law. 

1 

 
 
RECOMMENDATIONS  

Overall,  concerning  the  recommendations  in  the  2022  Rule  of  Law  Report,  Bulgaria  has 
(made):  

  Significant progress on ensuring timely ordinary competitions for promotion to avoid long-
term  secondment  of  judges  to  fill  in  vacant  positions,  taking  into  account  European 
standards on secondment of judges. 

  No progress  yet on advancing with the legislative amendments aiming at improving the 
functioning of the Inspectorate to the Supreme Judicial Council and avoiding the risk of 
political influence, in particular by involving judicial bodies in the selection of its members. 
  No progress yet on taking steps to adapt the composition of the Supreme Judicial Council, 

taking into account European standards on Councils for the Judiciary. 

  Some progress regarding corruption prevention measures aimed at improving the integrity 
of specific sectors of the public administration, including the police and the judiciary.  
  No progress on improving the effectiveness of investigation and a robust track-record of 
prosecution and final convictions in high-level cases of corruption including through the 
institutional reform of the Anti-Corruption Commission and specialised judicial authorities  
  Some progress on improving transparency in the allocation of state advertising, in particular 
with regard to state advertising contracted through intermediaries, such as media agencies. 

On this basis, and considering other developments that took place in the period of reference, 
and in addition to recalling the commitments made under the national Recovery and Resilience 
Plan relating to certain aspects of the justice system and the anti-corruption framework, it is 
recommended to Bulgaria to: 

  Take steps to adapt the relevant legislative framework to avoid long-term secondment of 
judges to fill in vacant positions, taking into account European standards on secondment of 
judges. 

  Advance  with  the  preparation  of  legislative  amendments  aiming  at  improving  the 
functioning of the Inspectorate to the Supreme Judicial Council and avoiding the risk of 
political influence, in particular by involving judicial bodies in the selection of its members.  
  Step  up  efforts  to  adapt  the  composition  of  the  Supreme  Judicial  Council,  taking  into 

account European standards on Councils for the Judiciary. 

  Ensure an improved effectiveness of investigations and a robust track-record of prosecution 
and  final  judgments  in  high-level  corruption  cases  including  through  the  institutional 
reforms of the Anti-Corruption Commission. 
Improve the integrity of top executive functions, taking into account European standards, 
in particular by ensuring that clear integrity standards for the Government as well as an 
appropriate sanctioning mechanism are in place. 

 

  Advance  with  the  work  aimed  at  improving  transparency  in  the  allocation  of  state 
advertising, in particular with regard to state advertising contracted through intermediaries, 
such as media agencies. 

2 

 
 
 
 
I. 

JUSTICE SYSTEM  

The  judicial  system  of  Bulgaria1  includes  a  total  of  182  courts  which  are  ordinary  and 
specialised. As a general rule, the ordinary courts hear cases in three instances, with the system 
of these courts comprising 113 district courts, 28 regional courts and 5 courts of appeal. The 
specialised courts include military and administrative courts. The Supreme Court of Cassation 
is  the  court  of  last  instance  in  cases  heard  by  ordinary  and  military  courts,  while  for 
administrative  cases,  the  Supreme  Administrative  Court  is  the  court  of  last  instance.  The 
judiciary also includes the Prosecutor’s Office. The Constitutional Court of Bulgaria reviews 
constitutionality  of  laws  and  gives  interpretative  decisions2.  The  Prosecutor’s  Office  has  a 
unified  structure  and  is  headed  by  the  Prosecutor  General3.  Bulgaria  participates  in  the 
European  Public  Prosecutor’s  Office  (EPPO).  The  Supreme  Judicial  Council  (SJC)  is  the 
highest administrative authority in the Bulgarian judiciary. It is responsible for managing the 
judiciary and ensuring its independence. Judges, prosecutors and investigators4 are appointed, 
promoted, transferred and dismissed by their respective chamber (Judges’ or Prosecutors’) of 
the SJC5. In addition to the SJC, activities of magistrates are supervised by the Inspectorate. 
The Supreme Bar Council is an independent and self-governing body established by law6. 

Independence  

The level of perceived judicial independence in Bulgaria continues to be low among the 
general public and continues to be low among companies, despite recent improvement. 
Overall,  30%  of  the  general  population  and  33%  of  companies  perceive  the  level  of 
independence of courts and judges to be ‘fairly or very good’ in 20237. According to data in 
the 2023 EU Justice Scoreboard, the perceived judicial independence among the general public 
has consistently decreased in the last few years, although it remains higher than in 2016 (23%). 
In particular, this figure has decreased in comparison with previous years (32% and 31% in 
2021  and  2022,  respectively).  The  perceived  judicial  independence  among  companies  has 

1   For  a  description  of  the  judicial  structure  see  e.g.  CEPEJ  (2021),  Study  on  the  functioning  of  the  judicial 

systems in the EU Member States. 

2   See 2021 Rule of Law Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Bulgaria, p. 2.  
3   Art. 126 to 128 from the Constitution. 
4   Venice Commission opinion (CDL-AD(2019)031), para. 13-14: The majority of the investigators are police 
officers,  procedurally  supervised  by  the  prosecutors;  a  smaller  number  of  investigators  have  the  status  of 
magistrates  and  work  in  the  National  Investigative  Service  or  in  investigative  units  which  are  part  of 
prosecutors’  offices  at  regional  level.  Procedurally,  they  are  all  under  the  supervision  of  prosecutors. 
Procedural  supervision  means  that  all  decision  by  an  investigator  can  be  overturned  by  a  supervising 
prosecutor.  The  supervising  prosecutor  is,  in  turn,  subject  to  a  supervision  by  a  hierarchically  superior 
prosecutor, up to the level of the Prosecutor General. 

5   The Supreme Judicial Council is composed by a Judicial Chamber and a Prosecutorial Chamber. The Judicial 
Chamber is composed of six judges elected by judges, six members elected by Parliament and the presidents 
of  the  two  highest  courts,  who  are  ex  officio  members.  The  Prosecutorial  Chamber  is  composed  of  four 
prosecutors and one investigating magistrate elected by their peers, five members elected by Parliament, and 
the Prosecutor General, who is an ex officio member and its chair. The Plenary of the Supreme Judicial Council 
(25 members) is comprised of the members of both aforementioned chambers and is presided by the Minister 
of Justice, who does not have the right to a vote. 

6   See 2021 Rule of Law Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Bulgaria, p. 3.  
7   Figures 49 and 51, 2023 EU Justice Scoreboard. The level of perceived judicial independence is categorised 
as follows: very low (below 30% of respondents perceive judicial independence as fairly good and very good); 
low (between 30-39%), average (between 40-59%), high (between 60-75%), very high (above 75%). 

3 

 
                                                           
increased in comparison with 2022 (28%), as well as in comparison to 2016 (21%), but still 
under the 43% it had in 2021.  

A law for the effective accountability and criminal liability of the Prosecutor General and 
his/her deputies was adopted by Parliament. As mentioned in previous reports8, the lack of 
a  possibility  for  an  effective  criminal  investigation  of  the  Prosecutor  General  and  his/her 
deputies had been a long-standing issue, which was raised by the European Commission9, the 
European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR)10 and the Council of Europe11. The Government 
committed, in the context of the Bulgarian Recovery and Resilience Plan (RRP)12, to establish 
an effective mechanism for the accountability and criminal liability of the Prosecutor General 
and his/her deputies13. On 26 May 202314, the Parliament adopted the law, addressing the long-
standing  concerns  from  previous  Rule  of  Law  Reports,  and  meeting  the  last  specific 
commitment made by Bulgaria under the CVM15. The adoption came following an opinion of 
the  Venice  Commission  on  the  draft  law.  During  their  session  on  21-22  October  2022,  the 
Venice  Commission  adopted  an  opinion  on  the  draft  law,  considering  that  the  mechanism 
proposed by the draft law could be read as being consistent with the constitutional framework16, 
and would be capable of aligning the system to a considerable extent with the requirements of 
the European Convention for Human Rights (ECHR), as set out in the judgments of the ECtHR 
in  cases  Kolevi  and  S.  Z.  v.  Bulgaria17.  The  Council  of  Europe’s  Committee  of  Ministers 
equally  considered  that  the  draft  law  overall  responded  to  its  Interim  Resolution  of  201918, 
while  remaining  within  the  existing  constitutional  framework  and  providing  for  key 
safeguards19.  The  adopted  law  provides  for  a  mechanism  according  to  which,  when  legal 
grounds for starting an investigation against the Prosecutor General and his/her deputies exist, 
a notification is  sent  to  the chair of the Criminal Chamber of the Supreme Cassation  Court 

8   See 2020, 2021 and 2022 Rule of Law Reports, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Bulgaria, pp. 

3-5. 

9   Progress report Bulgaria 2019, COM(2019)498, p. 6. 
10   ECtHR, judgment of 5 November 2009, Kolevi v. Bulgaria, paras. 121-127, 129, 135 and 136. 
11   Council of Europe, Supervision of the execution of the European Court’s judgments, Committee of Ministers 
Decision  CM/Del/Dec(2022)1436/H46-6  of  10  June  2022  and  CM/Notes/1436/H46-6  of  8-10  June  2022, 
Committee  of  Ministers  Decision  CM/Del/Dec(2021)1419/H46-8  of  2  December  2021  and 
CM/Notes/1419/H46-8 of 30 November- 2 December 2021, CM/Del/Dec(2021)1398/H46-6 of 11 March 2021 
and 
Decision 
CM/Del/Dec(2020)1377bis/H46-9  of  1-3  September  2020  and  CM/Notes/1377bis/H46-9  of  3  September 
2020. See also Committee of Ministers (Interim Resolution CM/ResDH(2019)367 of 5 December 2019 and 
CM/Notes/1362/H46-6 of 3-5 December 2019; Venice Commission Opinion (CDL-AD(2019)031). 

CM/Notes/1398/H46-6 

9-11  March; 

of  Ministers 

Committee 

of 

12   2022/0112 (NLE) - Council Implementing Decision on the approval of the assessment of the recovery and 

resilience plan for Bulgaria of 28 April 2022. 

13   As well as a judicial review of prosecutorial decisions not to open an investigation. 
14   The draft law was tabled on 30 December 2022 but was not adopted before the dissolution of the Parliament 
on 2 February 2023. Due to that dissolution, it lapsed but it was reintroduced by the interim Government in 
the 49th National Assembly on 13 April 2023. 

15   See commitments made at the time by the Bulgarian Government, notably the commitment to put in place 
procedures  concerning  the  accountability  of  a  Prosecutor  General  in  line  with  Venice  Commission 
recommendations. Report from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council on Progress in 
Bulgaria under the Cooperation and Verification Mechanism, COM/2019/498 final, p. 13. 

16   As defined in the Constitutional Court Decision No. 7 of 11 May 2021.  
17   ECtHR, judgment of 5 November 2009, Kolevi v. Bulgaria. 
18   Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe Interim Resolution CM/ResDH(2019)367 of 5 December 

2019 and CM/Notes/1362/H46-6 of 3-5 December 2019. 

19   Council  of  Europe,  Supervision  of 
CM/Del/Dec(2022)1451/H46-9, para. 6.  

the 

execution  of 

the  European  Court’s 

judgments, 

4 

 
                                                           
(SCC).  Subsequently,  a  randomly  selected  judge20  would  be  appointed  as  a  prosecutor 
responsible for the investigation of the Prosecutor General and his/her deputies. As regards the 
judge selected, it would be for the Prosecutorial Chamber of the SJC to appoint that judge as a 
prosecutor21. In case the Prosecutor General or his/her depuies are indicted, and following the 
same  procedure,  a  second  judge  would  be  appointed  to  the  position  of  Deputy  Prosecutor 
General tasked with the hierarchical control of the acts taken by the first judge appointed as 
prosecutor22. On 5 June 2023, the Prosecutor General challenged the constitutionality of the 
law23.  

The mandate of the Prosecutor General was terminated following further requests that 
had been filed before the Supreme Judicial Council. As mentioned in last year’s report24, 
following the confirmation by the Constitutional Court25 of the right of the Minister of Justice 
to request to the Supreme Judicial Council for аn early termination of the Prosecutor General’s 
mandate, on 7 July 2022, four months after the request was filed26, the SJC held a hearing on 
the topic and rejected the proposal27. Two more requests have been filed by members of the 
Prosecutorial Chamber of the SJC28. On 5 June 202329, the Plenary decided that the request is 
admissible  and  will  be  combined  with  the  first  one  for  discussion  on  the  merits.  The 
Prosecutor’s  Office  published  a  press  release  on  18  May  2023  in  defence  of  the  publicly 

20   The selection will be from a list of judges having a rank of a Supreme Court judge with prior experience in 
criminal law matters. The judges who are fulfilling the requirements should consent to being part of that list. 
21   This magistrate would then gain the power to conduct investigations and to file an indictment before the court. 
22   Both judges would remain in function until the conclusion of the criminal proceedings but no longer than two 
years. If the proceedings are not concluded after two years, they could decide to extend their mandate or two 
new  judges  would  be  appointed  following  the  same  procedure.  If  the  criminal  proceedings  are  concluded 
before the end of the two years, the two judges are reappointed at their previous positions. 

23   See Constitutional Court Case No. 10/2023.A referral to the Constitutional Court does not automatically lead 
to non-application of the law. It would stop being applied only after a decision for being unconstitutional. 
Nevertheless,  according  to  Art.  54  of  the  Administrative  Procedure  Code,  any  ongoing  administrative 
procedure would have to be suspended if there is a request for constitutionality check related to it, and if the 
Constitutional Court decided that the request is admissible.  

24   See 2022 Rule of Law Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Bulgaria, p. 6. 
25   Constitutional Court Decision No. 1 of 2022/Case No. 17 from 2021. 
26   The Minister of Justice requested the early termination of the Prosecutor General’s mandate on 2 March 2022. 

See Plenary of the SJC, Agenda No.8 of 2022. 
27   See Plenary of the SJC, Protocol No.23 of 2022. 
28   See press release on the website of the SJC of 12 May 2023 and press release on the website of the SJC of 23 
May 2023. The two requests were filed by a majority of the Parliament-elected quota of members of the SJC. 
The first one of 12 May 2023, was filed by four members elected by the Parliament and two members elected 
by their peers. The second one of 22 May 2023, was filed by three members elected by the Parliament and one 
member elected by their peers. 

29   Protocol  No.  14  and  16  from  the  SJC  plenary  meeting  of  25  May  and  5  June  2023.  The  first  request  was 
discussed on 17 May 2023 in the Prosecutor’s chamber, and it was decided to transmit the request to the ethics 
and disciplinary committees. The same request was discussed on 25 May 2023 in the Plenary of the SJC and 
it was decided to discuss the merits of the request. During the meeting on 1 June 2023, the SJC created a list 
of witnesses that will be questioned in the context of this proceeding. Protocol No. 17 from the Prosecutor’s 
chamber meeting of 17 May 2023. The request for the early termination states as a basis the position of the 
Deputy Prosecutor General and Director of the National Investigative Service published on 8 May 2023 by 
the Bulgarian Telegraph Agency (BTA). The same had also filed a request for a hearing before the SJC on 16 
May 2023 on the same issue. These were related to alleged irregularities during an ongoing investigation of 
an explosion that took place aside of a road where the Prosecutor General’s convoy was passing by. 

5 

 
                                                           
announced  calls  for  the  resignation  of  the  Prosecutor  General30.  On  29  May  2023,  the 
Prosecutor General filed a request to the Constitutional Court, to clarify whether a SJC with an 
expired mandate has the power to decide on the early termination of his mandate31. During the 
discussions on the 8 and 12 June 2023, the first request of 12 May was withdrawn32. However, 
based on the second request of 22 May the Plenary of the SJC decided to early terminate the 
mandate of the Prosecutor General for undermining the prestige of the judiciary33. The early 
termination  vote  relied  on  one  of  the  new  provisions  introduced  by  the  new  law  on  the 
accountability  and  criminal  liability  of  the  Prosecutor  General  –  the  reduced  majority  from 
17/25 to 13/25. On 16 June 2023, the Prosecutorial chamber of the SJC selected the Deputy 
Prosecutor  General  and  Director  of  the  National  Investigative  Service34  as  an  ad  interim 
Prosecutor General until a new Prosecutor General is appointed35.  

The draft law for the introduction of judicial review against decisions of prosecutors not 
to open investigations was adopted. These provisions are part of the same draft law as the 
mechanism for the accountability and criminal liability of the Prosecutor General and his/her 
deputies, which was originally tabled on 30 December 2022, as well as part of the commitments 
under the RRP. On 26 May, Parliament adopted the law, thusproviding judicial review covering 
decisions on investigations regarding serious crimes36 and a number of other, corruption related 
crimes37. The review has a limited scope and the decision not to open an investigation first has 
to be appealed before a higher standing prosecutor, and only in case of a confirmatory decision 
by this higher standing prosecutor would there be a possibility to appeal the confirmed decision 
before the court38. 

30   See  press  release  of  the  Prosecutor’s  Office  of  18  May  2023.  https://prb.bg/en/news/64771-prosecutor-
general-ivan-geshev%3A-i-will-finish-my-mandate-no-matter-what-it-costs.  The  Prosecutor’s  Office  also 
started investigations against several former and current members of Parliaments. 

31   See Case No. 9 of 29 May 2023. 
32   See Protocol No. 17 of the SJC Plenary from 8 June 2023. The members of the SJC motivated their decision 
with the recent decision of a prosecutor not to open an investigation on the same issue due to the fact that they 
did not find that the Prosecutor General committed any crime. The aforementioned decision was taken prior 
to the adoption of the law on the accountability and criminal liability of the Prosecutor General. 

33   See Protocol No. 17 of the SJC Plenary from 12 June 2023. 
34   On 2 June 2023, between the first and second vote, the Parliament adopted amendments to the JSA with which 
separated, to certain extent, the National Investigative Service from the Prosecutor’s Office. On 14 June 2023, 
the President of the Republic vetoed the amendments due to potential issues with the  Constitution and the 
Rules of Procedure of the Parliament. The Parliament has begun discussing the veto and took into account the 
concerns raised by the President in the Legal Committee discussions on the topic. Moreover, the provisions 
that were not vetoed but were part of the same package of amendments remain non-promulgated until there is 
a decision of the Parliament on the vetoed provisions. 

35   See  Protocol  No.  21  of  the  Prosecutorial  chamber  from  16  June  2023.  Moreover,  on  19  June  2023,  the 
Bulgarian  Judges  Association  published  a  position  denouncing  the  procedure  for  selecting  an  ad  interim 
Prosecutor General, as it was done solely by the Prosecutorial chamber of the SJC, and not by the Plenary of 
the SJC, which would be the normal procedure for electing a new Prosecutor General.  

36   Art. 93 (7) of the Criminal Code – A "serious crime" is one punishable by law with imprisonment for more 

than five years, life imprisonment or life imprisonment without parole. 

37   Art. 119-122, 123 (4), (124) (1) and (2) and (4), (126)(1), (127)(4), (131), (132), (133), (134) to (141), (153), 
(154a), (155)(1), (159)(3), (6), (7), (162) to (165), (167)(1), (169),(169a), (184) to (187), (188)(1) and (2), 
225c,  282,  283,  304b(2),  305a,  307,  (331)(3),  (335),  (343),  (343a),  (349a),  (352)(1),  (2),  (4),  (353),  (4), 
(353b)(4) and (5), (353d)(1), (2), (3) and (5), (379), (387) and (419a) of the Criminal Code. 

38   According to the authorities, this structure of the judicial review would help avoiding excessive workload for 
both judges and prosecutors, as recommended by the Council of Europe in the Committee of Ministers of the 
Council of Europe decisions CM/Del/Dec(2021)1419/H46-8, para. 10, CM/Del/Dec(2021)1398/H46-6, para. 

6 

 
                                                           
There has been no progress yet with the reform regarding the composition of the Supreme 
Judicial Council. The 2022 Rule of Law Report recommended to Bulgaria to “take steps to 
adapt the composition of the Supreme Judicial Council, taking into account European standards 
on Councils for the Judiciary”39. The situation mentioned in the previous Rule of Law Reports, 
and the concerns raised there40, that judges elected by their peers41 do not form a majority in 
the Supreme Judicial Council (SJC), remains unchanged42. As mentioned in last year’s report, 
since 1 July 2021, the SJC functions with only four peer-elected judges due to the resignation 
of two peer-elected members43. After the expiry of the SJC’s mandate on 4 October 202244, its 
composition was not renewed so that it continues functioning with the same composition, for 
an undetermined period of time45. The voting practice of the Plenary of the SJC also continued 
to  reflect  the  decisive  role  of  the  Prosecutor  General46.  As  previously  mentioned47,  the 
combination of powers held by the Prosecutor General48 and his/her position in the Supreme 

3; CM/Del/Dec(2020)1377bis/H46-9, para. 4; CM/Del/Dec(2019)1362/H46-6. Information received from the 
Ministry of Justice in the context of the country visit to Bulgaria. 

39   See  2022  Rule  of  Law  Report,  Country  Chapter  on  the  rule  of  law  situation  in  Bulgaria,  p.  2.  See  also 
Recommendation CM/Rec(2010)12 of the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe, para 27 – “Not 
less  than  half  the  members  of  such  councils  should  be  judges  chosen  by  their  peers  from  all  levels  of  the 
judiciary and with respect for pluralism inside the judiciary.” 

40   See 2020 Rule of Law Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Bulgaria, p. 3-5. See 2021 Rule 
of Law Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Bulgaria, p. 5-7. See 2022 Rule of Law Report, 
Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Bulgaria, p. 6-8. 

41   The ex officio judges do not count as peer elected judges. Venice Commission opinion (CDL-AD(2020)035), 

para. 44.  

42   Recommendation CM/Rec(2010)12 of the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe, para 27; Venice 
Commission opinion (CDL-AD(2020)035), para. 44; JSA, Art. 16(3) and (4)  – Since the Judicial Chamber 
(14  members)  is  presided  by  either  one  of  the  ex  officio  members  (the  President  of  the  Supreme  Court  of 
Cassation or the President of the Supreme Administrative Court) a majority can be reached, both in the Plenary 
of the SJC and the Judicial Chamber, without the votes of the judges elected by their peers. 
43   See 2022 Rule of Law Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Bulgaria, p. 7.  
44   The term of the current SJC ran until 3 October 2022. The procedures for election of new peer elected members 
have  already  been  concluded  and  new  members  were  elected.  Nevertheless,  the  elections  for  the  Judges’ 
Chamber were challenged because of alleged irregularities in the e-voting system before a mixed panel of the 
Supreme  Administrative  Court  and  the  Supreme  Cassation  Court,  which  decided  that  the  elections  were 
conducted according to the established procedure and maintained the validity of their outcome.  

45   The undetermined period of time is due to the impossibility of the Parliament to form the necessary majority 
(qualified majority of 2/3) and to elect the new members, which is the case also for the Inspectorate to the SJC, 
which operates on an expired mandate since 2020. In this regard, please see Venice Commission 2010, Report 
on the Role of the Opposition in a democratic Parliament, CDL-AD(2010)025; Venice  Commission 2019, 
Report on the relationship between the parliamentary majority and the opposition in a democracy: a checklist, 
CDL-AD(2019)015; Venice Commission Opinion on Montenegro (CDL-AD(2018)015-f). 

46   In the vote for the dismissal of the Prosecutor General, the usual voting practice was observed, whereby the 
members from the Prosecutors’ chamber voted in block against the proposal, together with the members of 
the  Judges’  chamber  elected  by  the  Parliament.  See  the  meetings  of  the  Plenary  of  the  Supreme  Judicial 
Council: Protocol No. 23 of 2022 on the vote for the dismissal of the Prosecutor General. See also 2021 and 
2022 Rule of Law Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Bulgaria, p.6 and p. 7: for important 
decisions, members from the Prosecutors’ chamber seem to vote in block, together with the Parliament elected 
members  of 
the  Council  of  Europe 
(CM/Del/Dec(2021)1398/H46-6). 

the  Judges’  chamber.  See  Committee  of  Minister  of 

47   See 2020, 2021 and 2022 Rule of Law Reports, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Bulgaria, p. 3-

5. 

48   The  Prosecutor  General  may,  in  situations  defined  by  the  law,  annul  or  amend  any  decision  taken  by  any 
prosecutor which has not been reviewed by a judge. Furthermore, he may second prosecutors without their 
consent,  for  a  period  of  3  months  within  a  calendar  year,  and  issue  written  instructions  to  prosecutors, 

7 

 
                                                           
Judicial Council49 result in a considerable influence within the Prosecutor’s Office as well as 
potentially within the SJC (both in its Prosecutorial Chamber and its Plenary) and within the 
magistracy50.  The  committment  under  the  RRP51,  reported  in  the  previous  Rule  of  Law 
Report52, which aims at limiting the potential influence of the Prosecutor General within the 
SJC53 is now under discussion in Parliament54. The concerns regarding the composition and 
functioning of the SJC have been reiterated by the Council of Europe55 and stakeholders56. The 
combination of these elements increases the overall concerns regarding the situation of the SJC. 
The Government has informed that a change in the composition of the SJC would require an 
amendment  to  the  Constitution  and  that  the  Commission’s  recommendation  in  this  respect 
could not be addressed in the current political context57. There has thus been no progress on 
the implementation of the recommendation made in the 2022 Rule of Law Report. On 26 May 
2023, the Parliament also passed an amendment, which annulled the elections for peer-elected 
members of the SJC that took place in 202258. It should be recalled that if such a termination 
through the law of a mandate is not supported by safeguards, such as a judicial review, then 
there could be repercussions as regards the judicial independence of the members of the SJC, 
as well as the independence of the judiciary as a whole, since the SJC’s main function is to 
preserve  judicial  independence59.  This  provision  was  challenged  before  the  Constitutional 
Court as a result of the aforementioned request for a constitutionality check by the Prosecutor 

concerning only the application of the law, including in individual cases. The Prosecutor General also has 
significant powers over the prosecutors who are the heads of offices at district and provincial level.  

49   In the Prosecutorial Chamber, where the five members elected by Parliament are currently also prosecutors or 
investigating magistrates, all members are subordinates to the Prosecutor General, the ex officio member and 
chairman, who plays a decisive role in relation to their career and disciplinary proceedings. In the Plenary, the 
prosecutorial  members  have  been  noted  to  usually  vote  as  a  block  supporting  the  Prosecutor  General’s 
proposals or position. See also Art. 16 (3) and (4) of the JSA - The plenary of the SJC decides upon the draft 
budget, disciplinary removal from office and proposals for the appointment of the Presidents of the Supreme 
Court of Cassation, the Supreme Administrative Court and the Prosecutor General (Art. 30(2) of the JSA). 
The  two  chambers  take  decisions  on  appointment,  promotion,  relocation  and  release  from  office,  matters 
related to acquisition and restoration of tenure and decide on disciplinary sanctions (Art. 30(5) of the JSA); 
voting majority for decisions of the Judges’ chamber are described in Art. 33 para 4 of the JSA. 
the  European  Court’s 
the 

judgments, 
CM/Del/Dec(2021)1419/H46-8  of  2  December  2021  and  CM/Notes/1419/H46-8  of  30  November-  2 
December 2021, CM/Del/Dec(2021)1398/H46-6 of 9-11 March 2021. See also the 2021 and 2020 Rule of 
Law Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Bulgaria.  

50   Council  of  Europe,  Supervision  of 

execution  of 

51   Also  part  of  the  same  milestone  on  the  accountability  and  criminal  liability  of  the  Prosecutor  General  – 

Milestone 222. 

52   See 2022 Rule of Law Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Bulgaria, p. 5. 
53   This could be achieved by removing the possibility of selecting prosecutors and investigators for members of 

the SJC through the Parliament-elected quota. 

54   The  provisions  for  limiting  the  election  of  magistrates  through  the  Parliament-elected  quota  for  the  SJC 
members was adopted on 2 June 2023. However, on 16 June 2023, the President of the Republic vetoed part 
of the amendments passed with the same law due to potential issues related to their constitutionality.  
11, 

and 
CM/Del/Dec(2023)1459/H46-5, para. 6. See also Venice Commission opinion (CDL-AD(2022)032), paras. 
15-17. 

CM/Del/Dec(2022)1451/H46-9, 

of  Ministers 

55   Committee 

decisions 

para. 

56   Written contribution from Bulgarian Institute for Legal Initiatives Foundation and Civil Liberties Union for 

Europe, report on Bulgaria for the 2023 Rule of Law Report. 
57   Input from Bulgaria for the 2023 Rule of Law Report, p. 73. 
58   According to § 41, par. 1 of the Transitional and Final Provisions of the Law on Amendments and Supplements 
to the Criminal Procedure Code, adopted on 26 May 2023, within three months from the entry into force of 
this law, the National Assembly and the bodies of the judiciary shall initiate a procedure for new election of 
members of the Supreme Judicial Council. 

59   See ECtHR, judgment of 15 March 2022, GRZEDA v. Poland, paras. 300-3, 344-346. 

8 

 
                                                           
General60.  Furthermore,  the  same  law  also  added  the  possibility  of  opening  a  disciplinary 
proceeding against a member of the SJC for their actions as members of the SJC61.  

There  has  been  no  progress  yet  with  the  reform  regarding  political  influence  and  the 
functioning of the Inspectorate to the Supreme Judicial Council (ISJC). The 2022 Rule of 
Law Report recommended to Bulgaria to “advance with the legislative amendments aiming at 
improving the functioning of the Inspectorate to the Supreme Judicial Council and avoiding 
the risk of political influence, in particular by involving judicial bodies in the selection of its 
members”62. As mentioned in previous Rule of Law Reports63, the Inspectorate oversees the 
activity of the judiciary, assesses the integrity and potential conflicts of interest of magistrates, 
and is responsible for proposing any opening of disciplinary proceedings regarding magistrates 
to the SJC. The ISJC consists of an Inspector General and ten inspectors, who are independent 
and elected by Parliament64. As previously reported, working groups had been established to 
find ways to address concerns regarding its functioning and the risk of political influence65. 
The Government has expressed the view that a constitutional change would be needed for the 
involvement of judicial bodies in the selection procedure of the ISJC’s members66. The ISJC 
continues  to  operate  with  an  expired  mandate67.  In  this  regard,  on  12  September  2022,  the 
Constitutional Court ruled68 that after the expiration of their mandate, the Inspector General 
and the Inspectors should continue to perform their functions until their successors have been 
appointed by Parliament. The Court considered it inadmissible in such a situation to have the 
activities of the ISJC suspended for an indefinite period69. Given that no measures have been 
taken yet to advance with legislative amendments aiming at improving the functioning of the 
ISJC  and  avoiding  the  risk  of  political  influence,  no  progress  on  the  implementation  of  the 
recommendation is reported.  

Significant  progress  was  achieved  regarding  the  finalisation  of  competitions  for  the 
promotion of judges to avoid long-term secondment of judges to fill in vacant positions. 
The  2022  Rule  of  Law  Report  recommended  to  Bulgaria  to  “ensure  timely  ordinary 
competitions for promotion to avoid long-term secondment of judges to fill in vacant positions, 
taking into account European standards on secondment of judges”70. The past two Rule of Law 
Reports71 have highlighted that while magistrates may be promoted only through a competition, 
in  practice  as  of  July  2022,  only  one  competition  for  the  promotion  of  judges  had  been 

60   See Constitutional Court Case No. 10/2023. 
61   See Art. 308(2) of the JSA. On 2 June 2023, with the law adopted by the Parliament, which was vetoed by the 
President  of  the  Republic  (see  footnote  34  for  a  thorough  explanation),  a  new  disciplinary  sanction  for 
magistrates was introduced. The sanction allows the SJC to suspend the rights of magistrates to perform any 
legal profession for a period of up to 2 years. 

62   See 2022 Rule of Law Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Bulgaria, p. 2. 
63   See 2020, 2021 and 2022 Rule of Law Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Bulgaria, pp. 
7-9; 2021 Rule of Law Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Bulgaria, p.8; 2020 Rule of 
Law Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Bulgaria, p. 8. 

64   Art. 132a of the Constitution. 
65   See 2022 Rule of Law Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Bulgaria, p. 8. 
66   Information received from the Ministry of Justice in the context of the country visit to Bulgaria. No indications 

have been given as to which provisions of the Constitution would be violated. 

67   See 2022 Rule of Law Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Bulgaria, p. 8. 
68   Constitutional Court Decision No. 12 of 27 September 2022. 
69   See footnote 37. 
70   See 2022 Rule of Law Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Bulgaria, p. 2. 
71   See 2022 Rule of Law Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Bulgaria, pp. 9 and 10; 2021 

Rule of Law Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Bulgaria, pp. 6 and 7.  

9 

 
                                                           
completed in the previous four years72. The absence of regular competitions for the promotion 
of  magistrates,  combined  with  an  extensive  use  of  secondments  had  raised  concerns  in  the 
previous Rule of Law Report. The Government has informed that as of 9 December 2022, 109 
magistrates were promoted at various judicial bodies after competitions for promotion, some 
of them pending since 2019, have been concluded73. The SJC achieved this by applying the 
administrative  procedure  for  preliminary  implementation  of  administrative  decisions74  (i.e. 
decisions  on  promotion).  Furthermore,  on  26  May  2023,  the  Parliament  adopted  an 
amendment, which removed the possibility of seconding prosecutors and investigators to an 
open position for an undetermined period, which leads to secondments lasting for more than 
two years75. The new amendment takes into account European standards which highlight that 
secondments should happen with consent and on a temporary basis76, and only in exceptional 
circumstances77  and  limits  the  these  secondments  to  six  months  maximum  within  a  year78. 
Nevertheless, the amendment covers only the secondment of prosecutors and investigators but 
not the one of judges79. Therefore, while the competitions were concluded, this action by itself 
would  not  prevent  the  widespread  use  of  secondments  that  may  have  a  negative  effect  on 
seconded  magistrates,  if  they  are  faced  with  the  risk  of  a  termination  of  their  secondment 
against their will; this increases the power of the administrative heads80 if they are competent 
to decide on secondments and their termination81, which may create situations of dependence82, 
which in turn risks affecting judicial independence. Therefore, there is significant progress in 
implementing the recommendation.  

The Constitutional Court confirmed the constitutionality of the law for the closure of the 
specialised  judicial  authorities.  On  14  July  2022,  the  Constitutional  Court  published  its 

72   Written contribution from the Supreme Court of Cassation; Contribution from Bulgarian Institute for Legal 

Initiatives in the context of the country visit to Bulgaria. 

73   Input from Bulgaria for the 2023 Rule of Law Report, pp. 7 and 8. 
74   Art. 60(1) of the Administrative Procedure Code. The reason for using this procedure is that the postponement 
or delay in the enforcement of these decisions would continue to negatively affect the work of the courts, part 
of which are forced to resort to the institution of secondment in order to ensure the administration of justice in 
the  country.  Nevertheless,  this  procedure  represents  some  shortcomings.  Namely,  in  case  a  candidate 
challenges the decision on promotion before the court, and obtains a favourable decision, the already promoted 
magistrate would have to be demoted. This has not been identified as a serious concern by stakeholders but 
more  as  a  different  type  of  a  temporary  secondment  –  Information  received  from  the  Bulgarian  Judges 
Association, Bulgarian Institute for Legal Initiatives and Initiative Justice for Everyone in the context of the 
country visit to Bulgaria. 

75   See website of the SJC, register for seconded magistrates for October 2022 and January 2023: for October 
2022, 231 seconded judges (99 of them are seconded for more than 24 months, some secondments have been 
ongoing  for  more  than  10  years  (128  months));  for  January  2023,  159  seconded  judges  (65  of  them  are 
seconded for mora than 24 months, some secondments have been ongoing for 12 years (132 months). 

76   As  regards  EU  law  requirements,  see  CJEU,  Judgment  of  16  November  2021, Prokuratura  Rejonowa  w 

Minsku Mazowieckim, Joined Cases C-748/19 to C-754/19, EU:C:2021:931, point 72. 

77   Venice Commission (CDL-AD(2017)018), paras. 86 and 87. 
78   Art. 147(4) of the JSA. 
79   Such a restriction is not provided for judges. The amendment is only in the special text under Art. 147, para. 
4 of the JSA, but not in the general text for magistrates under Art. 227 of JSA. There is no change for judges. 
80   Administrative heads are the presidents of the different territorial divisions of Courts and the administratively 

superior prosecutors heading each of the territorial divisions of Prosecutor’s Offices.  

81   The  Judicial  Chamber  can  also  terminate  prematurely  secondments  when  during  the  secondment  there  are 
violations of the terms and conditions provided in the JSA, or in case of necessity for staffing the body of the 
judiciary from which the judge is seconded. See Art. 30(5), point 18 of the JSA. 

82   See 2022 Rule of Law Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Bulgaria, pp. 9-10. 

10 

 
                                                           
decision83 on the constitutionality review requested by the Prosecutor General84. The latter had 
challenged the constitutionality of the law of 14 April 2022 which sets out the closure of the 
specialised judicial authorities85. The Court found that the majority of the challenged provisions 
are  compatible  with  the  Constitution.  Nevertheless,  the  quotas  for  reappointment  that  were 
introduced as a means to equally distribute the magistrates after the closure of the authorities 
were  declared  unconstitutional.  All  magistrates  affected  by  the  closure  of  the  specialised 
judicial authorities have been placed at the judicial bodies of their choice86, thus putting an end 
to the reappointment procedure without any legal challenges.  

Quality  

New laws regarding the expansion of legal aid and mandatory judicial mediation have 
been adopted. As part of the efforts of the Government to address the concerns related to the 
accessibility of courts87, included in Bulgaria’s RRP, on 16 December 2022 amendments to the 
Legal Assistance Act were adopted. With the aim of facilitating the citizens’ access to justice 
the  scope  and  field  of  application  of  the  types  of  legal  assistance  in  alternative  dispute 
resolution and proceedings has been expanded88, and the range of persons with access to legal 
assistance was broadened89. Stakeholders have welcomed these positive amendments90. On 23 
January 2023, amendments creating mandatory judicial mediation were adopted, also as part 
of the RRP. According to the new provisions, the court may oblige the parties, after conducting 
an  evaluation  of  the  facts  in  the  case91,  to  participate  in  mandatory  mediation  in  a  limited 
number of cases, including family law, lower value contract law proceedings, and in a number 
of labour law and intellectual property law disputes92. As regards the length of the mediation, 

83   Constitutional Court Decision No.7 of 14 July 2022. 
84   Constitutional Court Case No.9 of 4 May 2022.  
85   The specialised judicial authorities here comprised of first and second instance Specialised Criminal Court 

and first and second instance Specialised Prosecutor’s Office. 

86   The majority of them were reappointed in Sofia. Some of them have been placed in the same court and some 
panels of the Specialised Criminal Court have been maintained. According to stakeholders, maintaining the 
panels created “specialised” panels within the Sofia City Court. The Sofia City Court submitted a preliminary 
reference  to  the  Court  of  Justice  of  the  European  Union  on  the  compatibility  with  EU  law,  including  the 
requirements of judicial independence, of the abolition of the specialised judicial authorities (case C-634/22, 
pending).  

87   See 2020 Rule of Law Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Bulgaria, p.8; and 2021 Rule of 
Law Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Bulgaria, p.10; and 2022 Rule of Law Report 
Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Bulgaria, p. 11. 

88   Input  from  Bulgaria  for  the  2023  Rule  of  Law  Report,  p.  11  –  “administrative  criminal  proceedings, 
administrative proceedings for issuing and appealing an individual administrative act, in proceedings before 
non-judicial bodies – arbitration and others, as well as in mediation procedures” 

89   Input from Bulgaria for the 2023 Rule of Law Report, p. 11 – “including persons with temporary protection 
status under the Asylum and Refugees Act, persons deprived of their legal capacity or whose deprivation is 
claimed, persons with physical and mental disabilities.” Moreover, the new provisions also provide legal aid 
in criminal, civil, administrative and international disputes in civil cases in connection with a whistleblower 
or  publicly  disclosed  information  under  the  terms  and  procedure  of  the  Law  on  the  Protection  of 
Whistleblowers. 

90   Information  received  from  Supreme  Bar  Council  and  Bulgarian  Judges  Association  in  the  context  of  the 

country visit to Bulgaria.  

91   See Law for amending and supplementing the Law on Mediation, promulgated in State Gazette No.11 on 2 

February 2023 – para. 6, Art. 140a(3) of the Civil Procedure Code. 

92   See Law for amending and supplementing the Law on Mediation, promulgated in State Gazette No.11 on 2 
February 2023 – para. 5 and 6. If the parties do not reach an agreement during the mediation procedure, the 
case is taken back to the court where the proceedings would continue. If there is an agreement, the court then 

11 

 
                                                           
the court can determine the exact length, but it can be no longer than two months, which could 
be extended on a request by the parties93. As regards the cost of the mandatory mediation, if 
the mediation was  concluded within the time limits imposed by the court, regardless  of the 
outcome,  there  are  no  additional  costs  for  the  parties,  and  the  mediation  is  paid  for  by  the 
court’s budget94. Finally, it appears that the new procedure suspends the period for the time-
barring of claims.95.  

Some  steps  have  been  taken  to  amend  the  legislation  on  the  introduction  of  fully 
digitalised justice. On 22 December 2022, the Government published for consultation a draft 
law aiming to guarantee the smooth operation of the judiciary in the process of introducing a 
fully  digitalised  justice.  Stakeholders  have  expressed  some  concerns  regarding  the  formal 
aspects96 and content97 of the draft law. Due to the dissolution of Parliament, the draft law was 
not tabled for discussion and lapsed. The draft law was reintroduced by the Government in the 
49th National Assembly on 13 April 2023. As mentioned in the previous reports98, judges and 
court staff continue to claim that the current system, the Unified Information System for Courts 
(UISC), does not improve their work, but still represents obstacles99. As reported in last years’ 
Rule of Law Report, this prompted the former president of the Supreme Court of Cassation to 
order  the  discontinuation  of  the  use  of  the  UISC100.  On  18  July  2022,  the  Supreme 
Administrative Court confirmed the decision of the previous instance regarding the complaint 
of  the  SJC  against  the  discontinuation  of  the  use  of  the  UISC  by  the  Supreme  Court  of 
Cassation, which obliged the latter to restart using the system. The discussion has led to the 
creation of a working group which would try to determine the necessary legislative changes to 
meet the need for adequate implementation of digitalised justice at cassation level101. In view 
of the final decision of the Supreme Administrative Court, as well as after consultations with 
representatives of the SJC and Information Service of the SJC, the President of the Supreme 

needs to approve it. Moreover, the new provisions introduce two categories of cases in which the court shall 
or  may  require  the  parties  to  participate  in  a  mediation  procedure.  The  court  shall  oblige  the  parties  to 
participate in a first mediation meeting in cases concerning the allocation of the use of a co-owned property, 
monetary  claims  arising  from  co-ownership,  partition,  disputes  between  co-owners  in  a  condominium, 
payment of the value of a company share upon termination of participation in a limited liability company, 
liability of a manager or controller of a limited liability company for damage caused to the company. 

93   See Law for amending and supplementing the Law on Mediation, promulgated in State Gazette No.11 on 2 

February 2023 – para. 5, Art. 22(4) of the Law on Mediation. 

94   See Law for amending and supplementing the Law on Mediation, promulgated in State Gazette No.11 on 2 

February 2023 – para. 6, Art. 78a(1) of the Civil Procedure Code. 

95   See Judgment of the Court of Justice of 17 June 2017,  Menini  & Rampanelli v Banco Popolare  – Società 
Cooperativa,  C-75/16,  ECLI:EU:C:2017:457, paras.  58-71;  Judgment  of  the  Court  of  Justice  of  18  March 
2010, Alassini and Others, Case 317/08 to C-320/08, ECLI:EU:C:2010:146, paras. 62-67. At national level, 
concerns  were  expressed  by  the  Supreme  Bar  Council  that  some  of  the  new  provisions  might  be 
unconstitutional, although no challenge before the Constitutional Court has been initiated so far. 

96   See Opinion of the Administration of the Council of Ministers on the website for public consultations. They 
consider that some requirements from the legislative process are not fulfilled, and the impact assessment does 
not represent a proper picture of the problems that the draft law is trying to solve. 

97   See Opinion of the Bulgarian Judges Association on the website for public consultations. The main criticism 
is regarding shortcomings that are not present in the draft and choosing solutions that may complicate the work 
of the courts rather than simplify it. 

98   See 2022 Rule of Law Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Bulgaria, p.12; See also 2021 

Rule of Law Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Bulgaria, p. 11. 

99   Written contribution from the Supreme Cassation Court in the context of the country visit, p. 4. 
100  See 2022 Rule of Law Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Bulgaria, p. 12. 
101  Written contribution from the Supreme Cassation Court in the context of the country visit, p. 4. 

12 

 
                                                           
Court  of  Cassation  ordered102  the  resumption  of  UISC’s  use  in  the  Court,  starting  from  26 
September 2022103. 

There is limited improvement of the availability of electronic communications within the 
justice  system.  Secure  electronic  communication  is  available  to  some  extent104  for 
communication between courts, while not being available for other legal professionals105. Not 
all court staff and judges can currently work remotely in a secure manner106. Access to digital 
tools for the different aspects of judicial proceedings remains limited, despite the introduction 
of  the  possibility  to  file  an  application  for  legal  aid  online107.  The  projects  under  the  RRP 
aiming to improve the digitalisation of justice are envisaged for the end of 2023 and late 2024. 

Efficiency 

Shortcomings in the data gathering and presentation on the overall efficiency of justice 
persist, while administrative justice continues to perform efficiently. There is a persistant 
lack of disaggregated efficiency data for the litigious and non-litigious civil and commercial 
cases108. This does not allow for a proper evaluation of the overall efficiency of the judicial 
system109.  Thus,  specific  inefficiency  problems  could  remain  unnoticed110.  However,  the 
administrative justice continues to perform efficiently. As in previous  years, the disposition 
time for administrative courts is very low at first instance courts111. Furthermore, in a specific 
area  of  EU  law  –  consumer  protection  –  both  in  terms  of  administrative  and  judicial 
proceedings, the courts and administration appear to be very efficient112.  

II. 

ANTI-CORRUPTION FRAMEWORK  

The  Commission  for  Counteracting  Corruption  and  Illegal  Assets  Forfeiture  (the  Anti-
Corruption Commission) remains responsible for both preventive and sanctioning actions for 
high-profile  corruption,  the  implementation  of  rules  on  asset  declarations  and  conflicts  of 
interests,  the  confiscation  of  illegally  acquired  assets,  carrying  out  certain  investigation 

102  See Order No. 691 of 11 August 2022. 
103  Written contribution from the Supreme Court of Cassation in the context of the country visit, p. 4 
104  There is no full electronic connectivity, allowing for a case to be accepted by another court electronically. 
Written contribution from the Supreme Court of Cassation in the context of the country visit, “Information on 
Topic 4”, p. 2. 

105  Figure  45,  2023  EU  Justice  Scoreboard.  The  percentage  of  female  judges  at  the  HCCJ  is  of  around  80%, 
currently the second highest percentage among supreme courts within the EU. See Figure 36, 2023 EU Justice 
Scoreboard. 

106  Figure 44, 2023 EU Justice Scoreboard. See also 2021 Rule of Law Report, Country Chapter on the rule of 

law situation in Bulgaria, p.12. 

107  Figures 46 and 47, 2023 EU Justice Scoreboard. Currently, it is only possible to consult electronic files and to 
receive information online about court fees. However, it is still not possible to initiate proceedings online, and 
the official court documents cannot be served electronically. 

108  See 2022 Rule of Law Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Bulgaria, p. 12. 
109  Figures 7 and 8, 2021 EU Justice Scoreboard. 
110  Written  contribution  from  the  Supreme  Court  of  Cassation  in  the  context  of  the  country  visit  to  Bulgaria. 
“Delays  in  commercial  dispute  proceedings  are  a  very  serious  problem.  It  entails  not  only  adverse 
consequences, but also significant  material damage  to the parties”. In particular, the adverse  consequences 
caused by the delayed handling of cases cannot be remedied by organisational measures alone as the main 
reason lies in the lack of resources in the Commercial Chamber.  

111  Figures 9 and 10, 2023 EU Justice Scoreboard. It is to be noted that this result is based on the methodology 

used by CEPEJ. 

112  Figures 22 and 23, 2023 EU Justice Scoreboard. 

13 

 
                                                           
activities as well as the monitoring of the implementation of institutional integrity action plans. 
Other institutions, such as the National Investigation Service, the State Security Service, the 
Internal Security Directorate, and the Chief Inspectorate provide various additional functions 
in the prevention and repression of corruption. The abolition of the special judicial authorities 
was completed during the reporting period, with  cases concerning special criminal offences 
(including high-level corruption) transferred to the regional and appellate judicial authorities 
around the country. The National  Anti-Corruption Council continues to  operate as  an inter-
ministerial advisory body. 

The perception among experts and business executives is that the level of corruption in 
the public sector remains high. In the 2022 Corruption Perceptions Index by Transparency 
International,  Bulgaria  scores  43/100  and  ranks  26th  in  the  European  Union  and  72nd 
globally113.  This  perception  has  been  relatively  stable  over  the  past  five  years114.  The 2023 
Special  Eurobarometer  on  Corruption  shows  that  81%  of  respondents  consider  corruption 
widespread in their country (EU average 70%) and 29% of respondents feel personally affected 
by  corruption  in  their  daily  lives  (EU  average  24%)115.  As  regards  businesses,  78%  of 
companies consider that corruption is widespread (EU average 65%) and  59% consider that 
corruption  is  a  problem  when  doing  business  (EU  average  35%)116.  Furthermore,  40%  of 
respondents find that there are enough successful prosecutions to deter people from  corrupt 
practices (EU average 32%)117, while 11% of companies believe that people and businesses 
caught for bribing a senior official are appropriately punished (EU average 30%)118. 

The Government has tabled a reform of the Anti-Corruption Commission in light of the 
concerns  regarding  the  effectiveness  of  the  current  Anti-Corruption  Commission, 
although it has not been adopted yet. A reform to improve the Anti-Corruption Commission 
is envisaged under Bulgaria’s RRP119, and aims at introducing the investigative powers120 and 
further  reorganising  the  structure  of  the  Anti-Corruption  Commission  by  splitting  it  in  two 

113  Transparency  International  (2023),  Corruption  Perceptions  Index  2022,  pp.  2-3.  The  level  of  perceived 
corruption  is  categorised  as  follows:  low  (the  perception  among  experts  and  business  executives  of  public 
sector corruption scores above 79); relatively low (scores between 79-60), relatively high (scores between 59-
50), high (scores below 50). 

114  In 2018 the score was 42, while in 2022 the score was 43. The score significantly increases/decreases when it 
changes  more  than  five  points;  improves/deteriorates  (changes  between  4-5  points);  is  relatively  stable 
(changes from 1-3 points) in the last five years. 

115 Special Eurobarometer 534 on Corruption (2023). The Eurobarometer data on citizens’ corruption perception 

and experience is updated every year. The previous data set is the Special Eurobarometer 523 (2022). 

116 Flash Eurobarometer 524 on Businesses’ attitudes towards corruption in the EU (2023). The Eurobarometer 
data  on  business  attitudes  towards  corruption  as  is  updated  every  year.  The  previous  data  set  is  the  Flash 
Eurobarometer 507 (2022). 

117  Special Eurobarometer 534 on Corruption (2023).  
118  Flash Eurobarometer 524 on Businesses’ attitudes towards corruption in the EU (2023).  
119  Council  Implementing  Decision  on  the  approval  of  the  assessment  of  the  recovery  and  resilience  plan  for 
Bulgaria, SWD(2022) 106 final and COM(2022) 172 final. Two specific milestones on the reform of the Anti-
Corruption Commission are envisaged under the Bulgarian RRP, namely the milestones 218 (titled: Entry into 
force  of  the  legislative  amendments  reforming  the  Anticorruption  and  the  Illegal  Assets  Forfeiture 
Commission) and 220 (titled: Anti-Corruption body set up and operational). 

120 Аccording to the current anti-corruption law, the Commission does not have powers to carry out investigative 
activities, as the competent directorate collects, analyses, and verifies information about acts of corruption of 
persons occupying high public offices, i.e. which includes operational searches. 

14 

 
                                                           
separate bodies121. A draft law, adopted by government, currently is progressing through the 
parliamentary  procedure122.  Parliament  did  not  nominate  a  chair  for  the  Anti-Corruption 
Commission  since  the  previous  chair  resigned  in  February  2022123.  According  to  the 
Government,  the  legislative  reform  is  necessary  as  it  considers  that  the  Anti-Corruption 
Commission  currently struggles to  effectively  and proactively implement its broad mandate 
(including verification of asset and interest declarations, carrying out integrity checks as well 
as confiscation of criminal assets). According to civil society, this is further compounded by a 
lack  of  public  trust  and  a  lack  of  transparency  by  the  agency  itself124,  although  the  Anti-
Corruption Commission itself maintains it provides transparent information on its activities on 
its website125. The OECD has also recommended improvements in how the Anti-Corruption 
Commission  approaches  integrity  checks  and  the  implementation  of  codes  of  ethics  with 
regards  to  civil  servants,  which  is  currently  seen  as  rather  fragmented126.  In  the  meantime, 
internal reorganisation continued, including moving more staff towards the processing of asset 
declarations, although it is unclear how this affects the functioning of other parts of the Anti-
Corruption  Commission127.  The  Anti-Corruption  Commission  itself  reports  increased 
efficiency and results based on an increase of reports and procedures on conflicts of interest128, 
although civil society criticises the formalistic approach and lack of actual conflicts of interest 

121  2022 Rule of Law  Report,  Country  Chapter on the  rule of law situation in Bulgaria, p. 14 and Input from 
Bulgaria for the 2023 Rule of Law Report, pp. 4-5 and pp. 16-17. The draft legislative reform foresees the 
creation of an Anti-Corruption Commission that would focus on senior public office holders by collecting and 
analysing  information  about  national  anti-corruption  policies  and  measures,  by  developing  and  proposing 
measures for prevention and counteraction of corruption and coordination of their implementation; and by the 
detection  and  investigation  of  certain  crimes,  characterized  as  corrupt,  committed  by  senior  public  office 
holders. The existing Commission would remain focused only on the seizure and confiscation of illegal assets. 
122  A draft law was initially adopted by the Government on 1 November 2022, but did not pass the parliamentary 
procedure before Parliament was dissolved in February 2023. The acting Government then re-approved the 
draft law in late March 2023 and tabled it in the newly constituted Parliament (following elections) in April 
2023 (no. 49-302-01-16). Further, two other draft laws were proposed by political groups in Parliament (draft 
laws no. 49-354-01-13 from 26 April 2023, and 49-354-01-62 from 2 June 2023). On 14 June 2023, the Legal 
Committee of the Parliament endorsed in a first vote the draft law submitted on 2 June. On 15 June, the Anti-
Corruption Committee of the Parliament also endorsed it in a first vote. However, this draft law deviates on 
number of points from the one proposed by the Council of Ministers, with elements of potential concern in 
particular as regards political independence of the Anti-Corruption Commission. Input from Bulgaria for the 
2023 Rule of Law Report, pp. 4-5 and pp. 16-17; Information received in the context of the country visit from 
the Ministry of Justice).  

123  2022  Rule  of  Law  Report,  Country  Chapter  on  the  rule  of  law  situation  in  Bulgaria,  pp.  14-15,  written 
contribution from the Anti-Corruption Commission received in the context of the country visit to Bulgaria and 
information  received  in  the  context  of  the  country  visit  from  the  Anti-Corruption  Commission.  The 
Commission maintains that the lack of a chair does not affect their performance.  

124  Information received in the context of the country visit from the Anti-Corruption Fund and the Centre for the 
Study of Democracy; Contribution from the Centre for the Study of Democracy for the 2023 Rule of Law 
Report, p. 14, Contribution from the Bulgarian Institute for Legal Initiatives for the 2023 Rule of Law Report, 
p. 18 and GRECO Fifth Evaluation Round – Evaluation report, para. 50. 

125 Input from Bulgaria for the 2023 Rule of Law Report. 
126  OECD (2023), Reforming Integrity Checks and Code of Ethics in Bulgaria: Recommendations for the Anti-
Corruption Commission. This report was produced in the framework of an EU-funded project, implemented 
through the Technical Support Instrument (TSI). 

127  The  workload  is  affected  by  the  frequent  parliamentary  elections.  Written  contribution  from  the  Anti-
Corruption Commission received in the context of the country visit to Bulgaria and information received in 
the context of the country visit from the Anti-Corruption Commission. 

128  Written  contribution  from  the  Anti-Corruption  Commission  received  in  the  context  of  the  country  visit  to 

Bulgaria. 

15 

 
                                                           
established129. In 2022, the Anti-Corruption Commission received 384 reports on conflicts of 
interest; it initiated 140 procedures that resulted in 25 decisions regarding senior public officials 
(finding 44 conflicts of interest)130. Additionally, the anti-corruption directorate of the Anti-
Corruption  Commission131  received  801  alerts  in  2022,  and,  in  559  cases,  performed 
operational or investigative actions on demand of the prosecution offices (of which 86 turned 
up  evidence  of  criminal  activity)  and  735  searches  across  the  country  in  relation  to  alerts 
received132.  

The  National  Strategy  for  Prevention  and  Countering  Corruption  continues  to  be 
implemented. The Government has committed in its RRP to providing yearly implementation 
reports on the 2021-2027 anti-corruption strategy by 2026 at the latest133. For now, it remains 
difficult to monitor the progress on the implementation of the anti-corruption strategy without 
these yearly reports134. Some partial results for 2022 were reported by the Ministry of Justice, 
albeit many of the proposed legislative revisions were delayed due to the political situation135. 
While  the  Anti-Corruption  Council  should  monitor  the  implementation  of  the  strategy,  this 
work has not started, possibly due to the political situation136. The Anti-Corruption Council 
held one meeting in June 2022, which discussed updating and reporting on the implementation 
of  the  Anti-Corruption  Strategy,  although  this  did  not  result  in  concrete  changes  or  steps 

129 Anti-Corruption Fund (2023), “Anti-Corruption institutions 2022: eyes wide shut”, 2022 annual report, pp. 6-

7. 

130 While the number of reports and the number of procedures have increased compared to 2021 (384 reports in 
2022  compared  to  255  in  2021;  leading  to  140  procedures  initiated  in  2022  compared  to  90  in  2021),  the 
number of decisions establishing a conflict of interest remains similar (22 decisions in 2021 compared to 25 
decisions in 2022). Written contribution from the Anti-Corruption Commission received in the context of the 
country visit to Bulgaria. 

131  The  Anti-Corruption  Commission  is  organised  into  six  specialised  directorates:  prevention  of  corruption, 
public register of asset declarations, conflict of interest, countering corruption, confiscation of the illegally 
acquired property and management of confiscated assets.. Information received in the context of the country 
visit from the Anti-Corruption Commission. 

132  Compared with 877 alerts; 618 integrity checks with 97 showing criminal activity and 800 searches in 2021. 
Activity Report for the Commission for Anti-Corruption and Illegal Assets Forfeiture of 2022, pp. 23-26.  
133  Under  its  RRP  (milestone  226),  the  latest  possible  deadline  for  these  implementation  reports  is  Q1  2026. 
Bulgaria  committed  to  provide  “Annual  analyses  on  the  implementation  of  the  National  Strategy  for 
Preventing and Combatting Corruption (2021-2027) and its associated Roadmap and annual reporting on the 
progress of implementation in the context of the European Rule of Law mechanism”. See also information 
received in the context of the country visit from the Ministry of Justice and 2022 Rule of Law Report, Country 
Chapter on the rule of law situation in Bulgaria, p. 15. 

134  This is without prejudice to the assessment of Milestone 226 from the RRP regarding the reporting on the 

yearly implementation of the strategy. 

135  Civil society points to unclarity over the implementation of corruption prevention measures included in the 
Anti-Corruption Strategy. Contribution from the Centre for the Study of Democracy for the 2023 Rule of Law 
Report, p. 15; contribution from the Bulgarian Institute for Legal Initiatives for the 2023 Rule of Law Report, 
p. 18 and Input from Bulgaria for the 2023 Rule of Law Report, Annex 3. 

136  Written contribution from the Anti-Corruption Council received in the context of the country visit to Bulgaria; 
information received in the context of the country visit from the Anti-Corruption Council and GRECO Fifth 
Evaluation Round – Evaluation report, para. 45. See also Contribution from the Bulgarian Institute for Legal 
Initiatives for the 2023 Rule of Law Report, p. 18. 

16 

 
                                                           
forward137. There is some concern that the responsibilities of the Anti-Corruption Commission 
and the Anti-Corruption Council may overlap138.  

There has been no progress made on improving the track-record in high-level cases of 
corruption.  The  2022  Rule  of  Law  Report  recommended  to  Bulgaria  to  “Ensure  that  the 
institutional reforms of the Anti-Corruption Commission and specialised judicial authorities 
lead to an improved effectiveness of investigations and a robust track-record of prosecution 
and final judgments in high-level corruption cases.” Given that accurate reporting, including 
disaggregated  data,  on  high-level  corruption  cases  remains  lacking,  it  is  not  possible  to 
conclude that there are concrete results on the track-record of high-level case of corruption. 
The  Prosecutor  General’s  Office  and  the  Supreme  Court  of  Cassation  continue  to  report 
different  streams  of  data  on  corruption  and  high-level  corruption  cases,  which  makes  it 
problematic  to  establish  a  clear  picture.  Regular  annual  reporting  on  high-level  corruption 
cases,  envisaged  under  the  RRP  to  improve  accuracy  and  reliability  of  data,  has  not  yet 
started139 although  a  working  group  on  the  issue  has  been  set-up140.  The  Supreme  Court of 
Cassation has started differentiating between high-level and regular corruption cases since the 
fourth quarter of 2022. Under this mechanism, the Supreme Court of Cassation currently tracks 
eight cases related to high-level corruption141, while it also reports six cases “with high-level 
defendants”  were  initiated  before  the  court  in  2022142.  On  the  other  hand,  the  Prosecutor-
General’s  office,  reports  144  new  pre-trial  proceedings  in  relation  to  corruption143,  and  48 
indictments  brought  to  the  courts,  in  cases  in  the  first  9  months  of  2022144.  Overall,  the 
perception remains  that the prosecution remains ineffective, sometimes leading to  a lack of 

137 Written contribution from the Anti-Corruption Council received in the context of the country visit to Bulgaria 
and Council of Ministers (2022), The National Council of Anti -Corruption Policies discussed updating the 
National Strategy for Prevention and Counteracting Corruption. 

138  GRECO Fifth Evaluation Round – Evaluation report, para.53, written contribution from the Anti-Corruption 
Commission received in the context of the country visit to Bulgaria and information received in the context of 
the country visit from the Anti-Corruption Council and Ministry of Interior. While GRECO recommends the 
Bulgarian authorities to clarify the responsibilities of both bodies, both the Anti-Corruption Commission and 
Anti-Corruption Council, as well as the Ministry of Interior deny any issues with overlap of responsibilities in 
practice.  

139  This concerns milestone 222 under Bulgaria’s RRP. The reports are expected to include data on the number 
of the high-level corruption cases filed, the number of cases concluded, detailed descriptions of the grounds 
for conclusion (both in the investigative stage and trial stage), number of convictions and acquittals, as well 
as indicators defining the cases for high-level corruption. Council Implementing Decision on the approval of 
the assessment of the recovery and resilience plan for Bulgaria, SWD(2022) 106 final. 

140  Input from Bulgaria for the 2023 Rule of Law Report, p. 3 and written contribution from the Supreme Court 

of Cassation received in the context of the country visit to Bulgaria. 

141  This  concerns  the  case  reported  in  the  first  half  of  2023. Written  contribution  from  the  Supreme  Court  of 

Cassation received in the context of the country visit to Bulgaria. 

142  The  list  includes  high-level  defendants  as  defined  by  Art.6,  para.  1,  points  3,  21,  32,  46  of  the  Counter-
Corruption and Unlawfully Acquired Assets Forfeiture Act, but it remains unclear if this represents all high-
level cases. Written contribution from the Supreme Court of Cassation received in the context of the country 
visit to Bulgaria. Overall, in 2022, 34 cases related to corruption offences were initiated before the Supreme 
Court of Cassation. Input from Bulgaria for the 2023 Rule of Law Report, Annex 4 - list of initiated cases in 
front of the Supreme Court of Cassation. 

143  The  prosecutor’s  office  reports  that  these  cases  are  “initiated  for  corruption  offences  with  an  alleged 
perpetrator, accused or perpetrator in a position of authority or in a specific capacity (managerial and control 
functions)”.  This  definition  appears  to  cover  some  high-level  corruption  cases,  but  also  other  proceedings 
involving lower-level civil servants. Written contribution from the Prosecutor-General received in the context 
of the country visit to Bulgaria. 

144  Written contribution from the Prosecutor-General received in the context of the country visit to Bulgaria. 

17 

 
                                                           
effective investigations in corruption cases or charges brought forward that are not supported 
by  sufficient  evidence  or  failing  to  meet  legal  requirements145.  While  acknowledging  that 
results could be improved, the prosecutors indicate that the limited results are related to the 
closure of the specialised judicial authorities, the way investigations are set-up as well as the 
multiple  and  frequent  legislative  changes146.  GRECO  has  called  for  more  proactive  and 
systematic  investigations  and  prosecutions  for  corruption  offences  linked  to  top  executive 
functions,  a  removal  of  procedural  impediments,  and  an  effective  and  proportionate 
sanctioning147. This was confirmed by a stakeholder’s analysis, according to which the ratio of 
convictions in high-level corruption cases appears low with few cases reaching the final stages 
of proceedings148. Further, Parliament focused on the prosecution’s performance in a hearing 
of the Prosecutor General before the Constitutional and Legal Affairs committee, where the 
discussion  focused  on  the  low  conviction  rate  in  high-level  corruption  cases  and  lack  of 
results149. A number of former and current Bulgarian political figures were sanctioned by third 
countries  during  2023  related  to  high-level  corruption,  which  signals  further  concerns150. 
Following arrests made in a high-level corruption case involving various former top executive 
officials151 under suspicions of corruption during 2022, as well as their subsequent release from 
prison152,  the  administrative  court  ruled  the  that  the  arrest  warrants  in  the  case  were  issued 
illegally153. Given that the reform of the Anti-Corruption Commission has not yet been adopted, 
and that a robust track-record of prosecution and final judgments in high-level corruption cases 

145  Civil society insists proceedings are marred with political interference, a lack of a proactive stance and proper 
investigative actions by the prosecutor and a mixed quality of the indictments. The “Eight Dwarfs” case is also 
used as an example to demonstrate the inaction of the prosecution in face of numerous (public) allegations. 
Information received in the context of the country visit from the Anti-Corruption Fund and the Centre for the 
Study of Democracy and the  Bulgarian Institute  for  Legal  Initiatives; Yankulov,  A (2023), What needs  to 
change in criminal justice, pp. 8-9; Anti-Corruption Fund, “Anti-Corruption institutions: a zero year”, 2021 
annual report, p.6 and pp. 24-25. and Anti-Corruption Fund (2023), The prosecutor's office has terminated the 
criminal proceedings on the "Eight Dwarfs" because it did not detect a crime. 

146  Information received in the context of the country visit from the Association of Public Prosecutors and the 
Prosecutor-General,  Written  contribution  from  the  Association  of  Public  Prosecutors  and  the  Prosecutor-
General received in the context of the country visit to Bulgaria and input from Bulgaria for the 2023 Rule of 
Law Report, Annex 2. 

147  GRECO Fifth Evaluation Round – Evaluation report, recommendation xiii, para. 119. "The [evaluation team] 
firmly believes that at present, Bulgaria’s criminal justice response to corruption cases involving [top executive 
functions] is unsatisfactory and needs to be addressed as a matter of urgency.” 

148  Monitoring work and analysis by civil society signal 5 convictions but 15 acquittals in the high-level cases it 
monitors, with a conviction of a mayor to six years imprisonment for corruption offences being recognised as 
“the first conviction within this sample of cases in six years”. The report stresses the conviction rate for high-
level corruption rate fundamentally differs from conviction rates in other types of cases. Anti-Corruption Fund 
(2022), “Anti-Corruption institutions: a zero year”, 2021 annual report, p. 6 and pp. 24-25 and Anti-Corruption 
Fund (2023), “Anti-Corruption institutions 2022: eyes wide shut”, 2022 annual report, pp. 5-6 and pp. 23-24. 
149  National  Assembly  (2022),  Transcript  of  the  regular  meeting  of  the  Parliamentary  Committee  on 

Constitutional and Legal Affairs held on 21 July 2022. 

150  On 10 February 2023, the US and UK sanctioned a number of current or former Government official under 
their Global Magnitsky Act, referring to allegations of corruption. Notably, this included some individuals 
against whom investigations or indictments were previously halted or dismissed within the Bulgarian justice 
system.  

151  This relates to administrative detention for a period of 24 hours by police authorities. Notably the former Prime 
Minister, Finance Minister, Chief of the parliamentary budgetary Commission, as well as a media adviser are 
involved. 

152  2022 Rule of Law Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Bulgaria, p. 16. 
153  Final Decisions by the Sofia City Administrative Court of 24 August, 1 November and 31 December 2022.  

18 

 
                                                           
remains  to  be  established,  there  has  been  no  progress  on  the  implementation  of  the 
recommendation made in the 2022 Rule of Law report.  

The  impact  of  the  closure  of  the  specialised  judicial  authorities  in  the  fight  against 
corruption cannot yet be fully assessed. The Specialised Prosecutor’s Office and Specialised 
Criminal Courts in the fight against corruption were closed in 2022, with their competences 
and cases transferred to the regional and appellate level authorities154. Only limited practical 
issues were detected with the transition155. It remains too early to substantially assess the effect 
of the closure of these institutions. Nonetheless, the prosecutors claim less cases of corruption 
are being sent to the prosecution following the closure of the institutions as well as a lack of 
specialised expertise among regional prosecution offices to deal with corruption cases156. Other 
stakeholders,  however,  see  only  little  to  no  positive  or  negative  impacts  at  this  stage157.  A 
number of measures were taken by the authorities to ease cooperation with the European Public 
Prosecutor’s  Office  (EPPO)158,  though  the  EPPO  has  expressed  concerns  about  the 
independence, general working conditions and working environment in Bulgaria159. The EPPO 
called  on  the  authorities  to  establish  an  independent  administrative  structure,  to  ensure  the 
urgent  assignment  of  dedicated  and  specialised  police  investigators  to  the  EPPO  and  to 
nominate missing candidates as European Delegated Prosecutors160. An agreement to detach 
police officers to the EPPO remains pending with the Ministry of Interior161.  

Work  is  ongoing  on  the  framework  on  foreign  bribery.  Detection,  investigation  and 
prosecution  of  foreign  bribery  cases  is  seen  as  ineffective  and  has  been  criticised  by  the 
OECD162. In this context, work is ongoing on a legislative reform in the area of foreign bribery. 
Under  the  2021-2027  Anti-Corruption  Strategy,  a  working  group  is  to  examine  ways  to 
improve liability of legal persons and other legislative changes relevant in the area of foreign 
bribery, in line with OECD recommendations163. This process is seen as sensitive, although the 
working group aims to formulate a proposal during 2023164. 

Some progress has been made on corruption prevention measures aimed at improving 
the integrity of specific sectors of the public administration, including the police and the 
judiciary.  The  2022  Rule  of  Law  report  recommended  to  Bulgaria  to  “Continue  the 
implementation  of  measures  to  improve  the  integrity  of  the  specific  sectors  of  the  public 

154  Input from Bulgaria for the 2023 Rule of Law Report, p.4 and 2022 Rule of Law Report, Country Chapter on 

the rule of law situation in Bulgaria, pp. 15-16. 

155  Information received in the context of the country visit from the Ministry of Justice and written contribution 

from the Supreme Court of Cassation received in the context of the country visit to Bulgaria. 

156  Information received in the context of the country visit from the Association of Public Prosecutors and the 
Prosecutor-General and written contribution from the Association of Public Prosecutors and the Prosecutor-
General received in the context of the country visit to Bulgaria. 

157  Information  received  in  the  context  of  the  country  visit  from  the  Initiative  Justice  for  Everyone,  the  Anti-
Corruption Fund, the Bulgarian Institute for Legal Initiatives and the Centre for the Study of Democracy and 
the Bulgarian judges association. 

158  Input from Bulgaria for the 2023 Rule of Law Report, p. 17. 
159 Including during a meeting with the Minister of Justice in February 2023. 
160 EPPO (2023), Press Release – Meeting between European Chief Prosecutor and Bulgaria’s Minister for Justice  
161  Input from the EPPO for the 2023 Rule of Law Report, p. 4. 
162  OECD (2021), Phase 4 evaluation of Bulgaria, p.54 (para.197). 
163  OECD (2021), Phase 4 evaluation of Bulgaria, p.54 (para.197). 
164  Input from Bulgaria for the 2023 Rule of Law Report, Annex 3 and information received in the context of the 
country  visit  from  the  Ministry  of  Justice.  See  also  OECD  (2021),  Phase  4  evaluation  of  Bulgaria,  p.54 
(para.197).  

19 

 
                                                           
administration, including measures tailored to the police and the judiciary”. The Ministry of 
Interior  continues  to  implement  various  projects  to  improve  the  integrity  of  the  police,  and 
particularly the border police165, including integrity tests166. The Ministry of Interior maintains 
it has already set high standards for integrity among police officers167. Nonetheless, GRECO 
has recently expressed concerns in relation to the overall police integrity, as gaps remain168, 
such as the operational independence of the police from the Ministry of the Interior169 and a 
lack of dedicated anti-corruption policies, such as a detailed code of conduct for the police, risk 
assessment or rules on gifts170. Authorities have set-up a working group that drafted an action 
plan  to  address  all  GRECO  recommendations171.  As  regards  the  judiciary,  authorities  are 
revising the law on the Inspectorate to the Supreme Judicial Council (ISJC) in order to make 
its corruption prevention systems more robust, to achieve the commitments under the RRP172. 
The  ISJC  signals  that  a  number  of  training  courses  on  integrity  –  in  particular  on  the  asset 
declaration system for magistrates – were carried out; and it has prepared three analyses that 
aim to further improve integrity among magistrates173. Of the 12 integrity checks carried out 
by  the  Inspectorate  in  2022,  3  led  to  disciplinary  proceedings174.  Measures  to  improve  the 
integrity  of  specific  sectors  continue  to  be  implemented,  although  some  of  the  announced 

165  2022 Rule of Law Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Bulgaria, p. 17, Input from Bulgaria 
for the 2023 Rule of Law Report, pp. 21-22 and Information received in the context of the country visit from 
the Ministry of Interior. See also European Commission (2022), Report of the voluntary based fact-finding 
mission to Bulgaria and Romania on the application of the Schengen acquis and its developments since 2011, 
p. 51. “Measures for the border police include, among others, an email address and a 24/7 telephone number 
where  anyone  can  report  problems  when  travelling  at  the  border  crossing  points  of  Bulgaria  or  alerts  on 
incorrect treatment by border police officers. Video surveillance has been installed in all control booths for 
border checks, and areas of the border crossing points to control the organisation of preventing and countering 
corrupt behaviour of staff. Staff rotation is frequently (every couple of hours, on a random basis) carried out 
to distribute staff within border crossing points.” 

166  For  example,  through  unexpected  inspections  of  the  traffic  police.  Written  contribution  from  the  Internal 

Security Directorate received in the context of the country visit to Bulgaria. 

167  Information received in the context of the country visit from the Ministry of Interior and written contribution 
from the Internal Security Directorate received in the context of the country visit to Bulgaria. For all officials 
of  the  Ministry  of  Interior  (which  includes  the  police),  during  2022,  the  Directorate  verified  307  reports 
concerning corruption; with 27 pre-trial proceedings initiated. For the border police, during 2022, there were 
118 reports of misconduct received, which resulted in opening pre-trial proceedings against eight officers. 
168  In particular for the police, some key recommendations from GRECO include: Operational independence of 
the  police,  including  instructions;  sponsorships  and  donations;  a  dedicated  anti-corruption  policy;  a 
comprehensive risk assessment; a code of ethics; and rules on gifts and strengthened integrity checks. GRECO 
Fifth Evaluation Round – Evaluation report, paras 124, 127, 135, 142, 146, 162, 181. 

169  GRECO, Fifth Evaluation Round – Evaluation report, para 124. 
170  GRECO, Fifth Evaluation Round – Evaluation report, para 142, 146 and 162. 
171  The  action  plan  is  being  consulted  with  various  institutions  in  advance  of  adoption  by  the  government. 
Information received in the context of the country visit from the Chief Inspectorate and Ministry of Interior 
and  Written  replies  from  Bulgaria  to  the  European  Parliament  LIBE  Democracy,  Rule  of  Law  and 
Fundamental Rights Monitoring Group (DRFMG), p. 12.  

172  See milestone 219 of the Bulgarian RRP. The ISJC needs to progress on a revision of the ethical guidelines 
for the conduct of magistrates, the reporting of its cases and the delivery of anti-corruption training courses, 
which is ongoing. The milestone does not require necessarily the use of legislative amendments to achieve 
this. 

173  Work on the electronic public register of declarations, which should facilitate online submissions of assets and 
interest  declarations  of  magistrates,  has  been  suspended  due  to  non-fulfillment  of  the  contract  by  the 
contractor. Input from Bulgaria for the 2023 Rule of Law Report, p. 16 and information received in the context 
of the country visit from the Inspectorate to the Supreme Judicial Council. 

174  Input from Bulgaria for the 2023 Rule of Law Report, p. 10 and information received in the context of the 

country visit from the Inspectorate to the Supreme Judicial Council. 

20 

 
                                                           
measures still need to be fully implemented. There has therefore been some progress on the 
implementation of the Recommendation made in the 2022 Report. In addition to this, public 
procurement  continues  to  be  an  area  at  high  risk  of  corruption  and  measures  to  improve 
competition  in  public  procurement  as  well  as  to  improve  and  intensify  controls  and  related 
sanctions are key deliverables under the RRP in 2023-2024175. Parliament adopted amendments 
to the Public Procurement Act in December 2022. The revised act aims to increase transparency 
and  competition  and  curb  corrupt  practices  and  conflicts  of  interest176.  The  Flash 
Eurobarometer  on  Businesses’  attitudes  towards  corruption  in  the  EU  shows  that  55%  of 
companies  in  Bulgaria  (EU  average  26%)  think  that  corruption  has  prevented  them  from 
winning a public tender or a public procurement contract in practice in the last three years177. 

Serious gaps remain as regards integrity of top executive functions. This has been noted 
by GRECO178 and civil society179. In particular, there are no legal requirements on the integrity 
or  incompatibilities  of  persons  hired  for  ministers’  private  offices180,  and  there  is  no 
comprehensive code of conduct, or sanctioning mechanism for top executive functions in place. 
The code of conduct for public officials does not cover top executive functions181. It remains 
unclear whether the Chief Inspectorate and various ministerial inspectorates have appropriate 
functional  independence  to  carry  out  their  corruption  prevention  tasks  adequately182.  A 
working group aims to address the GRECO recommendations further.  

The  rules  on  asset  and  interest  disclosure  for  public  officials  are  systematically 
implemented,  but  effectiveness  of  verifications  and  sanctions  could  be  improved.  For 
2022, there were 11 915 declarations of assets received by the Anti-Corruption Commission 
183 and a total of 11 363 verifications of asset declarations submitted in 2022 with 750 decisions 
establishing an administrative violation. 8 844 verifications of declarations submitted in 2021 
were also still processed in 2022184. In 2022, the Anti-Corruption Commission carried out 11 
inspections in response to alerts received in connection with declarations of incompatibility of 

175  See Milestones 242-250. 
176 These measures are subject to dedicated milestones under the RRP and will be assessed in this context and in 
accordance with dedicated procedures and timeline. Input from Bulgaria for the 2022 Rule of Law Report, p. 
23. 

177 Flash Eurobarometer 524 on Businesses’ attitudes towards corruption in the EU (2023). This is 29 percentage 

points above the EU average. 

178  GRECO Fifth Evaluation Round  – Evaluation report, par 3: “The integrity framework applicable to public 
officials  does  not  cover  PTEFs  in  a  sufficient  manner:  no  code  of  ethics  applies  to  them,  and  there  is  no 
awareness-raising on integrity matters, nor any established mechanism for confidential counselling on ethical 
issues.” 

179  Contribution from the Bulgarian Institute for Legal Initiatives for the 2023 Rule of Law Report, pp. 18-19. 
180  GRECO Fifth Evaluation Round – Evaluation report, recommendation i and ii, para. 31 and 33. According to 

GRECO, these persons and their functions should also be made public in an online register. 

181  i.e., government members and their private offices. Nonetheless, the development of such a Code of Conduct 
is foreseen in Measure 5, Priority 1 of the National Anti-Corruption Strategy for 2021-2027. GRECO Fifth 
Evaluation Round – Evaluation report para 43.  

182  GRECO Fifth Evaluation Round – Evaluation report, paras. 78-79. 
183  Compared to 12 430 declarations received and 679 decisions on violations for 2021. Written contribution from 
the Anti-Corruption Commission received in the context of the country visit to Bulgaria and Activity Report 
for the Commission for Anti-Corruption and Illegal Assets Forfeiture of 2022, pp. 14-18. 

184  This concerns cases of both failure to submit and wrongly submitted asset declarations. Activity Report for 

the Commission for Anti-Corruption and Illegal Assets Forfeiture of 2022, pp. 14-18. 

21 

 
                                                           
persons holding senior public positions185. The Anti-Corruption Commission assigned more 
staff to the handling of asset and interest declarations, but continues to be overburdened, as 
noted by GRECO, also due to the frequent parliamentary elections and governmental changes. 
This may result in irregularities going unnoticed186. The control mechanism appears superficial 
and not sufficiently dissuasive187. Civil society also signals the lack of higher sanctions in case 
of repeated violations of the Law on Anti-Corruption and Illegal Asset Forfeiture188. Clear rules 
on the declaration of gifts to top executive persons remain lacking189. 

A  working  group  has  been  set  up  to  examine  the  issue  of  lobbying,  as  it  remains 
unregulated. As noted in the previous Rule of Law Reports, there are no specific obligations 
for  the  registration  of  lobbyists  or  reporting  of  contacts  between  public  officials  and 
lobbyists190. Bulgaria has committed to adopt legislative measures to regulate lobbying under 
the  framework  of  the  RRP  by  the  end  of  2023191.  GRECO  has  also  strongly  recommended 
authorities  to  introduce  rules  on  how  top  executive  functions  engage  in  contacts  with 
lobbyists192. Authorities report that a working group has been convened in February 2023 to 
create a concept and possible draft legislation by the end of the year193.  

Audits  on  political  party  financing  continue, although  the  framework  has  come  under 
increased strain due to the frequent elections. The National Audit Office (NAO) remains 
responsible  for  carrying  out  audits  on  the  consistency  of  financial  activities,  revenue, 
expenditure and management of assets made available to political parties, including managing 
the Unified Public Register of political parties194. The audit office has come under increased 
strain  due  to  the  repeated  elections  in  Bulgaria,  having  carried  out  five  electoral  audits  on 
declarations  of  revenue  and  expenditure  of  electoral  campaigns  in  the  period  2021-2022. 
Regularly scheduled audits had to be dropped to accommodate for unforeseen elections due to 

185  No information was provided regarding the development of an online platform to file and verify declarations 
of asset and conflict of interests. Input from Bulgaria for the 2023 Rule of Law Report, p. 19 and 2022 Rule 
of Law Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Bulgaria, p. 18. 

186  GRECO Fifth Evaluation Round – Evaluation report, recommendation ix, para 111-112. GRECO States that 
“verifications  of  property,  income,  asset  and  interest  declarations,  whether  by  the  Anti-Corruption 
Commission, or other authorised bodies […] were not sufficiently comprehensive, which allowed considerable 
irregularities to pass unnoticed.” (par. 111). 

  The  Ministry  of  Interior,  although  they  do  not  exert  any  control  over  the  Anti-Corruption  Commission, 
considers that the staffing of the Anti-Corruption Commission is adequate Information received in the context 
of  the  country  visit  from  the  Ministry  of  Interior  and  the  Anti-Corruption  Commission  and  GRECO  Fifth 
Evaluation Round – Evaluation report, recommendation ix, para 112. 

187  GRECO Fifth Evaluation Round – Evaluation report, recommendation ix, para 112. 
188  An MP not filing his declarations generally gets the same administrative fine, even if he repeatedly does not 
file a proper declaration. Information received in the context of the country visit from the Centre for the Study 
of Democracy.  

189  GRECO Fifth Evaluation Round – Evaluation report, para. 95 and Contribution from the Centre for the Study 

of Democracy for the 2023 Rule of Law Report, p. 15. 

190  See 2022 Rule of Law Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Bulgaria, p. 18. 
191  Notably, a concept  note shall be prepared on the regulation of lobbying, and legislative  measures shall be 

adopted to regulate lobbying activities in the context of public decision-making. 

192  This  includes  also  the  necessity  to  include  an  element  of  transparency  towards  the  public.  GRECO  Fifth 

Evaluation Round – Evaluation report, recommendation xiii, para. 74. 

193  Input from Bulgaria for the 2022 Rule of Law Report, p.19 and information received in the context of the 

country visit from the Ministry of Justice. 

194  2022 Rule of Law Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Bulgaria, p. 18. 

22 

 
                                                           
insufficient resources195. Some conclusions of two of these electoral audits were forwarded to 
the prosecution for possible criminal violations196. On 22 May 2023, the National Audit Office 
announced it will publish 17 audit reports that were sent to the Prosecutor’s Office in the period 
2016-2020  on  suspicions  of  criminal  activity,  where  all  pre-trial  proceedings  have  been 
dropped197. Due to the political situation, the National Audit Office continues to operate with 
an  expired  mandate198.  Moreover,  the  chair  of  the  National  Audit  Office  was  dismissed  by 
Parliament  in  January  2023199.  Following  these  allegations  that  the  dismissal  was  without 
objective reasons200, the Constitutional Court decided that the members of Parliament removed 
the chair in violation of the Constitution, invalidating Parliament’s decision201.  

Passports from the discontinued investor citizenship scheme were revoked. Bulgaria has 
started  a  process  of  revoking  Bulgarian  citizenship  previously  granted  under  its  investor 
citizenship scheme due to investors’ failure to comply with the national legal framework202. 
This scheme was abolished with effect as of 5 April 2022203. Such schemes have high inherent 
corruption-related risks. The former head of the Bulgarian Investment Agency, responsible for 
the  scheme,  has  been  charged  with  abuse  of  office  in  relation  to  the  grant  of  Bulgarian 
citizenship under the scheme204.  

Legislation  on  whistleblowing  has  been  adopted  by  Parliament.  Legislation  on  the 
protection  of  whistleblowers  aiming  to  transpose  the  EU  Whistleblowers  Directive205,  a 
requirement under EU law, and also included in Bulgaria’s RRP206, was adopted by Parliament 
in January 2023, right before its dissolution207. Civil society raised concerns about the fact that 

195  Information received in the context of the country visit from the National Audit Office and written contribution 

from the National Audit Office received in the context of the country visit to Bulgaria. 

196  Information received in the context of the country visit from the National Audit Office and written contribution 
from the National Audit Office received in the context of the country visit to Bulgaria. The Office points to 
restriction of the current legal regime in force (art. 58 of the National Audit Office Act), the National Audit 
Office  cannot communicate or obtain further information about cases it sends to the prosecution, until the 
closure of criminal proceedings. This makes receiving feedback on or seeing results of their work difficult.  
197  The Audit Office intends to publish findings from audits sent to the Prosecutor's Office, where the proceedings 
had ended with a refusal to initiate pre-trial proceedings or with a decree to terminate pre-trial proceedings. 
Such a public release of audit findings has not happened over the past reporting periods. 

198  Information received in the context of the country visit from the Bulgarian Institute for Legal Initiatives and 

contribution from the Bulgarian Institute for Legal Initiatives for the 2023 Rule of Law Report, p. 24. 

199  Motion for the dismissal of the chair of the Bulgarian National Audit Office, of 20 January 2023 and National 

Audit Office, Press Release - The National Assembly dismissed the chairman of the Audit Office. 

200  The dismissal was criticised by civil society as being without objective reasons and potentially affecting the 
independence and operation of the National Audit Office. Information received in the context of the country 
visit from the Bulgarian Institute for Legal Initiatives. 

201  See Constitutional Court Decision No. 5 of 22 June 2023 on Case No. 5 of 20 January 2023. 
202  SEGA (2022), Bulgaria has begun confiscating golden passports. Bulgarian Minister of Justice Zarkov, in the 
context of a close door hearing in the European Parliament, mentioned to reporters that 12 “golden passports” 
have already been revoked, with the procedure for 5 more underway.  

203  2022 Rule of Law Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Bulgaria, p. 19. 
204  Lex.bg (2023), Former head of investment agency charged over ‘golden passports’. 
205  Directive (EU) 2019/1937. 
206  Milestone 217 of Bulgaria’s RRP requires, among other issues, that Bulgaria “[introduces] the requirements 
of Directive (EU) 2019/1937, notably: the creation of confidential internal and external channels for reporting 
irregularities and corruption; the establishment of verification mechanisms of the submitted signals; providing 
protection  and  support  measures  to  whistle-blowers;  ensuring  provision  of  feedback  and  publicity  on  the 
results of the performed inspections based on signals. 

207  The Law on the Protection of Whistleblowers or Publicly Disclosing Information on Violations, adopted by 

the 48th National Assembly on January 27, 2023. 

23 

 
                                                           
the law does not introduce a possibility for anonymous reporting. However, this is not required 
by the EU Whistleblowers Directive, and falls within the discretion of national legislators208. 
The authority designated under the law as competent to receive whistleblowers’ reports is the 
Commission  for  Data  Protection  (instead  of  the  Anti-Corruption  Commission  as  it  was  in 
earlier drafts of the legislation), which is considered inadequate by some stakeholders due to 
possibilities of political interference209. 

III.  MEDIA PLURALISM AND MEDIA FREEDOM 

The Bulgarian legal framework is based on a set of constitutional safeguards and legislative 
measures,  such  as  the  Radio  and  Television  Act210.  The  Access  to  Public  Information  Act 
regulates  access  to  public  information  and  the  re-use  of  public  sector  information.211  The 
Compulsory  Deposit  of  Copies  of  Printed  and  Other  Works  Act  contains  requirements 
regarding media ownership transparency (“Law on Deposit of Copies”)212. The institutional 
framework consists of the media regulator, the Council for Electronic Media (CEM), and the 
National Council for Journalistic Ethics and its executive body – the Ethics Commission213. 

Concerns remain about the lack of sufficient safeguards to secure the independence of 
the media regulator in practice, which may affect the functioning of the authority. In the 
latest Media Pluralism Monitor, independence and effectiveness of the media regulator scored 
a risk of 37%, a noticeable increase from last year’s risk factor of 25%214. According to the 
report, this is due to some actions of the regulatory body that are perceived as politicised.215 
The budget of CEM is still considered to be an issue: the CEM has indicated that it has faced 
difficulties to attract staff due to the low salaries proposed, although the authority was provided 
with  additional resources  for staff and maintenance216. Moreover, several  stakeholders have 
shared doubts about the complete political independence in the activities carried out and point 
to the fact that the very constitution of CEM exposes it to risks of political influence, a point 
which was also acknowledged by CEM members217.  

The  issues  regarding  the  effective  transparency  of  media  ownership  and  related 
enforcement of these obligations remain, in particular as regards online media. In addition 
to  the  CEM  public  register  covering  media  ownership  structures  of  radio  and  television 

208  Contribution  from  the  Centre  for  the  Study  of  Democracy  for  the  2023  Rule  of  Law  Report,  p.  15  and 

information received in the context of the country visit from civil society. 

209  Contribution  from  the  Centre  for  the  Study  of  Democracy  for  the  2023  Rule  of  Law  Report,  p.  15  and 

contribution from BILI for the 2023 Rule of Law Report, p. 20. 

210  Radio and Television Act. Bulgaria ranks 71st in the 2023 Reporters without Borders World Press Freedom 

Index compared to 91st in the previous year. 

211 Access to public information Act, available at Access to Public Information Act (government.bg). 
212  The enforcement of the Law on Deposit of Copies is carried out by the Ministry of Culture. 
213  The media self-regulatory body acts on the basis of the Code of Ethics adopted in 2004 and signed by a number 
of media outlets. The decisions of the Ethics Commission (the executive body of the NCJE) are only binding 
on the signatories of the Bulgarian Media Code of Ethics and voluntary for other media players. In 2022, the 
Ethics Commission handled 36 cases (written contribution from Reporters sans frontières for the 2023 Rule 
of Law Report). 

214  2023 Media Pluralism Monitor, p. 13. 
215  2023 Media Pluralism Monitor, p. 8. 
216  Information  received  from  the  Council  for  Electronic  Media  (CEM)  during  the  country  visit;  Input  from 

Bulgaria for the 2023 Rule of Law Report. 

217  See 2023 Media Pluralism Monitor, p. 13. Information received by Association of European journalists during 

the country visit. Information received from CEM during the country visit. 

24 

 
                                                           
operators218, the Ministry of Culture hosts a public register based on declarations made by any 
media outlet of its beneficial ownership, as well as the funding received from public funds, 
political parties, etc219. Although the legal framework is in place220, not all media declare their 
ultimate owners. Stakeholders refer in particular to some online media that have untransparent 
ownership, and this lack of transparency was considered common for websites disseminating 
disinformation about the war in Ukraine221. An expert working group was set up within the 
Ministry of Culture in 2021 to consider changes to the 2018 Law on the Deposit of Copies to 
improve the effective availability of media ownership information and work is progressing in 
that setting222.  

There  has  been  some  progress  as  regards  transparency  in  the  allocation  of  state 
advertising. The 2022 Rule of Law Report recommended Bulgaria to improve transparency in 
the  allocation  of  state  advertising,  in  particular  with  regard  to  state  advertising  contracted 
through intermediaries, such as media agencies. As indicated in the 2022 Rule of Law Report, 
prior to that recommendation, some general measures had been taken to improve transparency 
in practice, notably through the publication of a list of contracts awarded for the purpose of 
state advertising, including recipient and amount received223. Moreover, stakeholders indicate 
that electronic media have had for some years already the obligation to declare the source of 
the advertising received from public authorities224. However, several print media and websites 
fail to declare such information225. More generally, the overall picture regarding allocation of 
state advertising by the public authorities has not improved, and the absence of clear rules on 
how public funds are allocated to the media has raised concerns that this may be based on their 
perceived editorial loyalty226. The Government indicated that in December 2022 the members 
of the Council for the Rule of Law agreed to form an expert working group to discuss topics 
affecting  the  media  environment,  including  the  transparency  in  the  distribution  of  state 
advertising which was one of the priority topics identified. This working group was formally 
set up at a meeting of said Council on 26 June 2023227. At the same time, the authorities also 

218  See 2021 Rule of Law Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Bulgaria, p.16. A link to the 

register is available at Собствеността в медиите (cem.bg). 

219  The public register is accessible at: Министерство на културата на Република България (government.bg). 
220  The indicator of transparency of media ownership scores low risk (29%) as it did last year, due to the existence 

of legal provisions (2023 Media Pluralism Monitor, p. 15). 

221  2023 Media Pluralism Monitor, p. 9, 15 and 17. Information received from Media democracy Foundation in 

the context of the country visit. 

222  Information received from Bulgaria in the context of the country visit and follow-up contribution. Discussions 
in the expert group have focused on clarifying the ownership of online publications, which will improve the 
effectiveness of law enforcement, but also on other issues, such as reducing the excessive penalties provided 
for in the law and refining the scope of obliged persons by removing the obligation to declare the ownership 
and funding of specialised publications. 

223  See 2022 Rule of Law Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Bulgaria.  
224  Information received from NCJE and ABBRO in the context of the country visit. 
225  Written contribution from Reporters sans frontières for the 2023 Rule of Law Report. Information received 

from Media democracy Foundation in the context of the country visit. 

226  Information received from Media democracy Foundation and Union of publishers in the context of the country 
visit. Written contribution from Reporters sans frontières for the 2023 Rule of Law Report. The 2023 Media 
Pluralism Monitor indicates that there are no significant improvements in the rules and distribution of state 
advertising, which continues to be a key tool by governments ‘to advance media capture’ (p. 19). 

227 On 26 June 2023, the Council for the Rule of Law adopted a concept note which stresses the commitments of 
the Bulgarian authorities to take measures to implement the recommendation on state advertising, as well as 
other  questions  relevant  for  media  pluralism  and  media  freedom  in  Bulgaria.  Written  contribution  from 
Bulgaria. 

25 

 
                                                           
indicated that the issue of state advertising would be discussed in parallel and regulated in the 
context of the European Media Freedom Act228. As a result, it is considered that only some 
progress has been made in relation to the aforementioned recommendation. 

While  legal  safeguards  for  editorial  independence  are  in  place,  there  are  claims  of 
political influence over the media in practice. Media can rely on the principle of editorial 
independence from economic and political actors, which is set out in the Radio and Television 
Law  and  features  in  the  Code  of  ethics  of  Bulgarian  media229.  The  2023  Media  Pluralism 
Monitor  indicator  on  ‘Political  independence  of  the  media’  scored  a  medium  risk  of  42%, 
which shows a decrease of 33.3% compared to the previous year230. The report underlines that 
these  positive  changes  are,  to  some  extent,  attributed  to  the  easing  of  the  political  pressure 
observed in previous  years. At the same time, the report confirms  the  absence of sufficient 
safeguards  capable  of  preventing  in  practice  conflicts  of  interests  as  well  as  influence  of 
political actors over the media. It also notes that journalists consider that economic entities are 
among  the  leading  sources  for  external  pressure  over  the  media231.  Moreover,  some 
stakeholders point to the economic weakness as a main challenge for the media sector, which 
makes it dependent on external sources. This can lead media, in particular local media, to turn 
to  state  resources,  which  creates  risks  that  such  resources  are  granted  in  exchange  for 
favourable reporting232. Finally, apart from general competition rules, which are underpinned 
by economic considerations, no specific rules exist when it comes to activities that may have 
an impact on media concentration233. 

The  media  regulator  failed  to  elect  a  new  Director  General  of  the  Bulgarian  national 
television. The media regulator CEM appoints the Directors-General of the Bulgarian national 
radio  (BNR) and television (BNT) following a  public competition  and after hearings of the 
relevant candidates. The management boards of the BNR and the BNT consist of five members 
each and are endorsed by the media regulator upon proposal by the Directors-General234. In 
2022,  the  CEM  was  unable  to  elect  a  new  Director-General  of  BNT,  which  leads  to  the 
continued mandate of the present Director-General running for an unspecified period of time235. 
This outcome has been considered as a source of concern by some stakeholders236. The 2023 
Media Pluralism Monitor considers that independence of public service media scores a high 
risk of 94%, an increase of two percentage points compared to last year’s assessment. The rise 

228  Input from Bulgaria for the 2023 Rule of Law Report; Information received from Bulgaria in the context of 

the country visit. 

229  Art. 5 of the Radio and Television Law; Section 3 of the Code of Ethics. See also Article 11 of the Radio and 

Television Law, specifically for rights granted to journalists of electronic media. 

230  2023 Media Pluralism Monitor, p. 18. 
231  2023 Media Pluralism Monitor, p. 16 and 18. 
232  Information obtained as a follow-up to the country visit from the Union of publishers. 
233  See  2022  Rule  of  Law  Report,  Country  Chapter  on  the  rule  of  law  situation  in  Bulgaria.  The  NCJE  also 
indicates that no thresholds exist to prevent high concentration in the media (information obtained during the 
country  visit).  Others  refer  to  concentration  in  the  hands  of  companies,  which  are  also  active  in  the 
telecommunications sector, information obtained from Union of publishers. See also 2023 Media Pluralism 
Monitor, p. 16. 

234  Art. 58(1) Radio and Television Act. 
235  This is due to the fact that following the unsuccessful election of a new Director General, one of the candidates 
in the competition launched a court case against it. A new procedure for appointment can only take place once 
this case is resolved. 

236  Written contribution from Reporters sans frontières for the 2023 Rule of Law Report; information obtained 

in the context of the country visit from Association of European journalists. 

26 

 
                                                           
of the risk factor regarding public service media over the years is reported to be linked to the 
fact that the term of office of the management boards and the directors general of the BNR and 
the BNT can be extended indefinitely in case the CEM does not endorse new directors general 
and management boards237. The envisaged238 revision of the law, previously reported239, which 
aimed to strengthen the independence of public service media and define in more detail the 
public service remit and the related financing, has not been further discussed due to the political 
situation240. 

Although  issues  remain,  there  are  some  positive  trends  as  regards  access  to  public 
information. There have been some improvements, notably in terms of access to information 
functionalities of institutional websites, as well as a slight increase in the number of institutions 
responding within the statutory deadline and in the number of institutions providing full access 
to  the  requested  information241.  At  the  same  time,  some  of  the  known  obstacles,  such  as 
administrative tacit refusals, are still present242.  

The  protection  of  journalists  is  being  examined  by  a working  group,  while  journalists 
continue to encounter various difficulties and threats in their activities, including online 
threats. A positive legislative development relates to amendments to the criminal code, notably 
in  terms  of  crimes  of  insults  and  defamation,  where  the  amount  of  possible  fines  against 
journalists is planned to be reduced243. Stakeholders report on the continued use of strategic 
lawsuits against public participation, so-called SLAPPs cases, against journalists244. A recent 
example is the defamation claim made against a media service provider seeking a compensation 
of approximately EUR 500 000 (BGN 1 million), an unprecedented amount claimed in court245. 
The working group on the media environment set up by the Council for the Rule of Law on 26 
June 2023 will also cover the protection of journalists from SLAPPs, which will be among the 
key  topics  for  future  reflections246.  Other  attacks  against  journalists  can  also  be  noted,  in 

237  2023 Media Pluralism Monitor, p.19-20. 
238  See 2022 Rule of Law Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Bulgaria, which referred to the 

draft law introduced in Parliament in 2021.  

239  See 2022 Rule of Law Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Bulgaria, p. 22. 
240  Information received in the context of the country visit from the Ministry of Culture. Please refer to pillar I 
and pillar IV on more information as regards the political situation. More generally, according to European 
Parliament’s Flash Eurobarometer: News & Media Survey 2022, 44% of respondents in Bulgaria stated that 
they trust public TV and radio stations, below the EU average of 49%. 

241 2023 Media Pluralism Monitor, p.12. See also information received in the context of the country visit from 

Access to information programme. 

242  2023 Media Pluralism Monitor, p.12. See also information received in the context of the country visit from 
Access to information programme and written contribution from Reporters sans frontières for the 2023 Rule 
of Law Report, which refers to several refusals of access to information specifically by the Prosecutor’s office.  
243  Input by Bulgaria to the 2023 rule of law report, confirmed during the country visit by stakeholders. On 19 
May 2023, a joint draft to amend and supplement the Criminal Code was passed in a first vote in Parliament. 
Written contribution from Bulgaria. 

244  2023 Media Pluralism Monitor, p.13. Liberties 2023 Rule of law report, p. 31. See also 2022 report of the 
Agency for fundamental rights (‘FRA’). See also written contribution from Reporters sans frontières for the 
2023 Rule of Law Report. One development regarding lawsuits concerns a register of cases against journalists 
and the media which is made available on the website of the Supreme Court of Cassation.  

245  See  report  on  the  civil  claim  made  at  the  Sofia  City  Court  against  Mediapool  in  March  2023: 

https://www.mapmf.org/alert/30013?q=mediapo. 

246 In this regard, a concept note to ensure  media freedom, media pluralism and protection from SLAPPs was 
adopted by the Council for the Rule of Law on the same day as the setting up of the relevant working group. 
Written contribution from Bulgaria. See also https://www.justice.government.bg/home/index/396aedca-f63a-
48c5-a5c2-e145d29fa69d. 

27 

 
                                                           
particular online harassment of journalists which is on the rise; this was perceived in particular 
in the context of reporting on Russia’s war against Ukraine and the COVID-19 vaccination 
rollout247.  Stakeholders  reported  pressure  by  public  institutions,  political  parties  and  a 
controversial statement made against a journalist from a member of a regulatory authority248. 
Apart from online harassment, journalists rank physical threats as the most common form of 
external  pressure249.  Four  new  alerts  regarding  attacks  and  harassment  of  journalists  were 
registered in 2023 on the Council of Europe Platform to promote the protection of journalism 
and safety of journalists250.  

IV.  OTHER INSTITUTIONAL ISSUES RELATED TO CHECKS AND BALANCES 

Bulgaria is a representative democratic republic with a directly elected President, a unicameral 
National Assembly and a Constitutional Court in charge of constitutional review of laws and 
interpretative  decisions.  The  National  Assembly  has  a  final  decision-making  power  when 
adopting laws251. Bulgaria has two national human rights institutions. First, the Ombudsperson 
is an independent constitutional body, elected by the National Assembly and tasked with the 
promotion and protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms. Second, the Commission 
for the Protection against Discrimination is a body that implements policies in the spheres of 
gender equality and non-discrimination.  

An  improved  national  Post-monitoring  Mechanism  was  established  with  an  expanded 
scope to align with the EU annual Rule of Law Report. As indicated in previous reports252, 
the  Government  committed  to  set  up  a  Coordination  and  Cooperation  Council  (‘post-
monitoring council’) with the aim of assessing Bulgaria’s progress in judicial reforms, the fight 
against corruption and organised crime in an independent, transparent, and objective manner. 
On  5  August  2022,  the  Government  amended  the  decree  establishing  the  Council253.  The 
amendments renamed the mechanism as “A Mechanism for the Rule of Law”, with a Council 
for  the  Rule  of  Law  established  for  the  application  of  the  mechanism254.  Furthermore,  the 
amendments expanded the competences of the Council to cover the full scope of the Annual 
Rule of Law Report255. The Council for the Rule of Law is co-chaired by the Minister of Justice 
and the Representative of the Supreme Judicial Council. The members of the Council include 
representatives of the relevant Governmental authorities for each topic, judicial authorities and 
civil society organisations (CSOs)256. Stakeholders have informed that the cooperation with the 

247  2023 Media Pluralism Monitor, p. 9, 12 and 14; see also 2022 survey on freedom of speech in Bulgaria by the 

Association of European Journalists. See also Liberties 2023 Rule of law report. 

248  Information  received  in  the  context  of  the  country  visit  from  Media  democracy  Foundation,  Access  to 
information  programme  and  the  Association  of  European  Journalists.  See  also  written  contribution  from 
Reporters sans frontières and Liberties for the 2023 Rule of Law Report. 

249  2023  Media  Pluralism  Monitor,  p.12;  see  also  2022  survey  on  freedom  of  speech  in  Bulgaria  by  the 

Association of European Journalists. See also Liberties 2023 Rule of law report. 

250  Moreover, since the last rule of law report, 5 alerts have been reported in autumn 2022. 
251  Art. 87 of the Constitution: any member of the National Assembly or the Council of Ministers has the right to 
introduce a draft law. It is adopted by the National Assembly in two readings. The adopted draft law is sent to 
the President of the Republic of Bulgaria, who signs a decree for its promulgation. The draft is then published 
in the State Gazette and enters into force three days after its publication, unless the act provides otherwise. 
252  See 2022 Rule of Law Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Bulgaria, p. 23. See 2021 Rule 

of Law Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Bulgaria, p. 17. 

253  Decree of the Council of Ministers No. 240 of 24 September 2019.  
254  Art. 1 of the Decree of the Council of Ministers No. 240. 
255  Art. 2 of the Decree of the Council of Ministers No. 240. 
256  Art. 6 of the Decree of the Council of Ministers No. 240. 

28 

 
                                                           
authorities  is  very  constructive257  and  they  are  managing  to  achieve  progress  with  the  first 
decisions related to the necessary measures for the implementation of the recommendations of 
the 2022 Rule of Law Report258. They also reported that while the Supreme Bar Council was 
not included in the original list of participants in the Civil Council, part of the Council for the 
Rule  of  Law,  an  amendment  to  the  Decree  establishing  the  Council  was  made  in  order  to 
include the Supreme Bar Council in the list259.  

The renewal of the mandates of independent and regulatory authorities has been delayed 
due to the political  situation. Over the past  two  years, there have been  five parliamentary 
elections, with only one of them managing to create a stable government, which lasted only 
eight months. On 6 June 2023, a new regular government took office260. This situation has had 
the  consequence  of  delaying  the  renewal  of  the  mandates  of  important  independent  and 
regulatory  authorities261.  With  a  growing  number  of  independent  and  regulatory  authorities 
operating under a prolonged expired mandate, there is a potential risk that decisions of these 
authorities could be influenced262 by the fact that actions on the renewal of mandates have not 

257  Information received from Bulgarian Institute for Legal Initiatives, Centre for the Study of Democracy and 

Access to Information Programme in the context of the country visit to Bulgaria. 

258  See Protocol No. 1 of the Meeting of the Council for the Rule of Law. 
259  Information received from the Ministry of Justice and the Supreme Bar Council in the context of the country 
visit to Bulgaria. On 5 December 2022, a procedural motion was made, unanimously adopted by the members 
of the Council, to amend the Decree No. 240/2019 by including a representative of the Supreme Bar Council 
in  the  composition  of  the  Civil  Council  of  the  Council  for  the  Rule  of  Law.  Following  this  decision,  the 
Ministry of Justice drafted an amendment to the decree, which was promulgated in Official Gazette No. 25 of 
17 March 2023. 

260  This is a rotation government between the first and the second political powers represented in the Parliament. 
The  first  9  months,  the  Government  will  be  presided  by  the  representative  of  the  second  biggest  political 
power, while for the second 9 months, it will be presided by the representative of the biggest political power. 
During the periods when they are not Prime Ministers, they will be Deputy Prime Ministers.  

261  Currently,  these  are:  Bulgarian  National  Bank  –  Governor  and  two  Deputy  Governors;  Supreme  Judicial 
Council  –  11  members  (quota  of  the  National  Assembly);  Inspectorate  to  the  Supreme  Judicial  Council  – 
Inspector General and 10 Inspectors; Commission for Personal Data Protection – Chairman and four members 
of  the  board;  Commission  for  Public  Oversight  of  Statutory  Auditors  –  Chairman  and  four  members; 
Committee for disclosing the documents and announcing affiliation of Bulgarian citizens to the State Security 
and intelligence services of the Bulgarian National Army – Chairman, Deputy Chairman, Secretary and six 
members;  Financial  Supervision  Commission  –  Chair;  National  Social  Security  Institute  –  Governor; 
Bulgarian National Audit Office – President, two Vice-Presidents, two Members; Bulgarian Fiscal Council – 
Chairman  and  four  members;  Commission  for  Protection  against  Discrimination  –  Chairman,  Deputy 
Chairman and three members; Public Enterprises and Control Agency – 1 member of the Supervisory Board. 
There are also authorities for which the mandate was prematurely terminated without appointing a new person 
on the position:  Commission  for Combating Corruption and Confiscation of Illegally  Acquired Property  – 
Chairman;  Energy  and  Water  Regulatory  Commission  –  Chairperson;  National  Bureau  for  Control  over 
Special Intelligence Means – one member; National Health Insurance Fund – Director. A special case is the 
Constitutional Court of the Republic of Bulgaria which operates with two judges less from the quota of the 
National Assembly. Another judge’s mandate from the quota of the National Assembly would expire in 2024. 
If no judge is appointed at any of these positions, this would make the functioning of the Constitutional Court 
very difficult. See Chapter VIII of the Constitution.  

262  This situation creates a potential risk of taking decisions with a form of prior compliance. This means that 
institutions are more likely to take decisions, which would comply with the predicted reaction/position of the 
current or future authorities responsible for renewing their mandates due to the threat of premature termination 
of the already expired mandate. As explained in pillar II, according to stakeholders, a recent example is that 
of the chair of the Bulgarian National Audit Office. Furthermore, upon a request by members of Parliament of 
the  48th  National  Assembly,  the  Constitutional  Court  reviewed  the  constitutionality  of  the  decision  on  the 
dismissal  of  the  chair  and  decided  that  the  members  of  Parliament  removed  the  chair  in  violation  of  the 

29 

 
                                                           
been taken.  If the situation with  the  renewal  of  mandates is  not remedied, there could be  a 
particular issue with regard to the Constitutional Court. It already works with a limited number 
of judges and another mandate ending in 2024. The number of judges in that Court risks to be 
insufficient for it to fulfil its functions263. Another body with an expired mandate is one of the 
National  Human  Rights  Institutions264,  namely  the  Commission  of  the  Protection  against 
discrimination, whose Chairperson, Deputy and members have been operating with an expired 
mandate since July 2022. 

Important  procedural  rules  regarding  the  law-making  process  are  in  place,  however 
concerns arise in relation to implementation in practice. As mentioned in the 2022 Rule of 
Law Report, and in line with the implementation of the RRP265, improved rules for law-making 
in the Parliament have been adopted266. Accordingly, all draft legislation proposed by Members 
of Parliament should be accompanied by a reasoning and an impact assessment. Moreover, a 
summary  of  stakeholders’  opinions  is  to  be  presented  with  the  draft  laws  as  part  of  the 
parliamentary  committee  report  on  a  draft  law.  In  addition,  the  possibility  of  introducing 
important legislative changes through amendments to other legal acts between the first and the 
second reading is limited to amendments related to the matter of the initially submitted act and 
subject to the approval by a two-thirds majority of the committee responsible. As regards the 
practice of introducing legislative changes through amendments to other acts between the first 
and the second reading, no regular continuation of this practice has been reported, except for 
some  notable  examples267.  However,  stakeholders  have  reported  that  some  of  the  new 
obligations  are  not  thoroughly  respected  in  practice.  According  to  these  reports  draft  laws 
proposed by members of the Parliament are still often accompanied by just a pro forma impact 
assessment268.  Analysis  of  the  law-making  process  published  by  the  Centre  for  Regulatory 
Impact Assessment also reports insufficient progress with only sporadic implementation of the 
impact assessment requirement and frequent circumvention of mandatory public consultations 
for  draft  laws  tabled  by  members  of  Parliament269.  According  to  the  data  collected  by  the 
National  Centre  for  Parliamentary  Research  for  the  legislative  process  in  the  47th  and  48th 
Parliaments,  in  about  90%  of  the  draft  laws  tabled  by  members  of  Parliament,  there  is  no 
information  on  public  consultations  or  discussions  held  to  determine  the  problems  nor  on 
reasons necessitating the adoption of the draft law270. The quality of law-making is an important 

Constitution, invalidating Parliament’s decision. See Constitutional Court Decision No. 5 of 22 June 2023 on 
Case No. 5 of 20 January 2023. 

263  Information received from the Constitutional Court in the context of the country visit to Bulgaria.  
264  There are two National Human Rights Institutions in the country – the Ombudsperson, which has an A-status 
accreditation from Global Alliance of National Human Rights Institutions (GANHRI), and the Commission 
of the Protection against discrimination, which has a B-status accreditation from GANHRI.  

265  Milestone 241 under the RRP. 
266  See 2022 Rule of Law Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Bulgaria, p. 23. 
267  During the adoption of the Law on the Budget and during the adoption of the amendments on the Electoral 
Code for the reintroduction of paper ballots. During the adoption of the Law on the amendment and supplement 
of  the  Judicial  System  Act  to  introduce  amendments  regarding  the  Inspectorate  to  the  Supreme  Judicial 
Council, the Parliament adopted without any discussions and votes in the Legal Committee the separation of 
the National Investigative Service from the Prosecutor’s Office and new disciplinary sanctions for magistrates. 
268  Information received from Bulgarian Centre for Not-for-Profit Law, Bulgarian Helsinki Committee and Open 

Society Institute – Sofia in the context of the country visit to Bulgaria.  

269  Project "Regulatory Reform In Bulgaria - Five Years Of Stagnation Or Development?" by Regulatory Impact 

Assessment (RIA) Bulgaria. 

270  National Assembly. Study of the law-making activity of the National Assembly (December 2021 – July 2022) 

and (October 2022 – December 2022), p. 50 and p. 35. 

30 

 
                                                           
factor  for  investor  confidence  and  a  reason  for  concern  about  effectiveness  of  investment 
protection  for  24%  of  companies  in  Bulgaria271.  Stakeholder  feedback  suggests  that  quick 
adoption of laws before prior assessment results in costs and legal uncertainty for business 272. 

On 1 January 2023, Bulgaria had 93 leading judgments of the European Court of Human 
Rights pending implementation, an increase of one compared to the previous year273. At 
that time, Bulgaria’s rate of leading judgments from the past 10 years that remained pending 
was at 55% (the same as at the start of 2022) and the average time that the judgments had been 
pending implementation  was 6  years and 10 months  (compared to  6  years and 4 months in 
2022)274. One of the oldest leading judgments pending implementation for 22 years concerns 
the  excessive  use  of  force  by  law  enforcement  agents275.  On  15  June  2023,  the  number  of 
leading judgments pending implementation has increased to 96276. 

The Council for Civil Society Development has begun functioning. As reported in the 2022 
Rule of Law Report, the Council for Civil Society Development was appointed and has begun 
functioning277. The Council assembled for the first time on 8 March 2022 and until 20 January 
2023 has held a total of 10 meetings during which it established priority areas for their work: 
volunteering;  civic  participation;  dialogue  and  partnership;  funding  to  the  civic  sector;  and 
using the Council as a communication platform278. One of the main goals of the new Council 
is to create a national funding mechanism for CSOs. Stakeholders have reported that it is hard 
for CSOs to receive EU funding (through state agencies dealing with EU funds) because they 
are considered as commercial entities and the state applies the same state aid restrictions as for 
private companies receiving EU funding279. 

Despite the negative opinion of the Minister of Justice, the draft law for the registration 
of foreign agents was resubmitted by one of the political parties in the new Parliament 
and continues to raise serious concerns as regards the work of CSOs. On 27 October 2022, 
a  new  draft  law  for  the  “Registration  of  foreign  agents”  was  tabled  in  Parliament  by  some 

271  Figure  54,  2023  EU  Justice  Scoreboard  indicates  that  “Frequent  changes  in  legislation  or  concerns  about 

quality of the law-making process” are of concern to 24% of companies in Bulgaria.  

272  Figure 55, 2023 EU Justice Scoreboard. 
273  The adoption of necessary execution  measures  for a  judgment by the European  Court of Human  Rights is 
supervised by the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe. It is the Committee’s practice to group 
cases against a State requiring similar execution measures, particularly general measures, and examine them 
jointly. The first case in the group is designated as the leading case as regards the supervision of the general 
measures and repetitive cases within the group can be closed when it is assessed that all possible individual 
measures needed to provide redress to the applicant have been taken. 

274  All figures are calculated by the European Implementation Network and are based on the number of cases that 
are considered pending at the annual cut-off date of 1 January 2023. See the Contribution from the European 
Implementation Network for the 2023 Rule of Law Report, p. 2. 

275  Judgment of the European Court of Human Rights of 18 May 2000, Velikova v. Bulgaria, 41488/98, pending 

implementation since 2000. 

276  Data according to the online database of the Council of Europe (HUDOC-EXEC). 
277  See 2022 Rule of Law Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Bulgaria, p. 25. 
278  Franet (2023), Country research - Legal environment and space of civil society organisations in supporting 

fundamental rights - Bulgaria, p. 4. 

279  Written contribution from European Civic Forum  -  Annual Civic Space Report 2022 concerning Bulgaria, 
p.16. Information also received from BCNL and Open Society Institute – Sofia, in the context of the country 
visit to Bulgaria. As explained by stakeholders, the  main restrictions are related to the  de minimis rule for 
receiving EU funds through national intermediaries (i.e. that is, less than EUR 200 000 in any rolling 3-year 
period).  

31 

 
                                                           
Members of Parliament. The draft envisaged to set up a system where every entity (e.g. CSO, 
academic, journalist) that receives more than EUR 500 (BGN 1000) from a foreign state or 
entity (not including the EU Member States and funding coming through the EU) should be 
put in a register of foreign agents and they should state everywhere in their online or offline 
presence that they are a ‘foreign agent’280. Stakeholders have raised concerns that this could 
have a stigmatising effect and further affect the civic space in the country, which continues to 
be rated as narrowed281. However, following negative opinions from CSOs and the Ministry of 
Justice, the draft was never discussed and, as per the general rule of discontinuity, lapsed with 
the dissolution of the Parliament. On 28 April 2023, the same draft law was reintroduced in 
Parliament by the same political party.  

280  Stakeholders have reported that this resembles almost entirely the Russian (as to the labelling in the offline 
and  online  presence  of  the  entity)  and  Hungarian  (as  to  the  labelling,  mandatory  registration  and  imposed 
threshold for amount of money above which the registration would be mandatory) laws on the same topic. It 
should  be  recalled  that  the  combination  of  the  labelling  and  mandatory  registration  stigmatises  CSOs  and 
create a climate of distrust with regard to them, apt to deter natural or legal persons from other Member States 
or third countries from providing them with financial support. See Court of Justice of the European Union, 
judgment of 18 June 2020, Commission v. Hungary, C-78/18, paras. 50, 54, 56, 58 and 118. An open letter 
signed by 180 CSOs was published on the website of the Bulgarian center for not-for-profit law. 

281  See  rating  given  by  CIVICUS,  Bulgaria.  Ratings  are  on  a  five-category  scale  defined  as:  open,  narrowed, 
obstructed, repressed and closed. See also an open letter signed by 180 CSOs was published on the website of 
the Bulgarian center for not-for-profit law. 

32 

 
                                                           
Annex I: List of sources in alphabetical order* 

* The list of contributions received in the context of the consultation for the 2023 Rule of Law report 
can 
https://commission.europa.eu/publications/2023-rule-law-report-targeted-
stakeholder-consultation_en. 

found 

be 

at 

Administration of the Bulgarian Council of Ministers (2022), Opinion on the draft law on digitalisation 
of justice.  

Anti-Corruption  Fund  (2022),  “Anti-Corruption  institutions:  a  zero  year”  -  2021  annual  report, 
https://acf.bg/en/antikoruptsionni-institutsii-nuleva-g/  

Anti-Corruption  Fund  (2023),  “Anti-Corruption  institutions  2022:  eyes  wide  shut”,  2022 
annual report, https://acf.bg/bg/godishniyat-monitoringov-doklad-na-akf-4/ 

Bulgarian  Center  for  not-for-profit  law,  An  open  letter  signed  by  180  Civil  Society  Organisations, 
https://bcnl.org/news/180-grazhdanski-organizatsii-kazaha-ne-na-zakona-za-chuzhdestrannite-
ageni.html  

Bulgarian Council of Ministers (2019), Decree of the Council of Ministers n.240 of 24 September.2019 

Bulgarian Government (2023), Input from Bulgaria for the 2023 Rule of Law Report. 

Bulgarian Institute for Legal Initiatives Foundation (2023), Contribution from the Bulgarian Institute 
for Legal Initiatives Foundation for the 2022 Rule of Law Report. 

Bulgarian Institute for Legal Initiatives Foundation (2023),  Written contribution from the Bulgarian 
Institute for Legal Initiatives Foundation in the context of the country visit. 

Bulgarian Judges Association (2022), Opinion on the draft law on digitalisation of justice. 

Bulgarian National Assembly (2022), Rules of Organisation and Procedure of the National Assembly. 

Bulgarian  National  Assembly  (2022),  Study  of  the  law-making  activity  of  the  National  Assembly 
(December 2021 – July 2022) and (October 2022 – December 2022) 

Bulgarian Supreme Bar Council (2023), Written contribution from the Bulgarian Supreme Bar Council 
in the context of the country visit. 

CEPEJ (2022), Study on the functioning of the judicial systems in the EU Member States. 

Civicus, Monitor tracking civic space – Bulgaria https://monitor.civicus.org/country/bulgaria/ 

Constitutional Court Decision No. 7 of 2021, on Case No. 9 of 25 February 2021 

Constitutional Court Decision No.7 of 2022, on Case No. 4 of 2022. 

Constitutional Court Case No. 5 of 20 January 2023. 

Constitutional Court Decision No. 12 of 2022, on Case No. 7 29 April 2022. 

Bulgarian Council for the Rule of Law (2022), Protocol No.1 of 2022 

Council  of  Europe:  Committee  of  Ministers  (2010),  Recommendation  CM/Rec(2010)12  of  the 
Committee of Ministers to member states on judges: independence, efficiency and responsibilities. 

Council of Europe: Committee of Ministers (2019), Decision CM/Notes/1362/H46-6. 

Council of Europe: Committee of Ministers (2019), Interim Resolution, CM/ResDH(2019)367. 

Council of Europe: Committee of Ministers (2020), Decision CM/Del/Dec(2020)1377bis/H46-9 of 1-3 
September 2020. 

Council of Europe: Committee of Ministers (2020), Notes CM/Notes/1377bis/H46-9 of 3 September 
2020. 

33 

 
Council  of  Europe:  Committee  of  Ministers  (2021),  Decision  CM/Del/Dec(2021)1419/H46-8  of  2 
December 2021.  

Council of Europe: Committee of Ministers (2021), Notes CM/Notes/1419/H46-8 of 30 November- 2 
December 2021. 

Council  of  Europe:  Committee  of  Ministers  (2021),  Decision  CM/Del/Dec(2021)1398/H46-6  of  11 
March 2021. 

Council of Europe: Committee of Ministers (2021), Notes CM/Notes/1398/H46-6 of 9-11 March 2021. 

Council of Europe: Committee of Ministers (2022), Decision CM/Del/Dec(2022)1436/H46-6 of 10 
June 2022. 

Council of Europe: Venice Commission (2010),  Report on the Independence of the Judicial System 
Part I: The Independence of Judges (CDL-AD(2010)004). 

Council of Europe: Venice Commission (2017), Bulgaria - Opinion on the judicial system act (CDL-
AD(2017)018). 

Council of Europe: Venice Commission (2018), Montenegro – Opinion on the draft law concerning the 
amendments to the law on the council for the judiciary and the judges (CDL-AD(2018)015). 

Council  of  Europe:  Venice  Commission  (2019),  Bulgaria  -  Opinion  on  draft  amendments  to  the 
Criminal Procedure Code and the Judicial System Act, concerning criminal investigations against top 
magistrates (CDL-AD(2019)031). 

Council  of  Europe:  Venice  Commission  (2020),  Parameters  On  The  Relationship  Between  The 
Parliamentary Majority And The Opposition In A Democracy: A Checklist (CDL-AD(2019)015). 

Council of Europe: Venice Commission (2020), Bulgaria - Urgent interim opinion on the draft new 
constitution (CDL-AD(2020)035). 

Council of Ministers (2022), The National Council of Anti -Corruption Policies discussed updating the 
National  Strategy  for  Prevention  and  Counteracting  Corruption  (Националният  съвет  по 
антикорупционни политики обсъди актуализиране на Националната стратегия за превенция и 
противодействие 
корупцията), 
https://www.gov.bg/index.php/bg/prestsentar/novini/natsionalniyat-savet-po-antikoruptsionni-politiki-
obsadi-aktualizirane-na-natsionalnata-strategiya-za-preventsiya-i-protivodeystvie-na-koruptsiyata  

на 

Council of Ministers (2023), The government has approved a draft law on combating corruption among 
за 
persons  holding  high  public  positions 
противодействие  на  корупция  сред  лица, 
заемащи  висши  публични  длъжности), 
https://www.gov.bg/bg/prestsentar/novini/pravitelstvoto-odobri-zakonoproekt-za-protivodeystvie-na-
koruptsiya-sred-litsa-zaemashti-visshi-publichni-dlazhnosti  

(Правителството  одобри  Законопроект 

Council of the European Union (2006), Council conclusions of 17 October 2006, PRESS RELEASE, 
2755th  Council  Meeting,  General  Affairs  and  External  Relations  General  Affairs  13339/06  (Presse 
264), https://data.consilium.europa.eu/doc/document/ST-13339-2006-INIT/en/pdf.  

Council  of  the  European  Union  (2017),  Council  Conclusions  on  the  Cooperation  and  Verification 
Mechanism, 
9, 
https://data.consilium.europa.eu/doc/document/ST-15587-2017-INIT/en/pdf. 

COVEME 

December 

15587/17 

2017, 

12 

Court of Justice of the European Union, judgment of 16 November 2021,  Prokuratura Rejonowa w 
Minsku Mazowieckim, Joined Cases C-748/19 to C-754/19, EU:C:2021:931.  

Court of Justice of the European Union, judgment of 17 June 2017,  Menini & Rampanelli v Banco 
Popolare – Società Cooperativa, C-75/16, ECLI:EU:C:2017:457. 

34 

 
 
Court of Justice of the European Union, judgment of 18 March 2010, Alassini and Others, Case 317/08 
to C-320/08, ECLI:EU:C:2010:146. 

EPPO 
(2023),  Annual  Report 
02/EPPO_2022_Annual_Report_EN_WEB.pdf  

2022, 

https://www.eppo.europa.eu/sites/default/files/2023-

EPPO  (2023),  Press  Release  –  Meeting  between  European  Chief  Prosecutor  and  Bulgaria’s 
Minister  for  Justice,  https://www.eppo.europa.eu/en/news/meeting-between-european-chief-
prosecutor-and-bulgarias-minister-justice 

European Civic Forum (2023), Contribution from the European Civic Forum for the 2023 Rule of Law 
Report. 

European Commission (2006), Commission Decision of 13 December 2006 establishing a mechanism 
for cooperation and verification of progress in Romania to address specific benchmarks in the areas of 
judicial reform and the fight against corruption (C(2006) 6569), OJ L 354, 14.12.2006,  

European  Commission  (2019),  Report  from  the  Commission  to  the  European  Parliament  and  the 
Council on Progress in Bulgaria under the Cooperation and Verification Mechanism, COM(2019)498. 

European Commission (2020), 2020 Rule of Law Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation 
in Bulgaria. 

European Commission (2021), 2021 Rule of Law Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation 
in Bulgaria. 

European Commission (2022), 2022 Rule of Law Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation 
in Bulgaria. 

European Commission (2022), ANNEX to the Proposal for a Council Implementing Decision on the 
approval  of  the  assessment  of  the  recovery  and  resilience  plan  for  Bulgaria,  of  7  April  2022, 
COM(2022) 172 final. 

European Commission (2022), Council Implementing Decision on the approval of the assessment of 
the recovery and resilience plan for Bulgaria, of 7 April 2022, COM(2022) 172 final. 

European Commission (2023), EU Justice Scoreboard. 

European Court of Human Rights, judgment of 5 November 2009, Kolevi v. Bulgaria, 1108/02. 

European Implementation Network (2023), Contribution from the European Implementation Network 
for the 2023 Rule of Law Report.  

Franet, Center for the Study of Democracy (2023), Country research - Legal environment and space of 
civil  society  organisations  in  supporting  fundamental  rights  –  Bulgaria,  Vienna,  EU  Agency  for 
Fundamental Rights https://fra.europa.eu/en/country-data/2023/civic-space-report-2023. 

GRECO (2023), Fifth Evaluation Round – Evaluation Report on Bulgaria on preventing corruption 
and promoting integrity in central governments (top executive functions) and law enforcement agencies. 

National Audit Office (2023), Press Release - The National Assembly dismissed the chairman of the 
Audit  Chamber  Tsvetan  Tsvetkov  and  appointed  Goritza  Grancharova  -  Kozhareva  as  chairman, 
https://www.bulnao.government.bg/bg/novini/pressyobshteniq/narodnoto-sbranie-osvobodi-
predsedatelya-na-smetnata-palata-cvetan-cvetkov-i-opredeli-za-predsedatel-gorica-grncharova-
kozhareva/ 

Motion  for  the  dismissal  of  the  chair  of  the  Bulgarian  National  Audit  Office,  of  20  January  2023, 
https://www.parliament.bg/pub/plenary_documents/48-354-02-
38_PR_osvobozhdavane_na_predsedatel_SP.pdf  

35 

 
OECD  (2021),  Implementing  the  OECD  Anti-Bribery  Convention  -  Phase  4  Report:  Bulgaria, 
https://www.oecd.org/corruption/anti-bribery/Bulgaria-phase-4-report-en.pdf  

OECD (2023), Reforming Integrity Checks and Code of Ethics in Bulgaria: Recommendations for the 
Anti-Corruption Commission, https://doi.org/10.1787/d19f60c1-en  

Plenary of the Supreme Judicial Council (2022), Protocol No.23 of 2022 

Yankulov, A (2023), What needs to change in criminal justice (какво трябва 
да  се  промени  в  наказателното  правосъдие),  Anti-Corruption  Fund,  https://acf.bg/wp-
content/uploads/2023/03/reforma_web-1.pdf  

National  Assembly  (2022),  Transcript  of  the  regular  meeting  of  the  Parliamentary  Committee  on 
Constitutional  and  Legal  Affairs  held  on  21  July  2022  (Стенограма  от  редовно  заседание  на 
Комисията  по  конституционни  и  правни  въпроси,  проведено  на  21  юли  2022  г.), 
https://parliament.bg/bg/parliamentarycommittees/2949/steno/6924  

National Assembly (2023), Draft law on countering corruption among persons holding high public positions, 49-
302-01-16, https://www.parliament.bg/bg/bills/ID/164720 

National Assembly (2023), Anti-corruption bill, 49-354-01-13, https://www.parliament.bg/bg/bills/ID/164758 

National Audit Office (2023), The Audit Office will publish findings from audits sent to the prosecutor's office, 
the proceedings of which have been completed (Сметната палата ще оповести констатации от изпратени 
на 
приключили), 
производствата 
https://www.bulnao.government.bg/bg/novini/pressyobshteniq/smetnata-palata-she-opovesti-konstatacii-ot-
izprateni-na-prokuraturata-oditi-proizvodstvata-po-koito-sa-priklyuchili/ 

прокуратурата 

одити, 

които 

по 

са 

Supreme  Cassation  Court  (2023),  Written  contribution  from  the  Supreme  Court  of  Cassation  in  the 
context of the country visit.  

Supreme Judicial Council (2022), website of the Supreme Judicial Council for the register of seconded 
judges https://vss.justice.bg/page/view/1086  

36 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Annex II: Country visit to Bulgaria 

The Commission services held virtual meetings in February 2023 with: 

  Access to Information Programme 
  Anti-Corruption Council 
  Anti-corruption Fund Foundation 
  Association of Bulgarian Radio and TV Operators 
  Association of European Journalists – Bulgaria 
  Association of Prosecutors in Bulgaria 
  Audio-Visual regulator – Council for Electronic Media 
  Bulgarian center for not-for-profit law 
  Bulgarian Helsinki Committee 
  Bulgarian Industrial Association 
  Bulgarian Institute for Legal Initiatives 
  Bulgarian Judges Association 
  Centre for the Study of Democracy 
  Commission for countering corruption and for forfeiture of illegally acquired assets 
  Constitutional court 
  Foundation Media Democracy 
  Group of academics 
 
 
  Ministry of Culture 
  Ministry of Interior 
  Ministry of Justice 
  National Audit Office 
  National Council for Journalistic Ethics 
  Office of the Prosecutor General 
  Ombudsperson 
  Open Society Institute 
  Public service media – Bulgarian National Radio 
  Supreme Administrative Court 
  Supreme Bar Council 
  Supreme Court of Cassation 
  Supreme Judicial Council 
  Union of Publishers in Bulgaria 

Initiative Justice for Everyone 
Inspectorate to the Supreme Judicial Council 

* The Commission also met the following organisations in a number of horizontal meetings:  

  ALDA (European Association for Local Democracy) 
  Amnesty International  
  Civil Liberties Union for Europe  
  Civil Society Europe 
  Culture Action Europe  
  European Centre for Press and Media Freedom  

37 

 
 
  European Civic Forum  
  European Federation of Journalists  
  European Partnership for Democracy  
  European Youth Forum  
  Free Press Unlimited 
  Front Line Defenders 
 
 
 
 
 
  JEF Europe  
  Osservatorio Balcani e Caucaso Transeuropa 
  Philea  
  Reporters Without Borders  
  SOLIDAR 
  Transparency International EU 

ILGA Europe  
International Commission of Jurists 
International Federation for Human Rights (FIDH)  
International Planned Parenthood Federation European Network 
International Press Institute  

38