COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT 2024 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 2024 Rule of Law Report The rule of law situation in the European Union
Date: 2024-07-24
Institutions: European Commission, Secretariat-General
Subjects: Bulgaria, administrative transparency, corruption, democracy, freedom of the press, independence of the judiciary, infringement of EU law, pluralism in the media, rule of law, whistleblowing

EN 

  EN 

   EUROPEAN COMMISSION  Brussels, 24.7.2024  SWD(2024) 802 final  COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT 2024 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 2024 Rule of Law Report                The rule of law situation in the European Union {COM(2024) 800 final} - {SWD(2024) 801 final} - {SWD(2024) 803 final} - {SWD(2024) 804 final} - {SWD(2024) 805 final} - {SWD(2024) 806 final} - {SWD(2024) 807 final} - {SWD(2024) 808 final} - {SWD(2024) 809 final} - {SWD(2024) 810 final} - {SWD(2024) 811 final} - {SWD(2024) 812 final} - {SWD(2024) 813 final} - {SWD(2024) 814 final} - {SWD(2024) 815 final} - {SWD(2024) 816 final} - {SWD(2024) 817 final} - {SWD(2024) 818 final} - {SWD(2024) 819 final} - {SWD(2024) 820 final} - {SWD(2024) 821 final} - {SWD(2024) 822 final} - {SWD(2024) 823 final} - {SWD(2024) 824 final} - {SWD(2024) 825 final} - {SWD(2024) 826 final} - {SWD(2024) 827 final} - {SWD(2024) 828 final} - {SWD(2024) 829 final} - {SWD(2024) 830 final} - {SWD(2024) 831 final}  
 
 
ABSTRACT  

On  15  September  2023,  in  line  with  the  2006  decision  setting  up  the  Cooperation  and 
Verification  Mechanism  (CVM),  the  European  Commission  formally  closed  the  CVM,  as 
Bulgaria had satisfactorily fulfilled all the benchmarks and all recommendations set under the 
mechanism. Monitoring continues under the Rule of Law report as for all EU Member States. 

A comprehensive constitutional reform was adopted to improve judicial independence and to 
address  long-standing  concerns.  The  reform  anchors  the  mechanism  for  the  accountability 
and criminal liability of the Prosecutor General in the Constitution, which was also recently 
used in practice; it limits his/her powers; and divides the Supreme Judicial Council into two 
separate  councils.  The  procedures  for  appointment  and  dismissal  of  the  Prosecutor  General 
and the two Presidents of Supreme Courts have been amended. A draft new Judicial System 
Act  aims  to  ensure the politically independent  appointment and dismissal  of the Prosecutor 
General, but concerns have been raised as to its limitations. The draft law also addresses the 
concerns regarding the composition of the Inspectorate to the Supreme Judicial Council, the 
long-term  secondments  to  higher  positions,  and  envisages  changes  to  the  digitalisation  of 
justice. The availability of electronic communications continues to improve. There have been 
calls to extend judicial review for cases of dismissal of investigations for victimless crimes.  

Following the adoption of a reform, the Commission for Counteracting Corruption and Illegal 
Assets Forfeiture was divided into two separate bodies (the Anti-Corruption Commission and 
the Commission for Illegal Assets Forfeiture) and their performance remains to be assessed. 
A  mid-term  review  of  the  National  Strategy  for  Prevention  and  Countering  Corruption  is 
under  preparation.  A  robust  track-record  in  high-level  cases  of  corruption  remains  to  be 
established. Work has started on a Code of Conduct, as serious gaps remain in the integrity of 
top  executive  functions.  Rules  on  asset  and  interest  disclosure  for  public  officials  are 
systematically  implemented,  but  the  effectiveness  of  verifications  and  sanctions  is  lacking. 
Work proceeded on legislation to regulate lobbying and make it more transparent, although it 
is still at early stage and will need to be adopted by the Government. Investigations and legal 
proceedings linked to the abolished investor citizenship scheme continued. 

Concerns  remain  about  the  lack  of  sufficient  safeguards  to  secure  the  independence  of  the 
media  regulator.  Notwithstanding  the  existence  of  several  registers  for  media  ownership 
information,  shortcomings  regarding  the  enforcement  of  the  media  ownership  disclosure 
obligations  remain.  There  has  been  some  further  progress  as  regards  transparency  in  the 
allocation of state advertising. While legal safeguards for editorial independence are in place, 
indications of political and economic influence over the media remain. The Government has 
resumed  the  work  on  a  draft  law  to  strengthen  the  independence  of  public  service  media, 
while  the  media  regulator  has  not  yet  appointed  a  new  Director  General  of  the  national 
television.  The  positive  trend  as  regards  access  to  public  information  continues  although 
some  obstacles  remain.  While  the  Government  has  taken  steps  to  protect  journalists  from 
strategic  lawsuits  against  public  participation,  journalists  continue  to  encounter  various 
difficulties and threats in their activities.  

The  Council  for  the  monitoring  of  the  judicial  reform  was  merged  with  the  Rule  of  Law 
Council,  allowing  for  wider  participation  of  civil  society.  Concerns  have  been  raised  at  the 
fact  that  a significant  number of independent  and regulatory authorities  continue to  operate 
with  an  expired  mandate.  The  constitutional  reform  improved  the  access  to  constitutional 
justice.  Concerns  regarding 
legislative  process  continue.  The 
Ombudsperson was attributed new competences though financial and human resources have 
not been sufficiently reinforced. The work of the Council for Civil Society Development is 
blocked due to the political situation.  

the  quality  of 

the 

1 

 
 
RECOMMENDATIONS 

Overall,  concerning  the  recommendations  in  the  2023  Rule  of  Law  Report,  Bulgaria  has 
(made): 

•  Some further progress on taking 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. 

•  Some  progress  on  advancing  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.  

•  Fully implemented the recommendation to step up efforts to adapt the composition of the 
Supreme  Judicial  Council,  taking  into  account  European  standards  on  Councils  for  the 
Judiciary. 

•  No  progress  yet  on  ensuring  an  improved  effectiveness  of  investigations  and  a  robust 
track  record  of  prosecution  and  final  judgments  in  high-level  corruption  cases  and 
significant progress on the institutional reforms of the Anti-Corruption Commission.  
•  No  progress  on  improving  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. 

•  Some  further  progress  on  advancing  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. 

On this basis, and considering other developments that took place in the period of reference, 
and  in  addition  to  recalling  the  relevant  commitments  made  under  the  Recovery  and 
Resilience  Plan  and  the  relevant  country-specific  recommendations  under  the  European 
Semester, 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  draft  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. 

•  Take  forward  the  plans  to  adopt  a  mechanism  for  introducing  safeguards  in  the 
appointment procedure of the Parliament-elected members of the Supreme Prosecutorial 
Council,  ensuring  their  independence  and  taking  into  account  European  standards, 
particularly  in  view  of  the  Council’s  role  in  the  appointment  and  dismissal  of  the 
Prosecutor General. 

•  Ensure a robust track record of investigations, prosecutions and final judgments in high-
level corruption cases and the effective performance 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. 

• 

•  Further advance with the work aimed at improving transparency in the allocation of state 
through 

to  state  advertising  contracted 

in  particular  with  regard 

advertising, 
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 
the 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)  and  the 
Supreme  Prosecutorial  Council  (SPC)  are  the  highest  administrative  authority  in  the 
Bulgarian  judiciary.  They  are  responsible  for  managing  the  judiciary  and  ensuring  its 
independence.  Judges,  prosecutors  and  investigators4  are  appointed,  promoted,  transferred 
and dismissed by their respective Council (Judicial or Prosecutorial)5. In addition to the SJC 
and the SPC, 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  is  now  very  low  among  both 
the  general  public  and  companies.  Overall,  24%  of  the  general  population  and  25%  of 
companies perceive the level of independence of courts and judges to be ‘fairly or very good’ 
in  20247.  The  perceived  judicial  independence  among  the  general  public  has  decreased  in 
comparison  with  2023  (30%),  as  well  as  in  comparison  with  2020  (37%).  The  perceived 
judicial  independence  among  companies  has  decreased  in  comparison  with  2023  (33%),  as 
well as with 2020 (43%). The main reason cited by the general public for the perceived lack 
of independence of  courts  and judges is  the perception of interference or pressure  from  the 

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   Following  the  reform  of  the Anti-corruption  law  of  October  2023,  there  are  four  types  of  investigators  in 
Bulgaria  –  police  investigator  (under  the  supervision  of  the  Ministry  of  Interior),  customs  investigators 
(under the supervision of the Customs Agency), investigative inspectors (under the supervision of the Anti-
corruption Commission) and investigative magistrates. The latter 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 decisions 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, which could also be the Prosecutor General. 

5   The Supreme Judicial Council is composed by 15 members, eight of them are elected by their peers, five of 
them  are  elected  by  the  Parliament  and  two,  the  Presidents  of  the  two  Supreme  Courts,  are  ex  officio 
members. The Supreme Prosecutorial Council is composed of 10 members, two of them are elected by their 
peer prosecutors, one is elected by their peer investigative magistrate, six are elected by the Parliament and 
the Prosecutor General is an ex officio member. 

6   See 2023 Rule of Law Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Bulgaria, p. 3.  
7   Figures 51 and 53, 2024 EU Justice Scoreboard, and Figures 50 and 52, 2022 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 

 
 
Government  and  politicians,  while  the  reason  cited  by  companies  is  the  interference  or 
pressure from economic or other specific interests8. 

reform  was  consulted  with 

A comprehensive constitutional  reform was adopted to improve judicial independence 
and  to  address  long-standing  concerns.  On  20  December  2023,  Parliament  adopted 
amendments  to  the  Constitution  which  specify  that  national  courts  are  the  bearers  of  the 
judicial  power.  Other  amended  provisions  concerned  the  Supreme  Judicial  Council  and  the 
attached  Inspectorate  to  improve  judicial  independence,  and  limited  the  powers  of  the 
Prosecutor  General,  thereby  addressing  long-standing  concerns9.  Some  amendments  also 
concerned  the  powers  of  the  President  of  the  Republic  in  relation  to  appointing  interim 
government.  The 
its 
recommendations  have  been  largely  taken  into  account10.  The  constitutional  amendments 
have been challenged before the Constitutional Court in two separate cases11. The first case 
concerns  the  amendments  limiting  the  powers  of  the  President  of  the  Republic12,  while  the 
second  case  challenges  the  entire  reform,  including  also  the  amendments  related  to  judicial 
independence13. The decisions are still pending. In the meantime, a working group within the 
Ministry  of  Justice  drafted  a  new  Judicial  System  Act  to  implement  the  newly  adopted 
constitutional  reform,  which  was  published  for  a  preliminary  public  consultation14.  Upon 
summarising  the  received  opinions,  the  Ministry  of  Justice  plans  to  consult  the  Venice 
Commission on the proposed draft law. This opportunity could be used to also ask for a re-
examination of the constitutional reform and a confirmation that their recommendations were 
taken into account15.  

the  Venice  Commission  and 

The constitutional reform limited the powers of the Prosecutor General, thus addressing 
long-standing concerns. As mentioned in previous Rule of Law Reports, a combination of 
the powers and position allowed the Prosecutor General to exert considerable influence over 
the Prosecutor’s Office and the magistracy as a whole16. The constitutional amendments are 
addressing these concerns. The Prosecutor General is no longer the hierarchical superior to all 
administrative  heads  and  prosecutors.  With  the  constitutional  reform,  he/she  is  solely  the 
hierarchical  superior  of  the  Supreme  Prosecutor’s  Office  and  its  administrative  head17.  The 
reform  also  transferred the preparation of the methodological  guidance from  the Prosecutor 

8   Figures 51 and 53, 2024 EU Justice Scoreboard. In Bulgaria, 42% of the companies are either fairly or very 
confident  that  their  investments  are  protected  by  the  law  and  courts  in  the  Member  State.  30%  of  the 
surveyed  companies  see  the  quality,  efficiency  or  independence  of  justice  as  one  of  the  main  reasons  for 
concern about investment protection in the country. Figures 55 and 56, 2024 EU Justice Scoreboard. 

9   See  2020,  2021,  2022  and  2023  Rule  of  Law  Reports,  Country  Chapter  on  the  rule  of  law  situation  in 

Bulgaria, pp. 3-5. 

10   Venice Commission opinion (CDL-AD(2023)039). 
11   Both challenges argue that the reform should have been passed via a Grand National Assembly in line with 

Articles 153-163 of the Constitution. 

12   Challenge by President of the Republic – Constitutional case No. 1 of 2024. 
13   Challenge by the Members of Parliament - Constitutional case No. 2 of 2024. 
14   The document was published on 6 March 2024, with a one-month consultation period. The period for public 
discussion of the draft Judicial System Act was extended until 7 May 2024 due to the  numerous proposals 
received from the bodies of the judiciary and professional organisations of magistrates. 

15  Information received from the Ministry of Justice in the context of the country visit to Bulgaria. 
16  See  2020,  2021,  2022  and  2023  Rule  of  Law  Reports,  Country  Chapter  on  the  rule  of  law  situation  in 

Bulgaria, pp. 3-5. 

17   See Art. 126(1) and (2) of the Constitution. 

4 

 
 
General  to  the  Supreme  Prosecutor’s  Office18.  In  addition,  judicial  review  by  the  Supreme 
Administrative  Court  over  the  methodological  guidance  has  been  introduced.  This  is  a 
welcomed  development  by  stakeholders,  who  had  argued  that  the  methodological  guidance 
was used to exert influence over prosecutors19. Furthermore, the amendments constrained the 
power  of  legality  supervision20  by  allowing  its  subsequent  limitation  in  law21.  Finally,  the 
Prosecutor  General’s  competence  to  seize  the  Constitutional  Court  was  limited22.  All  these 
provisions  are  further  specified  and  developed  in  the  draft  new  Judicial  System  Act.  Upon 
reviewing the opinions received in the public consultation procedure, the Ministry of Justice 
plans to consult the Venice Commission on the draft amendments. 

The mechanism for the effective accountability and criminal liability of the Prosecutor 
General  and  his/her  deputies  was  used  in  practice  and  is  now  anchored  in  the 
Constitution.  As  mentioned  in  previous  reports23,  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  Commission24,  the  European  Court  of 
Human Rights (ECtHR)25 and the Council of Europe26. A mechanism was created to address 
this, as part of Bulgaria’s Recovery and Resilience Plan (RRP)27, by legislative amendments 
adopted on 26 May 2023. The new mechanism28 was triggered on 7 July 2023. Following a 
notification  by  the  Prosecutor’s  Office,  a  judge  with  the  rank  of  Supreme  Court  judge  was 
randomly  selected29  to  become  an  ad  hoc  prosecutor  for  the  investigation  of  the  Deputy 
Prosecutor  General  (currently  interim  Prosecutor  General).  After  some  delays30,  the  judge 
was  reappointed  on  18  October  202331  as  an  ad  hoc  prosecutor32.  There  have  been  some 

18   Under Art. 126(3) of the Constitution the Prosecutor General would ultimately need to validate the guidance 

prepared by the Supreme Prosecutor’s Office.  

19   Information received from Anti-corruption Fund Foundaiton and Bulgarian Institute For Legal Initiatives in 

the context of the country visit to Bulgaria. 

20   Supervision  of  legality  was  the  term  used  in  the  Constitution  referring  to  the  legality  of  the  prosecution 

activities, including those conducted by the prosecutors. 

21   See Art. 127(2) and (3) of the Constitution.  
22   See Art. 150(3) of the Constitution.  
23   See  2020,  2021,  2022  and  2023  Rule  of  Law  Reports,  Country  Chapter  on  the  rule  of  law  situation  in 

Bulgaria, pp. 3-5. 

24   Progress report Bulgaria 2019, COM(2019)498, p. 6. 
25   ECtHR, judgment of 5 November 2009, Kolevi v. Bulgaria, paras. 121-127, 129, 135 and 136. 
26   Council of Europe, Supervision of the execution of the European Court’s judgments, Committee of Ministers 
Decisions (2019-2023), the latest one being CM/Del/Dec(2023)1483/H46-10 and CM/Notes/1483/H46-10 of 
7  December 2023,  and  H/Exec(2023)10  of  22  September 2023.  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). 

27   See Milestone 222 of the Bulgarian RRP. The assessment related to the topic of Milestone 222 in the Rule of 
Law  report  does  not  prejudge  the  assessment  of  the  fulfilment  of  the  measures  in  the  framework  of  the 
Bulgarian Recovery and Resilience Plan. 

28   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  (SCC). 
Subsequently, a randomly selected judge is appointed as a prosecutor responsible for the investigation of the 
Prosecutor General and his/her deputies.  

29   Using the system for random allocation of cases. 
30   See  Prosecutor’s  Chamber  of  the  Supreme  Judicial  Council  meeting  Protocol  No.  26-27  of  5  and  19  July 

2023.  

31   See Prosecutor’s Chamber of the SJC Protocol No. 38 of 18 October 2023. 
32   As to the length of the  ad hoc prosecutor’s mandate see Art. 411a para. 5 of the Criminal Procedure Code 

and Art. 173a para. 3 of the JSA. 

5 

 
 
procedural33  and practical34 issues raised by stakeholders35  regarding the implementation of 
the  mechanism,  although  there  had  been  a  positive  assessment  of  the  mechanism  up  to  the 
reappointment of the ad hoc prosecutor36. The challenge of this mechanism by the Prosecutor 
General before the Constitutional Court is still pending37. Тhe constitutional reform anchored 
the mechanism in the text of the Constitution38.  

There  is  a  judicial  review  for  prosecutorial  decisions  not  to  open  an investigation  and 
there  have  been  calls  for  extending  it  for  cases  of  dismissal  of  investigations  for 
victimless  crimes.  As  mentioned  in  the  2023  Rule  of  Law  Report,  as  part  of  Bulgaria’s 
RRP39, a law was adopted introducing the possibility of judicial review against decisions of 
prosecutors not to open investigations in the stage of the preliminary inspection40. Recently, 
there  have  been  calls  from  the  Council  of  Europe41  and  other  relevant  stakeholders42  to 

33   For example, the case that triggered the  mechanism was filed by the Prosecutor’s Office. In this situation, 
there would be no possibility for a judicial review of a decision not to open an investigation. Moreover, some 
of  the  decisions  that  the  ad  hoc  prosecutor  takes  before  he/she  decides  on  indictment  are  subject  to  an 
internal control by the Prosecutor General and his/her deputies. The draft new Judicial System Act envisages 
changes  to  these  rules,  but  it  remains  unclear  whether  they  would  remove  the  potential  influence  of  the 
Prosecutor General over the preliminary inspection phase. See also open letter to Commissioner Reynders by 
Association of European Administrative Judges (AEAJ), European Association of Judges (EAJ), Judges for 
Judges Association, Magistrats Européens pour la Démocratie et les Libertés (MEDEL). 

34   For example, the ad hoc prosecutor had to meet on multiple occasions with the interim Prosecutor General, 
the person she is supposed to investigate, in order to resolve practical issues such as where she will sit and 
who  will  provide  her  with  the  necessary  administrative  support  to  exercise  her  tasks.  Furthermore,  while 
waiting for the appointment of the ad hoc prosecutor, the Prosecutor’s Office requested the evidence of the 
first case that triggered the mechanism from the Supreme Court of Cassation. Due to the lack of procedural 
rules related to this situation, the chair of the Criminal Chamber of the Supreme Court of Cassation gave the 
evidence to the Sofia City Prosecutors Office  explaining that refusal to give access might be considered a 
criminal offence and she could be prosecuted by the same Prosecutor’s Office that filed the request. Council 
of Europe, Supervision of the execution of the European Court’s judgments, Committee of Ministers Notes 
of 11-13 June 2024, (CM/Notes/1501/H46-10), point B, 4, b). 

35   Information  received  from  Bulgarian  Institute  For  Legal  Initiatives,  Anti-Corruption  Fund  Foundation, 
Institute For Market Economics, Center For The  Study Of Democracy and Initiative Justice For All in the 
context  of  the  country  visit  to  Bulgaria.  See  also  Council  of  Europe,  Supervision  of  the  execution  of  the 
European  Court’s  judgments,  Committee  of  Ministers  Analysis,  H/Exec(2023)10  of  22  September  2023. 
Council of Europe, Supervision of the execution of the European Court’s judgments, Committee of Ministers 
Notes of 11-13 June 2024, (CM/Notes/1501/H46-10), point B, 4, b). 

36   Information  received  from  Supreme  Court  of  Cassation,  Ministry  of  Justice,  Bulgarian  Institute  For  Legal 
Initiatives,  Anti-Corruption  Fund  Foundation  And  Institute  For  Market  Economics  in  the  context  of  the 
country  visit  to  Bulgaria.  Council  of  Europe,  Supervision  of  the  execution  of  the  European  Court’s 
judgments,  Committee  of  Ministers  Notes  of  11-13  June  2024,  (CM/Notes/1501/H46-10), Analysis  by  the 
Secretariat, General Measures, point 1. 
37   See Constitutional Court Case No. 10/2023.  
38   See Art. 130(4) of the Constitution. 
39   See Milestone 222 of the Bulgarian RRP. The assessment related to the topic of Milestone 222 in the Rule of 
Law  report  does  not  prejudge  the  assessment  of  the  fulfilment  of  the  measures  in  the  framework  of  the 
Bulgarian Recovery and Resilience Plan. 

40   See 2023 Rule of Law Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Bulgaria, p. 6. The subsequent 
decisions,  to  suspend  an  investigation  or  to  not  prosecute were  not  covered by  the  reform.  See  Figure  59, 
2022  EU  Justice  Scoreboard.  See  also  2023  Rule  of  Law  Report,  Country  Chapter  on  the  rule  of  law 
situation in Bulgaria, p. 6. 

41   See also Council of Europe, Supervision of the execution of the European Court’s judgments, Committee of 
4; 
Ministers 
CM/Del/Dec(2023)1483/H46-10 of December 2023, para. 3. CM/Notes/1475/H46-12 of September 2023, p. 

CM/Del/Dec(2023)1475/H46-12 

September 

Decision, 

2023, 

para. 

of 

6 

 
 
 
explore the possibility of extending the judicial review to decisions to suspend or terminate 
investigations  for  offences  for  which  there  is  no  recognised  victim  status  (i.e.,  victimless 
crimes). These calls come against the background of several victimless crime cases related to 
high-level corruption, that have been opened and then terminated without the possibility for a 
judicial review43.  

Stakeholders  have  raised  concerns  regarding  the  structure  for  the  investigation  of 
magistrates within the Sofia City Prosecutor’s Office. Following recent examples of cases 
against magistrates44, stakeholders have raised concerns about the fact that there is only one 
specialised  department  within  one  Prosecutor’s  Office  in  Bulgaria  competent  to  deal  with 
cases  involving  magistrates  –  the  Sofia  City  Prosecutor’s  Office45.  According  to  the  latest 
activity report of this  Office, there is  a specialised department  within it dealing solely with 
cases  related  to  magistrates46.  Moreover,  the  magistrates  working  in  this  specialised 
department are appointed exclusively,  and without clear criteria, by the administrative head 
of  this  Prosecutor’s  Office,  who  is  a  direct  subordinate  to  the  Prosecutor  General47. 
Consequently,  this  means  that  there  are  10  prosecutors,  exclusively  selected  by  the 
administrative  head  of  this  Prosecutor’s  Office,  in  the  whole  country  dealing  with  cases 
concerning  any  offence  that  may  be  committed  by  a  magistrate.  This  raises  concerns 
regarding prosecutorial autonomy and possible concerns regarding judicial independence48.  

The  recommendation  regarding  the  composition  of  the  Supreme  Judicial  Council  has 
been fully implemented. The 2023 Rule of Law Report recommended to Bulgaria to ‘[s]tep 
up  efforts  to  adapt  the  composition  of  the  Supreme  Judicial  Council,  taking  into  account 
European standards on Councils for the Judiciary’49. The concerns raised in the previous Rule 

1. H/Exec(2023)10 of September 2023, p. 1-3; CM/Notes/1501/H46-10 of 11-13 June 2024. See also Venice 
Commission opinion (CDL-AD(2023)039), para. 91. 

42   Publication of the Anti-corruption Fund Foundation ‘What needs to change in the criminal justice’, of March 
2023, p. 23. Information also received from Bulgarian Institute For Legal Initiatives, Anti-Corruption Fund 
Foundation, Institute For Market Economics, Center For The Study Of Democracy And Initiative Justice For 
All in the context of the country visit to Bulgaria. 

43   See Press release of the Prosecutor’s Office of 24 August 2023 regarding the case of former Prime Minister’s 
house  pictures.  See  Press  release  of  the  Prosecutor’s  Office  of  17  October  2023  regarding  the  so-called 
‘Barcelona-gate’,  See  Press  release  of  the  Prosecutor’s  Office  of  12  December  2023  regarding  the  former 
Prime Minister and former Minister of Finance.  

44   This  is  exemplified  by  a  recent  case  of  an  investigation  launched  against  a  prosecutor  for  opening  a  case 
against  an  alleged  head  of  an  organised  crime  group.  This  crime  group  had  been  suspected  of  having 
infiltrated the judiciary and intimidating magistrates. See Press release of the Sofia City Prosecutor’s Office 
of 19 February 2024 regarding the case and publishing the decision to open an investigation. 

45   See Art.  35(4) of the Criminal Procedure Code. Information received from Initiative  Justice For All, Anti-
Corruption Fund Foundation and Bulgarian Institute For Legal Initiatives in the context of the country visit 
to Bulgaria. 

46   See  Report  on  the  activity  of  the  Sofia  City  Prosecutor’s  Office,  p.  148.  Тhe  total  number  of  prosecutors 
working in this Prosecutor’s Office is 184 from which only 10 are part of the abovementioned department. 
Stakeholders  have  informed  that  currently  the  number  is  even  lower.  The  authorities  are  justifying  the 
creation of such department as a response to the need for specialisation of work on this category of cases and 
explain that the rules for random allocation of cases apply within this department. 

47   Information  received  from  Initiative  Justice  For  All,  Anti-Corruption  Fund  Foundation  and  Bulgarian 

Institute For Legal Initiatives in the context of the country visit to Bulgaria. 

48   Council of Europe, Supervision of the execution of the European Court’s judgments, Committee of Ministers 

Notes of 11-13 June 2024, (CM/Notes/1501/H46-10), point B, 4, a) and b). 

49   See  2023  Rule  of  Law  Report,  Country  Chapter  on  the  rule  of  law  situation  in  Bulgaria,  p.  2.  The 
Commission  assessed  that  ‘[n]o  progress  [was  made]  yet  on  taking  steps  to  adapt  the  composition  of  the 

7 

 
 
 
of Law Reports50 as regards the potential influence of the Prosecutor General and the fact that 
judges elected by their peers51  did  not  form  a majority in  the SJC52, were addressed by the 
recent  constitutional  reform  of  20  December  2023.  The  reform  separated  the  SJC  into  two 
councils.  The  SJC,  solely  responsible  for  judges,  is  now  composed  of  15  judges  –  eight  of 
them are elected by their peers, five by Parliament, and the remaining two, the Presidents of 
the  two  Supreme  Courts  (Supreme  Court  of  Cassation  and  Supreme  Administrative  Court), 
are  members  ex  officio53.  The  Supreme  Prosecutorial  Council  (SPC),  responsible  for 
prosecutors and investigative magistrates, is now composed of 10 members – two of them are 
elected by their prosecutor peers, one is elected by their investigative magistrate peers, six are 
elected by Parliament, and the Prosecutor General is a member ex officio54. Before adopting 
the  reform,  the  authorities  consulted  the  Venice  Commission,  which  confirmed  that  this 
composition  of  the  SJC  is  in  line  with  previous  Venice  Commission  recommendations  and 
with  the  established  standards55.  In  light  of  the  amendments  brought  about  by  the 
aforementioned  constitutional  reform,  the  recommendation  made  in  the  2023  Rule  of  Law 
Report is considered to be fully implemented. 

A draft reform provides more clarity and safeguards for the election procedure of peer 
elected  members  of  the  Supreme  Judicial  Council.  The  draft  new  Judicial  System  Act 
includes  a  reform  of  the  election  procedure  for  the  peer-elected  members  of  the  SJC  and 
SPC56. This reform addresses an issue found with the 2022 elections for peer-elected judges 
of the SJC57. The elections for the Judges’ Chamber were challenged before a mixed panel of 
the  Supreme  Administrative  Court  and  the  Supreme  Cassation  Court  because  of  alleged 
irregularities  in  the  e-voting  system,  namely  suspicions  that  the  number  of  people  who  e-
voted from the building of the SAC did not match the number of people who were present58. 
The  panel  of  judges  decided  that  the  elections  were  conducted  according  to  the  established 
procedure and maintained the validity of their outcome59. Following an access to documents 

Supreme Judicial Council, taking into account European  standards on Councils for the Judiciary.’ 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.’ 

50   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.  See  2023  Rule  of  Law  Report, 
Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Bulgaria, p. 6-8. 

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

para. 44.  

52   Venice  Commission  opinion  (CDL-AD(2020)035),  para.  44;  JSA,  Art.  16(3)  and  (4)  – Since  the  Judicial 
Chamber (14 members) was 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 could be reached, both 
in the Plenary of the SJC and the Judicial Chamber, without the votes of the judges elected by their peers. 

53   Art. 130a(1) of the Constitution. See also Figure 57 of the 2024 EU Justice Scoreboard. 
54   Art. 130a(2) of the Constitution. 
55   Venice  Commission  opinion  (CDL-AD(2023)039),  para.  47  confirmed  consistency  with  Recommendation 
CM/Rec(2010)12. The election procedure for the Parliament-elected members was criticised by the Venice 
Commission due to the lack of an anti-deadlock mechanism but it will be further specified through the new 
Judicial System Act which draft was tabled on 6 March 2024. 

56   See Section II of Chapter II of the Draft JSA. 
57   The procedures for election of peer elected members took place in June-July 2022. See 2023 Rule of Law 

Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Bulgaria, p. 7. 
58   Mixed Judicial Panel of the SSC and SAC, Case No. 18 of 27 June 2022. 
59   Mixed Judicial Panel of the SSC and SAC, Decision No. 1 of 21 July 2022. 

8 

 
 
request,  which  was  granted  by  the  Ministry  of  Justice,  the  suspected  irregularities  were 
confirmed  in  November  202360.  To  address  the  issue,  the  draft  new  Judicial  System  Act 
envisages  that  votes  can  be  cast  using  paper  ballots  or  through  the  e-vote  system,  which 
would be strengthened with a multi-factor authentication login61.  

The  constitutional  reform  has  changed  the  appointment  and  dismissal  procedures  for 
the  Prosecutor  General  and  the  Presidents  of  Supreme  Courts.  With  the  constitutional 
reform  and  the  separation  of  the  SJC  into  two  councils,  the  procedure  for  appointment  and 
dismissal of the three highest ranked magistrates changed. Before the reform, the Prosecutor 
General  and  the  two  Presidents  of  Supreme  Courts62  were  proposed  for  appointment 
following a vote in  the Plenary of the SJC and appointed by the President  of the Republic. 
Their dismissal was also the responsibility of the President of the Republic on a proposal by 
the Plenary of the SJC. In both cases, the President of the Republic has limited discretion63. 
With the reform, the final step of appointment and dismissal by the President of the Republic 
remains. However, the powers to propose for appointment and to propose a dismissal of the 
two  Presidents  of  Supreme  Courts  are  now  given  to  the  SJC64,  and  to  the  SPC  when 
concerning  appointment  and  dismissal  of  the  Prosecutor  General65.  The  procedure,  as  it 
relates  to  the  two  Supreme  Courts’  Presidents  has  been  welcomed,  as  it  ensures  greater 
judicial  independence  with  a  majority  of  judges  elected  by  their  peers  and  without  the 
involvement  of  prosecutors  in  the  SJC66.  However,  the  exclusive  power  of  the  SPC  to 
propose the Prosecutor General for appointment has also raised concerns with stakeholders67. 
They have warned against the risk of politicisation of the SPC due to the higher number of 
Parliament-elected  members  in  the  SPC68,  and  the  fact  that  no  prosecutors  or  investigators 
can  be  elected  through  the  Parliament  quota69.  These  rules  could  allow  the  Parliament  to 
indirectly  elect  the  Prosecutor  General  through  their  quota  in  the  SPC70.  To  address  these 

60   See Opinion of the Bulgarian Judges Association (BJA) of 22 November 2023.  
61   See Section II of Chapter II of the draft JSA. As to the authentication process, currently, the administrative 
heads  of  courts  receive  the  individual  passwords  for  e-vote  for  each  magistrate  in  their  court  in  a  paper 
format.  Then  these  are  distributed  to  each  magistrate.  The  same  draft  law  would  also  address  the  issues 
raised in the 2023 Rule of Law Report by removing the new disciplinary proceeding against members of the 
SJC  that  was  prohibiting  them  to  exercise  legal  profession  for  2  years.  See  2023  Rule  of  Law  Report, 
Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Bulgaria, p. 8. 
62   Supreme Court of Cassation and Supreme Administrative Court. 
63   The President can reject the appointment of a candidate and return the vote back to the Plenary of the SJC. If 

the vote is confirmed again, the President is obliged to appoint the candidate. 

64   See Art. 130b(2), p.2. 
65   See Art. 130b(3), p.2. See also Figure 65 of the 2024 EU Justice Scoreboard. 
66   Venice Commission opinion (CDL-AD(2023)039), para 51 and 52. 
67   Written contributions from MEDEL, Bulgarian Judges Association, Bulgarian Institute For Legal Initiatives, 
Institute For Market Economics And Center For The Study Of Democracy for the preparation of the 2024 
Rule of Law Report. Information also received from President of the Supreme Court of Cassation, President 
of the Supreme Administrative Court, Prosecutor General, Anti-Corruption Fund Foundation, Justice for All 
Initiative  and  Supreme  Bar  Council  in  the  context  of  the  country  visit  to  Bulgaria.  See  also  Venice 
Commission opinion (CDL-AD(2023)039), para 61-71.  

68   The Parliament-elected members are 6 out of 10 total members of the SPC. 
69   This was done as part of Bulgaria’s commitments under the Recovery and Resilience Plan (RRP).  
70   Written contributions from MEDEL, Bulgarian Judges Association, Bulgarian Institute For Legal Initiatives, 
Institute For Market Economics And Center For The Study Of Democracy for the preparation of the 2024 
Rule of Law Report. Information also received from President of the Supreme Court of Cassation, President 
of the Supreme Administrative Court, Prosecutor General, Anti-Corruption Fund Foundation, Justice for All 
Initiative  and  Supreme  Bar  Council  in  the  context  of  the  country  visit  to  Bulgaria.  See  also  Venice 
Commission opinion (CDL-AD(2023)039), para 61-71. 

9 

 
 
concerns, the Ministry of Justice proposed in the draft new Judicial System Act (JSA) a novel 
mechanism for the proposal for appointment and appointment of the members to the SJC and 
SPC elected by the Parliament71. The preliminary proposals for appointment would be open 
to members of Parliament, Supreme Bar Council, and the three highest-ranking law faculties 
in Bulgaria, and civil society organisations with a proven track record of active work in the 
area of justice for at least 5 years would be allowed to make proposals to individual members 
of Parliament who can in turn accept or reject them72. These proposals would then be sent to 
an ad hoc Nomination Committee composed of five members73 that would draft a report with 
a  recommended  assessment  for  each  candidate74.  The  Legal  Affairs  Committee  of  the 
Parliament would then continue with the procedure. The National Assembly will elect one by 
one every member of the SJC and of the SPC with the two-thirds majority of the members of 
the Parliament75. While it appears that these safeguards could help mitigate risks of political 
influence over the Parliament-elected members of the SJC and SPC, stakeholders underscore 
that the mechanism could still grant a disproportionate role to the members of Parliament in 
the  process  of  election76.  Stakeholders  consider  that  the  establishment  of  a  Nomination 
Committee is a positive development, but it needs a more prominent role that would not be 
limited to simple administrative tasks77. 

Some  progress  has  been  achieved  regarding  political  influence  and  the  functioning  of 
the Inspectorate to the Supreme Judicial Council (ISJC). The 2023 Rule of Law Report 
recommended  to  Bulgaria  to  ‘[a]dvance  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’78.  As  mentioned  in  previous  Rule  of  Law  Reports79,  the 

71   See Section III of the draft JSA.  
72   Art. 52(2), pp. 1-3 draft JSA.  
73   Art.  53(1)  draft  JSA  –  the  Supreme  Court  of  Cassation,  the  Supreme Administrative  Court,  the  Supreme 
Prosecutor’s  Office,  the  Ministry  of  Justice  and  the  Ombudsperson  Office  appoint  one  member  each.  The 
rules of procedure of the Nomination Committee would be drafted by the Legal  Affairs  Committee of the 
Parliament. 

74   This would be done following an open procedure with a live-streamed hearing of the candidates. The report 
would be published on the website of the Parliament and would be sent to the Legal  Affairs Committee of 
the Parliament. See Art. 54 and 56 draft JSA. 

75   Art. 54 to 56 draft JSA. 
76   They would propose candidates, draft the rules of procedure for the Nomination Committee, and appoint the 
candidates. According  to  the Council  of  Europe,  it  appears  possible  to  mitigate  to  some  extent  the  risk  of 
politicised decisions by giving a strong role to the nomination committee proposed in the draft Judiciary Act 
of  March  2024  for  assessing  and  preferably  ranking  candidates  to  be  appointed  by  parliament  and  by 
allowing  sufficiently  broad  range  of  stakeholders  including  NGOs  to  directly  or  indirectly  propose 
candidates.  See  Council  of  Europe,  Supervision  of  the  execution  of  the  European  Court’s  judgments, 
Committee  of  Ministers  Notes  of 11-13  June  2024,  (CM/Notes/1501/H46-10), Analysis by  the  Secretariat, 
General measures, point 1. Information received in the context of the country visit to Bulgaria.  

77   Written contributions from Bulgarian Institute For Legal Initiatives, Institute For Market Economics, Anti-
Corruption Fund Foundation And Center For The Study Of Democracy in the context of the country visit to 
Bulgaria. 

78   See  2023  Rule  of  Law  Report,  Country  Chapter  on  the  rule  of  law  situation  in  Bulgaria,  p.  2.  The 
Commission  assessed  that  ‘[n]o  progress  [was  made]  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.’ 

79   See  2020,  2021,  2022  and  2023  Rule  of  Law  Report,  Country  Chapter  on  the  rule  of  law  situation  in 

Bulgaria, pp. 7-9.  

10 

 
 
Inspectorate80  oversees  the  activity  of  the  judiciary,  assesses  the  integrity  and  potential 
conflicts  of interest  of magistrates, and is  responsible for proposing  opening of disciplinary 
proceedings  regarding  magistrates  to  the  SJC.  The  draft  new  Justice  System  Act,  that  was 
published for preliminary consultations on 6 March 2024, changes the appointment procedure 
of the Inspector General and inspectors to address concerns regarding its functioning and the 
risk of political influence81. As recommended in the 2022 and 2023 Rule of Law Reports, the 
appointment procedure  would include the Plenaries of the Supreme Court of Cassation  and 
the Supreme Administrative Court, as well as the Common Assemblies of the prosecutors of 
the  Supreme  Prosecutor’s  Office  and  the  investigative  magistrates  of  the  National 
Investigative Service82. Additionally, the draft law envisages quotas for magistrates coming 
from the ranks of judges and from the ranks of prosecutors83. The reform in its current form 
would address concerns raised, but the process is still ongoing. Therefore, some progress has 
been achieved to address the recommendation made in the 2023 Rule of Law Report. 

Some further progress has been achieved regarding avoiding long-term secondment of 
judges to fill in vacant positions. The 2023 Rule of Law Report recommended to Bulgaria 
to ‘[t]ake 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’84. The draft new Judicial System Act is aiming at addressing in a more stable manner 
the remaining issues in this area. As mentioned in the 2023 Rule of Law Report, a solution, 
albeit  temporary,  was  found  to  address  the  concern  regarding  the  regular  competitions  for 
appointment  and  promotion,  while 
long-term  secondments 
remained85.  The  widespread  use  of  secondments  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  heads86  because  they  are  competent  to 
decide on secondments and their termination87, which may create situations of dependence88. 
European standards in the area highlight that secondments of judges with or without consent 
require  the  necessary  guarantees  to  prevent  any  risk  of  judicial  independence  being 

the  concerns  regarding 

80   Art. 132a of the Constitution – the Inspectorate consists of an Inspector General and ten inspectors, who are 

independent and elected by Parliament. 

81   See 2022 Rule of Law Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Bulgaria, p. 8. 
82   Art. 381, draft JSA. 
83   Art. 379, draft JSA – five inspectors would come from the ranks of the judges and would have experience 
with civil, commercial and administrative cases; two inspectors would also come from the ranks of judges 
and would have experience with criminal cases; three inspectors would come from the ranks of prosecutors 
and investigative magistrates. 

84   See  2023  Rule  of  Law  Report,  Country  Chapter  on  the  rule  of  law  situation  in  Bulgaria,  p.  2.  The 
Commission assessed that ‘[s]ignificant progress on ensuring timely ordinary competitions for promotion to 
avoid longterm secondment of judges to fill in vacant positions, taking into account European standards on 
secondment of judges’. 

85   See 2023 Rule of Law Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Bulgaria, pp. 9-10. According 
to the register maintained by the Supreme Judicial Council, as of November 2023, there are 191 seconded 
judges, 105 of them being seconded for more than a year, with the longest secondment being 140 months. 
86   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.  

87   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. 

88   See 2023 Rule of Law Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Bulgaria, pp. 9-10. 

11 

 
 
jeopardised89, including when a secondment is terminated without the judge’s consent90. The 
draft new Justice System Act would address the issue of long-term secondments by removing 
the  possibility  of  seconding  a  judge  to  a  vacant  position  for  more  than  12  months91. 
Additionally,  the  draft  law  also  envisages  to  restructure  the  appraisal  and  competition 
procedures  to  ensure  that  there  are  no  more  backlogs  of  appraisals  that  would  delay  the 
competition,  and  that  there  are  regular  competitions  that  would  ensure  a  timely  filling  of 
positions in the judiciary92. The reform in its current form would address concerns raised, but 
the process is still ongoing. Therefore, some further progress has been achieved to address the 
recommendation made in the 2023 Rule of Law Report. 

Several committees were created to investigate cases of intimidation of magistrates and 
possible  infiltration  of  the  judiciary.  The  parliamentary  and  judiciary  committeеs93  were 
tasked with inquiring about the circumstances surrounding a recently murdered man believed 
to have been the head of an organised crime group94 involved in intimidation of magistrates 95 
and possible infiltration of the magistracy96. Stakeholders have informed that there were two 
such groups, one led by  a former investigative magistrate97. The authorities have  explained 
that  there  are  no  mechanisms  in  place  to  prevent  such  situations.  However,  there  are  some 
measures for countering the intimidation and possible infiltration once they have occurred98. 
In particular, the Minister of Justice can grant, and has in some cases granted, security to the 
intimidated  magistrate,  while  the  Prosecutor’s  Office  is  tasked  with  investigating  the 
intimidation  and  possible  infiltration99.  In  the  event  that  the  allegations  also  concern  the 

89   Secondments are being done on a temporary basis and in exceptional circumstances. See also for the specific 

case of Bulgaria - Venice Commission opinion (CDL-AD(2017)018), paras. 86 and 87. 

90   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, points 72-90. 

91   Art. 324, draft JSA. 
92   See Art. 72 to 81 draft JSA.  
93   On  7  February  2024  the  Parliament  took  a decision  to  establish  such  an  ad  hoc  committee,  see  also  State 
Gazette  No.  13  of  2024;  on  13  February  2024,  the  SJC  took  a  decision  to  establish  such  an  ad  hoc 
committee, see also Protocol No. 4 of the SJC of 13 February 2024; and on 6 March 2024 the SPC tasked the 
whole Council with this matter, see Protocol No. 9 of the SPC of 6 March 2024. 

94   See hearings in Parliament from 15, 22, 29 February and 14 March 2024. Magistrates and formerly accused 
persons  who  are  familiar  with  the  situation  were  heard  in  Parliament.  According  to  their  statements,  the 
organised crime group was operating through the already closed Specialised Criminal Court and Specialised 
Prosecutor’s Office.  

95   The  judge  who  was  heard  both  in  the  Parliamentary  and  the  SJC  committees  has  had  personal  security 

ensured by the Ministry of Justice since 2019 due to threats received by the murdered man.  

96   See Publication by the Anti-corruption Fund Foundation of 4 June 2021. 
97   Information  received  from  Bulgarian  Institute  For  Legal  Initiatives,  Anti-Corruption  Fund  Foundation, 
Center  For  The  Study  Of  Democracy,  Institute  For  Market  Economics,  Initiative  Justice  For  All  And 
Bulgarian  Judges  Association  in  the  context  of  the  country  visit  to  Bulgaria.  The  former  investigative 
magistrate is involved in the ‘Eight dwarfs’ investigation reported in the previous Rule of Law Reports. One 
of  the  investigations  currently  being  conducted  by  the  ad  hoc  prosecutor  against  the  current  Prosecutor 
General is about possible ties with this former investigative magistrate. See also open letter to Commissioner 
Reynders  by  Association  of  European  Administrative  Judges  (AEAJ),  European  Association  of  Judges 
(EAJ), Judges for Judges Association, Magistrats Européens pour la Démocratie et les Libertés (MEDEL). 
Council of Europe, Supervision of the execution of the European Court’s judgments, Committee of Ministers 
Notes of 11-13 June 2024, (CM/Notes/1501/H46-10), point B, 4, a). 

98   Information from Ministry of Justice, Ministry of Interior, Prosecutor General, Supreme Court of Cassation, 
Supreme Administrative Court, Supreme Judicial Council and Supreme Prosecutorial Council in the context 
of the country visit to Bulgaria. 

99   Information  from  Ministry  of  Justice,  Prosecutor  General,  Supreme  Court  of  Cassation,  Supreme  Judicial 

Council and Supreme Prosecutorial Council in the context of the country visit to Bulgaria.  

12 

 
 
Prosecutor General and his/her deputies it is then up to the ad hoc prosecutor to investigate 
their possible involvement in  such schemes100. Nevertheless, stakeholders have doubted the 
effectiveness of those measures101. 

Quality 

The law on mandatory judicial mediation  was declared unconstitutional. As mentioned 
in the 2023 Rule of Law Report, the law on mandatory judicial mediation, which was adopted 
in 2023, was expected to enter into force on 1 July 2024102. This reform is a part of the RRP 
commitments of Bulgaria103. The later date of entry into force of these law and regulations104 
aimed  to  ensure  that  the  necessary  conditions  are  in  place105  for  the  introduction  of  the 
mediation institution, otherwise the reform could not have been implemented106. However, as 
mentioned in the 2023 Rule of Law Report, the Supreme Bar Council has submitted a request 
for  a  constitutionality  check  in  March  2024  claiming  that  mandatory  mediation  limits  the 
parties’ right to free access to court and is therefore unconstitutional107. On 1 July 2024, the 
Constitutional Court declared unconstitutional the whole set of provisions of in the Mediation 
Act and the Civil Procedure Code establishing mandatory judicial mediation108. 

A  new  draft  law  envisages  changes  to  the  Judicial  System  Act  related  to  the 
digitalisation  of  justice.  The  draft  amendments  to  the  Judicial  System  Act  that  that  were 
developed and tabled before the publication of the 2023 Rule of Law Report were not further 
pursued109.  However,  it  is  rather  the  draft  new  Judicial  System  Act  that  would  introduce 
concrete  provisions  related  to  the  digitalisation  of  justice  110.  These  provisions  concern  the 
use  of  digital  files  in  the  judiciary,  the  creation  of  digital  systems  and  their  common 
integration111.  The  draft  also  envisages  a  more  prominent  role  for  the  Ministry  of  e-
Government  in  preparing  and  implementing  new  tools  and  new  platforms112.  The  draft 
Judicial  System  Act  sets  out  deadlines  for  electronic  handling  of  cases  in  the  judiciary113. 
Namely,  cases  that  have  been  initiated  before  1  July  2021  could  be  conducted  entirely  on 
paper;  cases  that  have  been  initiated  between  1  July  2021  and  1  January  2025  could  be 

100  One of the investigations currently being conducted by the ad hoc prosecutor against the current Prosecutor 

General is about possible ties with this former investigative magistrate.  

101  Information  received  from  Bulgarian  Institute  For  Legal  Initiatives,  Anti-Corruption  Fund  Foundation, 
Center  For  The  Study  Of  Democracy,  Institute  For  Market  Economics,  Initiative  Justice  For  All  And 
Bulgarian Judges Association in the context of the country visit to Bulgaria. 

102  See 2023 Rule of Law Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Bulgaria, pp. 11-12. 
103  See Milestone 227. The assessment related to the topic of Milestone 227 in the Rule of Law report does not 
prejudge the assessment of the fulfilment of the measures in the framework of the Bulgarian Recovery and 
Resilience Plan. 

104  See Protocol No. 30 of the Judges Chamber of the SJC of 31 October 2023. 
105  Building  and  providing  material  for  the  judicial  mediation  centres  in  all  district  courts  /113/  and  regional 

courts /28/, or 141 centres in total, selection and training of mediators in the judicial centres. 

106  Input from Bulgaria for the 2024 Rule of Law Report, p. 14. 
107  See Constitutional Case No. 11 of 6 March 2024. Information received from the Supreme Bar Council in the 

context of the country visit to Bulgaria. 

108  See Constitutional Decision No. 11 of 1 July 2024. 
109  See 2023 Rule of Law Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Bulgaria, p. 12. 
110  See Chapter 22 draft JSA. 
111  See Chapter 22 Section I and II draft JSA. 
112  Idem. 
113  See §21 of the final and transitional provisions of the draft JSA. 

13 

 
 
conducted both on paper and online; cases started after 1 January 2025 would be conducted 
only in online form114.  

The  availability  of  electronic  communications  within  the  justice  system  continues  to 
improve. The authorities have implemented or finalised several new electronic tools115. The 
Single e-Justice Portal (SEJP) was upgraded to allow for the execution of procedural actions 
in  electronic  form,  electronic  summons  and  electronic  payment116.  Moreover,  the  SEJP 
provides  the  possibility  of  online  registration  for  users,  the  creation  and  management  of 
profiles of legal practitioners, electronic request for access to cases, new electronic services 
for  initiation  of  court  proceedings,  filing  of  documents  in  pending  cases  and  electronic 
payments through a virtual POS terminal117. The authorities have also developed but not yet 
implemented  a  voice-to-text  system  using  Artificial  Intelligence  (AI)  for  the  courts118. 
According to the 2024 EU Justice Scoreboard, secure electronic communication is available 
to  some  extent  for  communication  between  courts,  while  not  being  available  for 
communications between courts and legal professionals119. It continues to be impossible for 
most court staff and judges to work remotely in a secure manner120. Access to digital tools for 
the different aspects of judicial proceedings continues to be limited, with the introduction of 
the possibility to see information online regarding court fees121. The projects under the RRP 
aiming to improve the digitalisation of justice have not been put in place yet122. 

Efficiency 

The  possibility  of  gathering  disaggregated  data  for  civil  and  commercial  cases  will  be 
made  available for 2023. The authorities have informed that a common understanding  has 
been reached with the European Commission for the Efficiency of Justice (CEPEJ) and as of 
2024123 they will be able to provide disaggregated data on the length of civil and commercial 
proceedings in all three instances124. This would be possible for the first time since the first 
edition  of  the  EU  Justice  Scoreboard  in  2013.  At  the  same  time,  the  length  of  court  cases 
related to bribery and administrative justice continues to be among the most efficient in the 
EU125. 

114  See §19, 20 and 21 (1) of the final and transitional provisions of the draft JSA. 
115  Input from Bulgaria for the 2024 Rule of Law Report, pp. 15-17.  
116  Input from Bulgaria for the 2024 Rule of Law Report, p. 15. 
117  Input from Bulgaria for the 2024 Rule of Law Report, p. 16. 
118  Input from Bulgaria for the 2024 Rule of Law Report, pp. 16-17. 
119  Figure 45, 2024 EU Justice Scoreboard. The percentage of female judges at the Supreme Courts is of around 
80%, currently the second highest percentage among supreme courts within the EU. See Figure 38, 2024 EU 
Justice Scoreboard. 

120  Figure 44, 2024 EU Justice Scoreboard. See also 2021, 2022 and 2023 Rule of Law Report, Country Chapter 

on the rule of law situation in Bulgaria, pp. 12-13. 

121  Figures 47 and 48, 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. 

122  They were planned for end 2023, which was delayed. The other project is planned for end 2024. 
123  The data published by the European Commission for the Efficiency of Justice  (CEPEJ) does not present the 
data  for year in which it is published but the data  from two years ago. For  example, the 2024 publication 
presents the data for 2022.  

124  Input from Bulgaria for the 2024 Rule of Law Report, p. 17. 
125  Figures 9, 10 and 23 2024 EU Justice Scoreboard.  

14 

 
 
II. 

ANTI-CORRUPTION FRAMEWORK  

The Commission for Counteracting Corruption and Illegal Assets Forfeiture (CACIAF) was 
split  into  two  bodies:  the  Anti-Corruption  Commission,  (ACC)  and  the  Commission  for 
Illegal  Assets  Forfeiture  (CIAF).  The  ACC  remains  responsible  for  both  preventing  and 
sanctioning  high-profile  corruption  and  for  implementing  rules  on  asset  declarations  and 
conflicts of interests. It also gained investigative powers for corruption cases involving high-
profile  persons.  The  CIAF  remains  responsible  for  the  confiscation  of  illegally  acquired 
assets.  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.  Regular  regional  and 
appellate  judicial  authorities  remain  responsible  for  all  corruption  cases,  including  at  high-
level.  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 2023 Corruption Perceptions Index by Transparency 
International,  Bulgaria  scores  45/100  and  ranks  26th  in  the  European  Union  and  67th 
globally126.  This  perception  has  been  relatively  stable  over  the  past  five  years127.  The 2024 
Special  Eurobarometer  on  Corruption  shows  that  85%  of  respondents  consider  corruption 
widespread  in  their  country  (EU  average  68%)  and  32%  of  respondents  feel  personally 
affected by corruption in their daily lives (EU average 27%)128. As regards businesses, 88% 
of  companies  consider  that  corruption  is  widespread  (EU  average  65%)  and  57%  consider 
that corruption is a problem when doing business (EU average 36%)129. Furthermore, 16% of 
respondents find that there are enough successful prosecutions to deter people from  corrupt 
practices (EU average 32%)130, while 14% of companies believe that people and businesses 
caught for bribing a senior official are appropriately punished (EU average 31%)131.  

A mid-term review of the National Strategy for Prevention and Countering Corruption 
is under preparation. A working group, set-up by order of the Prime Minister, is evaluating 
the  implementation  of  the  strategy  for  the  year  2022132.  The  same  working  group  prepared 

126  Transparency International (2024), Corruption Perceptions Index 2023, 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). 

127  In 2019 the score was 43, while in 2023 the score was 45. 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. 

128 Special Eurobarometer 548 on Citizens’ attitudes towards corruption in the EU (2024). The Eurobarometer 
data  on  citizens’  corruption  perception  and  experience  is  updated  every  year.  The  previous  data  set  is  the 
Special Eurobarometer 534 (2023). 

129  Flash Eurobarometer 543 on Businesses’ attitudes towards corruption in the EU (2024). The Eurobarometer 
data on businesses’ attitudes towards corruption as is updated every year. The previous data set is the Flash 
Eurobarometer 524 (2023). 

130  Special Eurobarometer 548 on Citizens’ attitudes towards corruption in the EU (2024). 
131  Flash Eurobarometer 543 on Businesses’ attitudes towards corruption in the EU (2024). 
132  To note that this is two years later than planned. In its RRP (milestone 226), the Government has committed 
to providing yearly implementation reports on the 2021-2027 anti-corruption strategy. According to the RRP, 
the timeline for fulfilment of milestone 226 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 

15 

 
 
 
proposals for a mid-term revision of the Strategy and action plan and will, in the near future, 
also  prepare  an implementation  report for the year 2023133. While the annual  report  for the 
implementation of the Strategy for the year 2022 and the revised Strategy were discussed and 
endorsed  by  the  National  Anti-Corruption  Council  in  October  2023,  it  is  still  not  formally 
adopted by the Government134. The preliminary results of this report show that only 18% of 
planned activities of the Strategy were fully implemented in 2022135. The formal approval of 
the 2022 implementation report, and the revision of the Strategy as well as the drafting of the 
implementation  report  for  the  year  2023  remain  to  be  proceeded  further136.  Civil  society 
organisations  criticised  both  the  implementation  and  the  revision  of  the  current  strategy, 
which  according  to  them  is  insufficiently  based  on  a  thorough  and  evidence-based  needs 
analysis.137  

Following the adoption of a reform, the Commission for Counteracting Corruption and 
Illegal  Assets  Forfeiture  was  divided  into  two  separate  bodies  (the  Anti-Corruption 
Commission  and  the  Commission  for  Illegal  Assets  Forfeiture)  and  their  performance 
remains to be assessed. The 2023 Rule of Law Report recommended to Bulgaria to ‘[e]nsure 
an  improved  effectiveness  of  investigations  […]  in  high-level  corruption  cases  including 
through  the  institutional  reforms  of  the  Anti-Corruption  Commission138.’  The  institutional 
reforms, dividing the previous Commission for Counteracting Corruption and Illegal Assets 
Forfeiture into two separate bodies, were adopted on 6 October 2023139. This reform  (to be 
assessed  as  part  of  Bulgaria’s  RRP140)  aims  to  advance  the  anti-corruption  institutional 

associated Roadmap and annual reporting on the progress of implementation in the context of the European 
Rule of Law mechanism’. See also 2022 Rule of Law Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in 
Bulgaria,  p.  15. The  assessment  related  to  the  topic  of  Milestone  226  in  the  Rule  of  Law  report  does  not 
prejudge the assessment of the fulfilment of the measures in the framework of the Bulgarian Recovery and 
Resilience Plan. 

133  This includes participation of relevant ministries and government bodies as well as civil society. The aim is 
to align the Strategy with recommendations from European and international bodies and to take into account 
new  legal  initiatives.  Input  from  Bulgaria  for  the  2024  Rule  of  Law  report  pp.  24-25  and  information 
received in the context of the country visit from the Anti-Corruption Council and contribution received from 
the Bulgarian Institute for Legal Initiatives, p. 19. 

134  And as a consequence, it is not yet publicly available. Written contribution from the Anti-Corruption Council 

in the context of the country visit to Bulgaria. 

135  Input from Bulgaria for the 2024 Rule of Law report p. 25. 
136  Report  from  the  meeting  of  the  National  Council  on  Anti-Corruption  Policies  on  18  October  2023  and 

information received in the context of the country visit from the Anti-Corruption Council. 

137  Contribution received from the Centre for the Study of Democracy for the 2024 Rule of Law Report, p. 17 

and from the Bulgarian Institute for Legal Initiatives for the 2024 Rule of Law Report, p. 19. 

138  See  2023  Rule  of  Law  Report,  Country  Chapter  on  the  rule  of  law  situation  in  Bulgaria,  p.  2.  The 
Commission assessed that ‘[n]o progress [was made] 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.’ 

139  Input from Bulgaria for the 2024 Rule of Law report, pp. 4 and 18-19. See also the Countering of Corruption 
Act  SG,  No.  84  of  06.10.2023.  The  new  Anti-Corruption  Commission  is  specialised  in  the  activities  of 
detection  and  investigation  of  corruption  crimes,  identification  of  conflict  of  interest,  acceptance  and 
verification of declarations  and  prevention  of  corruption. The  scope of  persons  covered by  the  legislation, 
and  as  such,  by  the ACC,  has  significantly  increased.  The  Commission  for  Illegal Assets  Forfeiture  will 
continue  to  carry  out  the  activity  of  establishing,  securing  and  confiscating  illegally  acquired  property  as 
well  as  functions  of  managing,  storing  and  protecting  the  property  on  which  precautionary  measures 
imposed in the proceedings initiated by it. Discussions on changing the mandate and legislation of the CIAF 
are at an early stage.  

140  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 

16 

 
 
 
framework. Stakeholders criticised a lack of transitionary provisions in the legislation141, as 
the Commission was split immediately upon entry into force of the law, leading to a lack of 
capacity  and  operational  difficulties  in  continuing  to  perform  its  regular  tasks142. 
Additionally,  the  reform  transferred  the  exclusive  competence  to  investigate  corruption 
crimes  of  high-level  officials  to  the  ACC  as  of  1  March  2024.  Newly  hired  investigative 
inspectors were supposed to take over ongoing investigations and start new investigations on 
all high-level officials within the scope of the law143. However, the level of preparedness of 
the  ACC  and  its  ability  to  appropriately  investigate  since  1  March  2024  –  including  as 
regards the recruitment of sufficient investigative inspectors – will need to be monitored144. 
The  ACC  confirms  that,  since  then,  investigative  measures  were  carried  out  in  connection 
with five cases and states that its action led to 26 persons being indicted145. Simultaneously, 
Parliament has not yet nominated the three members of the ACC (i.e. its collegial leadership), 
which, according to the law, had to be in place by January 2024146. The significant role of the 
Parliament  in  both  nominating147  and  appointing  the  members  of  the  ACC  raises  questions 
over  its  political  independence148.  The  introduction  of  an  independent  Nomination 
Committee149 is intended to mitigate these concerns. This would require the swift adoption of 
the  rules  of  procedure  with  a  view  to  ensuring  the  political  independence  of  the  ACC 
members.  According  to  the  Government  and  the  ACC  itself,  the  ACC  remains  fully 

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). The  assessment  related  to  the 
topic of Milestone 218 and 220 in the Rule of Law report does not prejudge the assessment of the fulfilment 
of the measures in the framework of the Bulgarian Recovery and Resilience Plan. 

141  Information received in the context of the country visit from the Prosecutor General, the Bulgarian Institute 
for Legal Initiatives and the Anti-Corruption Fund, and Contribution received from the Centre for the Study 
of Democracy for the 2024 Rule of Law report, p. 16 and the Bulgarian Institute for Legal Initiatives, p. 18. 
142  Contribution received from the Centre for the Study of Democracy for the 2024 Rule of Law report, pp. 14 
and  16-17  and  Information  received  in  the  context  of  the  country  visit  from  Centre  for  the  Study  of 
Democracy, the Bulgarian Institute for Legal Initiatives and the Anti-Corruption Fund 

143  Input from Bulgaria for the 2024 Rule of Law report, p. 19. 
144  At the time of publication of this report, the leadership of the ACC was still not appointed while it would 
need  to  take  on  an  estimated  170  cases  with  c.15  investigative  inspectors  which  raises  questions  over  the 
ACC’s  readiness.  While  an  initial  competition  for  recruitment  of  13  inspectors  has  been  announced,  it 
remains unclear whether this procedure is finalised. Information received in the context of the country visit 
from the Anti-Corruption Commission, the Prosecutor General, the Bulgarian Institute for Legal Initiatives 
and  the  Anti-Corruption  Fund  and  Anti-Corruption  Fund  (2023),  Analysis  of  new  Anti-Corruption  Law: 
‘New investigative bodies cannot compensate for lack of vision for comprehensive criminal justice reform’ 
and  Dnevnik  (2024),  How  the  new Anti-Corruption  Commission  works  -  like  the  old  one,  but  with  more 
powers. 

145  So far, one major investigative action of the ACC is publicly known to have taken place in April 2024. The 

action involved searches and arrests linked to the Bulgarian Customs, including the head of Customs. Pre-
trial proceedings have been initiated. Dnevnik (2024), The action in customs: It became clear who ordered it, 
the director and three others are accused. 

146  The  deadline  for  appointing  the  leadership  was  6  January 2024.  Contribution received  from  the  Bulgarian 

Institute for Legal Initiatives for the 2024 Rule of Law report, p. 18. 

147  The law gives both Parliament and civil society organisation the right to nominate candidates, which have to 
fulfil certain criteria. Candidates then have to be appointed by Parliament through a two-thirds majority. See 
art. 8-10 of the Countering of Corruption Act. 

148  International  standards  in  relation  to  Anti-Corruption  Commissions,  such  as  the  UN  Convention  against 
Corruption,  generally  recommend  giving  responsibilities  for  nominating  and  appointing  the  leadership  to 
different institutions. See also 2023 Justice  Scoreboard, fig. 58 and Contribution received from the Centre 
for the Study of Democracy for the 2024 Rule of Law report, p. 17. 

149  Art. 8(4) of the Countering of Corruption Act. 

17 

 
 
functional  while  awaiting  these further steps.  Its regular activities, including  the system  for 
prevention of conflicts of interest and for asset declaration, continue as before150. Subject to 
addressing  swiftly  the  practical  implementation,  as  the  Commission  has  been  reformed 
establishing the Anti-Corruption Commission (ACC), and the Commission for Illegal Assets 
Forfeiture (CIAF), there is significant progress on this part of the recommendation made in 
the 2023 Rule of Law Report.  

There has been no progress yet in establishing a robust track-record of high-level cases 
of  corruption.  The  2023  Rule  of  Law  Report  recommended  to  Bulgaria  to  ‘[e]nsure  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 Commission151’. Accurate reporting, including disaggregated data, on high-
level corruption cases is still lacking. 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  difficult  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 started152. Under its own mechanism153, the Supreme Court of 
Cassation tracks six cases related to high-level corruption on which it rendered a decision in 
2023154. The Prosecutor General’s office reported in relation to corruption in general155, not 
on  high-level  corruption,  82  new  pre-trial  proceedings  and  27  indictments  in  the  first  9 
months  of  2023156  (a  lower  number  compared  to  2022157).  Stakeholders  maintain  the  view 
that the prosecution is largely ineffective in relation to high-level corruption, with charges not 
brought  or  indequately  brought  forward  even  in  cases  of  well-substantiated  allegations  or 
publically available evidence. They also consider that a number of highly public allegations 
of  high-level  corruption  were  either  dismissed  or  not  proceeded  further  in  early  stages158. 

150  Input from Bulgaria for the 2024 Rule of Law report, pp. 22-23 and Information received in the context of 

the country visit from the Ministry of Justice and the Anti-Corruption Commission. 

151  See  2023  Rule  of  Law  Report,  Country  Chapter  on  the  rule  of  law  situation  in  Bulgaria,  p.  2.  The 
Commission assessed that ‘[n]o progress [was made] 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.’ 

152  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. 
153  2023 Rule of Law Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Bulgaria, p. 17. 
154  Input from Bulgaria for the 2024 Rule of Law report, p. 29 and Annex 4 – Data on corruption cases from the 

SCC. 

155  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. Input from Bulgaria for the 2024 Rule of Law report, Annex 3 – Data on 
corruption cases from the Prosecution Office. 

156  Input  from  Bulgaria  for  the  2024  Rule  of  Law  report,  Annex  3  –  Data  on  corruption  cases  from  the 

Prosecution Office. 

157  The  Prosecutor  General’s  office  reported  144  new  pre-trial  proceedings  in  relation  to  corruption,  and  48 
indictments brought to the courts, in cases in the first nine months of 2022. See 2023 Rule of Law Report, 
Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Bulgaria, p. 17. 

158  Contribution received from the Bulgarian Institute for Legal Initiative for the 2024 Rule of Law Report, p. 
18  and  from  MEDEL,  p.  15,  Center  for  the  Study  of  Democracy  (2024),  The  State  Of  State  Capture  and 
information  received  in  the  context  of  the  country  visit  from  the  Anti-Corruption  Fund,  the  Bulgarian 

18 

 
 
 
Further  analysis  by  stakeholders  confirmed  that  the  ratio  of  convictions  in  high-level 
corruption  cases  appears  low  with  few  cases  reaching  the  final  stages  of  proceedings159. 
GRECO  has  expressed  similar  concerns160.  A  number  of  additional  challenges  in 
investigating  and  prosecuting  such  cases  are  also  signalled  by  the  Supreme  Court  of 
Cassation.  This  includes  the  lifting  of  immunity  of  high-level  figures,  short  statutes  of 
limitations  and  a  formalistic  criminal  procedure  code161.  While  acknowledging  that  results 
could be improved, the prosecutors have indicated that the limited results are also related to 
the  formalistic  criminal  procedure  code  as  well  as  the  multiple  and  frequent  legislative 
changes.  Prosecutors  are  also  criticial  of  the  performance  of  corruption  investigators.  They 
have  however  not  identified  any  actions  for  improvement  that  can  be  undertaken  by  the 
Prosecution  office162.  Sanctions  by  third  countries  on  a  number  of  former  and  current 
Bulgarian  political  figures  related  to  high-level  corruption  remain  in  place  and  are  in 
themselves a signal of serious shortcomings163. On this basis, it is not possible at this stage to 
conclude  that  there  are  concrete  results  in  establishing  a  robust  track  record  of  prosecution 
and final judgments in high-level corruption cases, and as such there has been no progress yet 
on this part of the implementation of the recommendation made in previous years.  

Regional and appellate judicial bodies have fully taken over corruption cases since the 
the  closure  of  the  specialised  judicial  authorities  in  the  fight  against  corruption.  The 
Specialised  Prosecutor’s  Office  and  Specialised  Criminal  Courts  in  the  fight  against 
corruption  and  organised  crime  were  closed  in  2022,  with  their  competences  and  cases 
transferred  to  the  regional  and  appellate  level  judicial  authorities  with  the  necessary 
safeguards164. While stakeholders generally agree that the former specialised bodies did not 
produce enough results165 and see the new structure as an improvement, it remains too early 

Institute for Legal Initiatives and the Centre for the Study of Democracy. 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.  Recent  examples  include  cases  in  the  so  called 
‘Barcelonagate’ scandal involving a former Prime Minister and Minister from a leading political party, but 
also the ‘Eight Dwarfs’ case. See Kapital Insights (2023), The end of Barcelonagate? and BTA (2023), Sofia 
city prosecution terminates Barecelonagate money laundering case and 2023 Rule of Law Report, Country 
Chapter on the rule of law situation in Bulgaria, pp. 17-18. 

159  Monitoring work and analysis by civil society signal 4 convictions but 19 acquittals in the high-level cases it 
monitors,  with  no  new  final  convictions  being  reported  during  2023. The  report  also  stresses  the  growing 
number of criminal proceedings (17) terminated by prosecutors without clear reasoning at the pre-trial stage. 
Anti-Corruption  Fund  (2024), Anti-Corruption  institutions  2023:  a  freezing  point,  2023  annual  report,  pp. 
14-30. 

160  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.’ 

161  Input from Bulgaria for the 2024 Rule of Law report, p. 30. 
162  Information received in the context of the country visit from the Association of Public Prosecutors and the 
Prosecutor General, and 2023 Rule of Law Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Bulgaria, 
pp. 17-19. 

163  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. See also 2023 Rule of Law Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Bulgaria, p. 18 
164  2022 Rule of Law Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Bulgaria, pp. 15-16 and 2023 Rule 

of Law Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Bulgaria, p. 19.  

165  See  also  hearings  in  Parliament  from  15,  22,  29  February  and  14  March  2024,  where  magistrates  and 
formerly  accused  persons  made  allegations  of  criminal  influence  within  the  already  closed  Specialised 
Criminal Court and Specialised Prosecutor’s Office. 

19 

 
 
to draw firm conclusions166. The prosecution highlights some advantages of the past model, 
stating it provided for adequate prosecutorial independence to tackle the most difficult cases, 
although they also admit disadvantages167. Concerning cooperation with the European Public 
Prosecutor’s  Office (EPPO), following  concerns expressed by the EPPO168, the Ministry of 
Interior  concluded  an  agreement  with  the  EPPO  in  September  2023  to  ensure  independent 
access  of  the  EPPO  to  specialised  police  investigators169.  The  EPPO  itself  reported  17 
corruption cases among its open cases in Bulgaria in 2023 (6% of the total open cases)170.  

Work on a legislative reform in the area of foreign bribery has not progressed further. 
Detection,  investigation  and  prosecution  of  foreign  bribery  cases  is  seen  as  ineffective  and 
cointinues to be criticised by the OECD171. Work on a specific legislative reform in the area 
of  foreign  bribery  remains  ongoing.  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 recommendations172. Due 
to  the  complex  work,  the  working  group  within  the  Ministry  of  Justice  postponed  the 
deadline of its final report from the end of 2023  and is still working on concrete legislative 
proposals, however, a concrete proposal has not been published so far173. In early 2024, one 
piece of draft legislation providing for higher monetary sanctions for legal entities and a new 
algorithm  for  determining  the  amount  of  the  sanctions  (an  amendment  of  the  Law  on 
Administrative  Offences  and  Sanctions)  aiming  to  implement  the  OECD recommendations, 
was submitted for public consultation. 

Work continues on corruption prevention measures aimed at improving the integrity of 
specific sectors of the public administration, including 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 police, including integrity tests174. The Ministry, together 
with  the  Anti-Corruption  Commission,  is  developing  a  corruption  risk  assessment 

166  Information received in the context of the country visit from the Anti-Corruption Fund, Centre for the Study 

of Democracy and the Institute for Market Economics.  

167  These  were  not  further  specified.  Information  received  in  the  context  of  the  country  visit  from  the 

Association of Public Prosecutors and the Prosecutor General. 

168  2023 Rule of Law Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Bulgaria, p. 19. 
169  Input  from  Bulgaria  for  the  2024  Rule  of  Law  Report,  pp.  21-22  and  28  and  EPPO  (2024),  Bulgaria: 

Designated police officers to work exclusively on EPPO investigations.  

170  EPPO (2024), Annual Report 2023, p. 19. 
171  OECD (2023), Bulgaria Phase 4 Follow-up Report, p. 4 ‘The [OECD] Working Group [on Bribery] remains 
seriously concerned about Bulgaria’s enforcement situation’ and 2023 Rule of Law Report, Country Chapter 
on the rule of law situation in Bulgaria, p. 19. 

172  OECD  (2021),  Phase  4  evaluation  of  Bulgaria,  p.  54  (para.197)  and  2023  Rule  of  Law  Report,  Country 

Chapter on the rule of law situation in Bulgaria, p. 19. 

173  Written contribution from the Ministry of Justice received in the context of the country visit to Bulgaria and 
OECD (2023), Bulgaria Phase 4 Follow-up Report, p. 3 ‘Critical recommendations such as those pertaining 
to the foreign bribery offence or the liability of legal persons thus remain, to date, unimplemented’. See also 
Contribution received from the Centre for the Study of Democracy for the 2024 Rule of Law Report, p. 20 
174  See  for  instance  European  Commission  (2023),  Report  of  the  third  voluntary  fact-finding  mission  to 
Bulgaria  –  latest  developments  in  the  application  of  the  Schengen  acquis,  p.  11.  ‘Over  the  last  year,  the 
Bulgarian authorities continued the implementation of  measures to fight integrity breaches and corruption. 
An  anti-corruption  plan  for  2023  was  elaborated  by  the  Intradepartmental  Coordinating  Council  of 
Combating  Corruption.  In  accordance  with  this  plan,  the  Ministry  of  Interior  has  continued  to  implement 
specific measures in areas of increased corruption risk (road traffic control, border control, etc.), as well as 
general horizontal measures to prevent and counter corruption, including ethics and anti-corruption trainings 
for law enforcement authorities.’ 

20 

 
 
methodology  for  its  employees,  including  the  police,  with  the  aim  to  roll  this  out  during 
2024175.  A  working  group  continues  to  assess  the  open  recommendations  from  GRECO176, 
such as the operational independence of the police from the Ministry of the Interior177 and a 
lack of dedicated anti-corruption policies, such as a detailed code of conduct for the police, 
risk assessment and rules on gifts178. This work is channelled through a specific action plan 
within  the  Ministry  of  Interior179.  The  Government  reports  draft  amendments  to  further 
develop and upgrade the ethical rules for those officials with police functions and to enhance 
the regulations on the independence of police activities have been prepared, while new rules 
on donations were issued and ethics committees and advisors have been appointed within the 
Ministry  of  Interior.  As  regards  the  judiciary,  the  codes  of  conduct  for  judges  and 
prosecutors180 were adopted in 2023, including clear provisions on integrity and prevention of 
corruption181.  These  codes  were  in  principle  welcomed  by  the  Venice  Commission,  which 
however  also  recommended  some  improvements  and  stressed  that  complementary  rules  on 
disciplinary  proceedings  are  needed  in  the  Judicial  System  Act182.  The  Inspectorate  to  the 
Supreme Judicial Council (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  comparative  analyses  with  other  EU  Member  States  that  aim  to  further  improve 
integrity among magistrates183. Of the 16 integrity checks carried out by the Inspectorate in 
2023, three led to disciplinary proceedings184.  

Work has started on a comprehensive code of conduct to address the serious gaps in the 
integrity of top executive functions. The 2023 Rule of Law report recommended to Bulgaria 
to  ‘[i]mprove  the  integrity  of  top  executive  functions,  taking  into  account  European 
standards, in particular by ensuring that clear integrity standards for the Government as well 

175  Input from Bulgaria for the 2024 Rule of Law Report pp. 23 and 28 and 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.  

176  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. 

177  GRECO, Fifth Evaluation Round – Evaluation report, para 124. 
178  GRECO, Fifth Evaluation Round – Evaluation report, para 142, 146 and 162. 
179  Information  received  in  the  context  of  the  country  visit  from  the  Ministry  of  Interior  and  the  Internal 

Security Directorate. 

180  Making corruption prevention systems for the  judiciary more  robust, including through the Inspectorate  to 
the Supreme Judicial Council (ISJC) and adopting the codes of conduct is a commitment under the RRP (see 
milestone  219).  The  assessment  related  to  the  topic  of  Milestone  219  in  the  Rule  of  Law  report  does  not 
prejudge the assessment of the fulfilment of the measures in the framework of the Bulgarian Recovery and 
Resilience Plan. 

181  Code  of  Ethical  Conduct  of  Bulgarian  Judges  and  Code  of  Ethical  Conduct  of  Bulgarian  Prosecutors  and 
Investigators. See also Written contribution received in the context of the country visit from the Inspectorate 
to the Supreme Judicial Council 

182  Venice Commission opinions (CDL-AD(2024)004) and (CDL-AD(2024)005). Further minor amendments to 
the  codes,  including  increased  attention  for  whistleblowers  and  measures  against  favouritism  and 
corporatism, are also recommended by the Venice Commission. 

183  Work however on the electronic public register of declarations, which should facilitate online submissions of 
assets and interest declarations of magistrates remains suspended co as the  contract for these services was 
terminated  for  a  third  time.  Written  contribution  received  in  the  context  of  the  country  visit  from  the 
Inspectorate to the Supreme Judicial Council.  

184  Input from Bulgaria for the 2024 Rule of Law Report, p. 25.  

21 

 
 
as an appropriate sanctioning mechanism are in place185’. Important gaps have been noted by 
GRECO186 and civil society187. In particular, there are no legal requirements on the integrity 
or  incompatibilities  of  persons  hired  for  ministers’  private  offices188,  and  there  is  no 
comprehensive  code  of  conduct,  or  sanctioning  mechanism  for  top  executive  functions  in 
place. A working group, set up at the start of 2024, is drafting proposals for a code of conduct 
for top executive functions, in line with commitments in the Anti-Corruption Strategy189. The 
working  group  aims  to  present  a  draft  document  by  June  2024190.  In  general,  integrity 
provisions  for  top-level  functions  remain  fragmented,  with  various  institutions  having 
differing  provisions,  and  no  plans  have  been  announced  to  address  this  shortcoming191. 
Moreover,  it  is  still  unclear  whether  the  Chief  Inspectorate  and  various  ministerial 
inspectorates  have  appropriate  functional  independence  to  carry  out  their  corruption 
prevention tasks adequately192. As the integrity framework was not improved, there has been 
no progress on the recommendation made in the 2023 Rule of Law Report.  

The  rules  on  asset  and  interest  disclosure  for  public  officials  are  systematically 
implemented but effectiveness of verifications  and  sanctions is  lacking. On declarations 
of  assets,  from  January  2023  until  6  October  2023,  10  965  declarations  of  assets  were 
received by the CACIAF while 13 349 verifications of declarations (both submitted in 2022 
and  2023)  were  carried  out,  resulting  in  660  decisions  establishing  an  administrative 
violation193.  Since  6  October  2023,  the  ACC  sought  to  finalise  the  work  of  receiving  the 
regular  submission  of  declarations  of  those  required  to  do  so  in  2023  establishing  30 
administrative violations194. Additionally, the CACIAF  – until  6 October 2023  – undertook 
action  on  491  reports  from  citizens  in  which  it  could  provide  support  to  criminal 
investigations195, while the ACC continued this work on 149 such reports196. On conflicts of 
interest,  from  January  until  6  October  2023,  the  CACIAF  initiated  314  procedures  (on  the 

185  See  2023  Rule  of  Law  Report,  Country  Chapter  on  the  rule  of  law  situation  in  Bulgaria,  p.  2.  The 
Commission assessed that ‘[s]ome progress [was made] regarding corruption prevention measures aimed at 
improving  the  integrity  of  specific  sectors  of  the  public  administration,  including  the  police  and  the 
judiciary.’ 

186  GRECO Fifth Evaluation Round – Evaluation report, para. 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.’ 

187  See 2023 Rule of Law Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Bulgaria, p. 21. 
188  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. 

189  The  working  group  is  working  on  amendments  to  the  Law  on Administration  and  a  Code  of  Conduct.  It 
includes  representatives  of  civil  society.  Input  from  Bulgaria  for  the  2024  Rule  of  Law  Report,  p.  25, 
Contribution from the Bulgarian Institute for Legal Initiatives for the 2023 Rule of Law Report, p. 19 and 
written  contribution  from  the  Anti-Corruption  Council  received  in  the  context  of  the  country  visit  to 
Bulgaria. 

190  Contribution from the Bulgarian Institute for Legal Initiatives for the 2024 Rule of Law Report, p. 19 and 
information received in the context of the country visit from the Anti-Corruption Council and the Bulgarian 
Institute for Legal Initiatives. 

191  Contribution from the Centre for the Study of Democracy for the 2024 Rule of Law Report, p. 17. 
192  GRECO Fifth Evaluation Round – Evaluation report, paras. 78-79. 
193  Compared to 11 915 declarations received and 750 decisions on violations for 2022. The administrative 

violations concern cases of both failure to submit and wrongly submitted asset declarations. Commission for 
Counteracting Corruption and Illegal Assets Forfeiture, Activity Report 2023, pp. 4-5 

194  Anti-Corruption Commission (2024), Activity Report 6.10.2023-31.12.2023, p. 6 
195  Commission for Counteracting Corruption and Illegal Assets Forfeiture, Activity Report 2023, p. 20 
196  Anti-Corruption Commission (2024), Activity Report 6.10.2023-31.12.2023, p. 9 

22 

 
 
basis of 230 reports) that resulted in 122 decisions regarding senior public officials (finding 
12 conflicts of interests)197, while from 6 October 2023 until the end of that year, the ACC 
initiated 105 procedures  (on the basis of 74 reports) that resulted  in  22 decisions regarding 
senior public officials (finding 5 conflicts of interest)198. A draft regulation on the declaration 
of assets of certain public officials is in preparation, given the scope of persons covered by 
the  system  was  widened  with  the  aforementioned  reform  of  the  ACC199.  The  increase  in 
responsibilities of the ACC by this reform is seen by civil society organisations as potentially 
negatively  affecting  the  existing  asset  declaration  system,  as  the  ACC’s  already  limited 
resources  might  need  to  be  used  for  this  as  well200.  Civil  society  organisations  continue  to 
voice  concerns  over  structural  issues  in  particular  the  control  mechanism,  which  they 
consider formalistic, superficial and non-dissuasive, as well as the lack of results of the asset 
and interest declaration system, which was not reformed by the new legislation201. This may 
result in  irregularities going  unnoticed as  also  underlined by GRECO202. Clear  rules on the 
declaration of gifts to top executive persons remain lacking203. 

The rules on revolving doors were reformed and work on legislation to make lobbying 
more  transparent  has  started.  Following  commitments  to  adopt  legislative  measures  to 
regulate  lobbying  under  the  framework  of  the  RRP204,  the  Government  has  prepared  a 
concept paper on possible lobbying legislation aiming to define lobbying into law and setting 
up  a  transparency  register  requiring  lobbyists  to  register  their  activity,  information  on  this 
activity and funds spent . The concept paper was adopted by the Council of Ministers in July 
2024,  following  which  legislative  drafting  will  start205.  Civil  society  organisation  have 
actively  participated  in  this  work,  although  stakeholders  noted  that  a  broad  definition  of 
lobbying could possibly restrict the operating environment of civil society206. The President 
of the National Audit Office has been named as the body that would possibly manage a future 

197  Commission for Counteracting Corruption and Illegal Assets Forfeiture, Activity Report 2023, p. 17 
198  Anti-Corruption Commission (2024), Activity Report 6.10.2023-31.12.2023, p. 7 
199  Written contribution from the Ministry of Justice in the context of the country visit to Bulgaria 
200  Information  received  in  the  context  of  the  country  visit  from  the  Justice  for  All  Initiative  and  the  Anti-
Corruption  Fund;  and  Anti-Corruption  Fund  (2024),  Anti-Corruption  institutions  2023:  a  freezing  point, 
2023 annual report, p. 35 and pp. 38-41. 

201  Contribution  from  the  Centre  for  the  Study  of  Democracy  for  the  2024  Rule  of  Law  Report,  p.  18, Anti-
Corruption Fund (2024), Anti-Corruption institutions 2023: a freezing point, 2023 annual report, pp. 38-41 
and Center For The Study Of Democracy (2023), Second Good Governance Report: Implementing Effective 
Instruments for Asset Declaration and Politically Exposed Companies. See also 2023 Rule of Law Report, 
Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Bulgaria, pp. 15-16 and 21-22. 

202  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).  GRECO  Fifth  Evaluation  Round  –  Evaluation 
report, recommendation ix, para 112. 

203  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. 

204  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. The assessment related to 
the topic of Milestone 223 in the Rule of Law report does not prejudge the assessment of the fulfilment of 
the measures in the framework of the Bulgarian Recovery and Resilience Plan. 

205  Input from Bulgaria for the 2024 Rule of Law Report, p. 25. 
206  Several  organisations  advocate  for  a  restricted  definition  of  lobbying  that  focuses  on  for-profit  actors. 
Written contribution from the Bulgarian Institute for Legal Initiatives, the Access to Information Programme 
and  the  Center  for  the  Study  of  Democracy  received  in  the  context  of  the  country  visit  to  Bulgaria,  and 
Contribution from the Bulgarian Institute for Legal Initiatives for the 2024 Rule of Law Report, p. 25. 

23 

 
 
transparency  register  and  has  welcomed  this  role207.  GRECO  has  in  the  past  also  strongly 
recommended authorities to introduce rules governing the interactions between top executive 
functions and lobbyists208. Rules on revolving doors also underwent a targeted reform, as the 
2023  Countering  Corruption  Act  places  restrictions  for  the  period  of  one  year  on  certain 
persons. For example, those who managed public procurement procedures with EU funds, are 
prohibited from participating in such procurements in their new functions for a period of 12 
months209,  while  high-ranking  politicians  are  also  prohibited  from  joining  firms  in  policy 
areas on which they worked for the same time period210. 

Audits on political  party financing continue, although it remains unclear if allegations 
of  criminal  behaviour are  appropriately  followed-up.  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 parties211. In June 2023, the NAO published 
for the first time 19 audit reports that had been sent to the Prosecutor’s Office in the period 
2016-2020 on suspicions of criminal activity. The NAO did this after criminal proceedings – 
a  responsbility  of  the  prosecution  –  related  to  these  reports  were  completed  or  ended 
inconclusively212. Overall, of 25 audit reports sent to the Prosecutor’s Office on suspicion of 
criminal  behaviour  during  the  period  2018-2022,  13  reports  were  closed  during  the  initial 
investigation  stage,  while  there  is  no  data  on  the  remaining  12,  raising  questions  about 
effective  prosecutorial  follow-up  to  the  identified  allegations  of  criminal  behaviour213. 
Following the dismissal of the former chair of the NAO by Parliament and subsequent ruling 
by  the  Constitutional  Court  that  this  was  done  in  a  manner  incompatible  with  the 
Constitution214,  the  Court,  in  November  2023,  also  declared  in  a  separate  case  that  the 
appointment  of  an  interim  chair  by  Parliament  was  unconstitutional215.  A new  chair  was  in 
the meantime appointed in July 2023, for a full mandate216. The insitution itself continues to 
signal a lack of resources to carry out its tasks217.  

Amendments  to  the  recent  whistleblowers  legislation  were  adopted  by  Parliament.  As 
reported  in  the  2023  Rule  of  Law  Report,  an  initial  whistleblower  protection  system  was 
adopted  on  2  February  2023  aiming  to  align  Bulgarian  law  with  the  EU  Whistleblowers 
Directive218. A first amending law was adopted in October 2023219, which addresses several 

207  Written contribution from the National Audit Office received in the context of the country visit to Bulgaria. 
208  This  also  includes  an  element  of  transparency  towards  the  public.  GRECO  Fifth  Evaluation  Round  – 

Evaluation report, recommendation xiii, para. 74. 
209  Article 87 of the 2023 Countering of Corruption Act. 
210  Article 86 of the 2023 Countering of Corruption Act. 
211  2022 Rule of Law Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Bulgaria, p. 18. 
212  There has been no follow-up after this announcement by the NAO. Input from Bulgaria for the 2024 Rule of 

Law Report, p. 26. 

213  Written contribution from the National Audit Office received in the context of the country visit to Bulgaria. 
See also 2023 Rule of Law Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Bulgaria, pp. 22-23. 

214  2023 Rule of Law Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Bulgaria, pp. 22-23. 
215  Constitutional Court Decision No. 7 of 21 November 2023.  
216  Bulgarian Parliament (2023), Decision on the election of chair for the Bulgarian National Audit Office.   
217  Written contribution from the National Audit Office received in the context of the country visit to Bulgaria. 
218  Directive  (EU)  2019/1937.  2023  Rule  of  Law  Report,  Country  Chapter  on  the  rule  of  law  situation  in 

Bulgaria, pp. 23-24. 

219  The initial whistleblowers legislation was the law adopted on 2 February 2023. The Law of  5 October 2023 
on Amendments and Supplements to the Whistleblower Protection Act provided for the further amendments. 
Input from Bulgaria for the 2024 Rule of Law Report pp. 21 and 27. 

24 

 
 
the 

that  should  be  available 

of the shortcomings of the initial law, in particular some aspects as regards the personal and 
the  material  scope  and 
to 
interim  relief  measures 
whistleblowers220.  According  to  information  provided  by 
the  Bulgarian  authorities, 
amendments are under preparation to address remaining shortcomings, but these remain to be 
submitted to Parliament. This commitment is also included in Bulgaria’s RRP221. Moreover, 
in  2023  the  Ombudsman’s  powers  for  conducting  an  external  audit  of  whistleblowing  and 
whistleblower  protection  activities  were  implemented  through  the  creation  of  a  new  expert 
unit222.  Following  these  amendments,  civil  society  organisations  continue  to  stressa  lack  of 
results  and  impact  on  the  ground  of  the  whistleblowing  system  regarding  the  fight  against 
corruption  at  this  stage223.  Moreover,  civil  society  organisations  continue  to  criticise  the 
designation of the Commission for Data Protection as the competent authority, noting that it 
lacks  capacity  and  expertise  on  the  relevant  legislation  in  order  to  serve  as  an  efficient 
whistleblower authority, in particular in corruption cases224. 

Public procurement remains an area at high risk of corruption, and investigations and 
legal  proceedings  linked  to  the  abolished  investor  citizenship  scheme  continued. 
Businesses’ attitudes towards corruption in the EU show that 36% of companies in Bulgaria 
(EU average 27%) think that corruption has prevented them from winning a public tender or 
a  public  procurement  contract  in  practice  in  the  last  three  years225.  As  such,  public 
procurement  continues  to  be  considered  as  an  area  at  high  risk  of  corruption.  Public 
procurement  legislation  was  amended  in  October  2023226  to  improve  transparency  and 
integrity227. Civil society studies indicate that the public procurement system as a whole lacks 
integrity measures both at the national and local levels228, and that in some specific instances, 
such  as  private  hospitals  working  with  certain  public  funds  (such  as  National  Health 

220  See Transparency International How Well do EU Countries Protect Whistleblowers? - Transparency.org, and 
by  the  Southeast  Europe  Coalition  on  Whistleblower  protection  Transposition  of  the  EU  2019/1937 
Directive  on  Whistleblower  protection  in  Southeast  Europe  -  Publication  -  Center  for  the  Study  of 
Democracy (csd.eu). 

221  Milestone  217  of  Bulgaria’s  RRP  provides  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’. The assessment related to the topic of Milestone 217 in the Rule of 
Law  report  does  not  prejudge  the  assessment  of  the  fulfilment  of  the  measures  in  the  framework  of  the 
Bulgarian Recovery and Resilience Plan. Discussions on the fulfilment of this milestone are ongoing. 

222  Amendments and Supplements to the Whistleblower Protection Act, SG N. 11 of February 2, 2023 (in § 5 of 
the Final Provisions the respective amendments are made to the Ombudsman Act). Resolution of MC N 147 
of September 20, 2023. Input from Bulgaria for the 2024 Rule of Law Report p. 38, Law of 5 October 2023 
on Amendments and Supplements to the Whistleblower Protection Act 

223  Contribution from the Centre for the Study of Democracy for the 2024 Rule of Law Report, p. 14 and p. 19 
and Contribution from the Bulgarian Institute for Legal Initiatives for the 2024 Rule of Law Report, pp. 19-
20.  

224  Tsabala,  K.  et.  al.,  Transposition  of  the  EU  2019/1937  directive  on  whistleblower  protection  in  Southeast 

Europe: Challenges and lessons learned, Southeast European Coalition on Whistleblower Protection. 

225  Flash Eurobarometer 543 on Businesses’ attitudes towards corruption in the EU (2024). This is 9 percentage 

points above the EU average. 

226  This  was  done  as  part  of  the  Bulgarian  Recovery  and  Resilience  Plan  –  Milestone  242.  The  assessment 
related  to  the  topic  of  Milestone  242  in  the  Rule  of  Law  report  does  not  prejudge  the  assessment  of  the 
fulfilment of the measures in the framework of the Bulgarian Recovery and Resilience Plan. 
227  Public Procurement Agency (2023), Amendments to the Public Procurement Act are adopted. 
228  Center  for  the  Study  of  Democracy  (2023),  Bridges  to  Nowhere.  State  Capture  and  Corruption  Risks  in 

Fiscal Transfers and Public Procurement at the Local Level in Southeast Europe. 

25 

 
 
Insurance  Fund),  certain  entities  (notwithstanding  they  are  for  the  most  part  financed  by 
public  money)  remain  out  of  the  scope  of  the  Public  Procurement  Act229.  In  addition,  as 
reported  previously,  investigations  and  legal  proceedings  concerning  Bulgarian  citizenship 
previously  granted  under  the  country’s  investor  citizenship  scheme,  abolished  in  2022, 
continue230. Even after their abolition, investor citizenship schemes continue to expose a high 
risk  of  corruption,  as  new  allegations  emerged,  including  corruption  and  fraud  to  avoid 
proper  due  diligence  in  the  granting  of  citizenship231.  A  parliamentary  investigation 
committee has been set-up to further investigate these cases 232.  

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  Act233.  The  Access  to  Public  Information  Act 
regulates  access  to  public  information  and  the  re-use  of  public  sector  information.234  The 
Compulsory  Deposit  of  Copies  of  Printed  and  Other  Works  Act  contains  requirements 
regarding  media  ownership  transparency  (‘Law  on  Deposit  of  Copies’)235.  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 
Commission236. 

Concerns remain about the lack of sufficient safeguards to secure the independence of 
the media regulator. In the latest Media Pluralism Monitor, independence and effectiveness 
of the media regulator scored a risk of 37%, unchanged from the 2023 MPM edition237. The 
regulator  indicated  that  it  faced  pressure  as  regards  its  activities  by  certain  politicians  and 
political parties238. As previously stated, the CEM indicated that due to its budget it has faced 
difficulties to attract staff in view of the low salaries proposed239. The 2024 Media Pluralism 
Monitor noted that a general amendment to the Constitution was passed in the Parliament in 
December 2023, which aims to guarantee more independence for regulatory bodies, such as 

229  Contribution from the Bulgarian Institute for Legal Initiatives for the 2024 Rule of Law Report pp. 21-22. 
230  2023 Rule of Law Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Bulgaria, p. 23. 
231  Mediapool (2024), The ‘Gleb Mishin’ scheme: Over 4 000 people from the former USSR are trying to get a 

BG passport.  

232  Decision of the National Assembly of 14 February 2024. See also, Bulgarian Telegraph Agency (2024), CC-
DB’s Atanas Atanasov Heads Ad Hoc Committee on Possible Illegal Granting of Bulgarian Citizenship 
233  Radio  and  Television  Act  available  at  Lex.bg  -  Закони,  правилници,  конституция,  кодекси,  държавен 
вестник, правилници по прилагане. Bulgaria ranks 59th in the 2024 Reporters without Borders World Press 
Freedom Index compared to 71st in the previous year. 

234  Access to public information Act, available at Access to Public Information Act (government.bg). 
235  The enforcement of the Law on Deposit of Copies is carried out by the Ministry of Culture. 
236  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 
2023, the Ethics Commission took decisions in 21 cases (contribution from Reporters sans frontières for the 
2024 Rule of Law Report). The NCJE reported a rise in complaints in the first two months of 2024, with a 
majority of them relating to disinformation but also the war in Ukraine (information received in the context 
of the country visit). 

237  2024 Media Pluralism Monitor, p. 13. It is noted that stakeholders considered that the CEM could be more 
effective  in  its  monitoring  and  enforcement  regarding  the  activities  of  media.  Information  received  in  the 
context  of  the  country  visit  from  the  Association  of  European  journalists  and  Access  to  Information 
programme. 

238  Information received in the context of the country visit from the CEM. 
239  Information received in the context of the country visit from the CEM. 

26 

 
 
the  CEM.  This  constitutional  amendment  would  need  to  be  implemented  through  ordinary 
legislation to become effective in practice. This would ensure that in the future – once a law 
is passed – members of the Parliamentary quota of the CEM would be selected after a vote by 
a  two  thirds  majority  of  the  members  of  the  Parliament,  as  compared  to  simple  majority 
today240. 

Notwithstanding  the  existence  of  several  registers  for  media  ownership  information, 
shortcomings regarding the enforcement of the media ownership disclosure obligations 
remain. In addition to the CEM public register covering media ownership structures of radio 
and  television  operators241,  the  Ministry  of  Culture  hosts  a  public  register  based  on 
declarations made by any media outlet of its beneficial ownership and the funding received 
from public funds, political parties, etc242. Stakeholders consider that this register is not easily 
accessible and that the system based on self-declarations is not effective in practice given the 
insufficient enforcement of these obligations243. Although the legal framework is in place, not 
all  media  declare  their  ultimate  owners244.  Stakeholders  consider  that  the  situation  is  most 
complex  as  regards  certain  non-transparent  online  media  which  are  usually  vehicles  for 
spreading disinformation245. The expert working group set up within the Ministry of Culture 
in 2021 to consider changes to the Law on the Deposit of Copies continues the reflections on 
how to improve the functioning of the register and the related availability of media ownership 
information246.  

There has been some further progress as regards transparency in the allocation of state 
advertising. The 2023 Rule of Law Report recommended Bulgaria to ‘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’247. The 
expert working group set up in June 2023 to discuss topics affecting the media environment, 
including the transparency in the distribution of state advertising, identified this matter as one 
of the priority topics248. In October 2023, amendments  to  the Public Procurement Act  were 
adopted which aim to bring some transparency when awarding state advertising to radio and 

240  See Article 91b of the Bulgarian constitution and MPM 2024, p. 14. 
241  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). 
242  The public register on media ownership, accessible online. 
243  Information  received  in  the  context  of  the  country  visit  (Access  to  information  programme,  For  the  truth 

project). 

244  The indicator of transparency of media ownership scores low risk (29%) as it did in previous years, due to 

the existence of legal provisions (2024 Media Pluralism Monitor, p. 9 and 16). 

245  2024 Media Pluralism Monitor, p. 18. Information on the lack of transparency received in the context of the 
country  visit  from  NCJE.  Contribution  from  Reporters  sans  frontières  for  the  2024  Rule  of  Law  Report 
which refers to the increase in ‘mushroom and binge websites’. 

246  Information  received  in  the  context  of  the  country  visit  from  the  Ministry  of  Culture.  Discussions  in  the 
expert group have for instance reflected on whether to consider the declaration of media ownership as a pre-
condition for benefitting from state advertising. 

247  In  the  2023  Rule  of  Law  Report,  the  Commission  concluded  that  some  progress  was  made  on  the 
recommendation given the setting up of an expert group to discuss topics affecting the media environment, 
including transparency in the distribution of state advertising.  

248  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. Input from Bulgaria for the 
2023 rule of law report. 

27 

 
 
television  broadcasters  and  on-demand  media  services249.  In  particular,  contracting 
authorities  are  required  to  send  a  procurement  award  notice  for  publication  in  the  public 
procurement  register  within  30  days  after  the  conclusion  of  a  contract  subject  to  the 
exemption which applies to such media service providers250. Moreover, the authorities shall 
provide for the publication of a notice of completion of a public procurement contract  or  a 
framework  agreement  and  specify  the  funds  paid  to  each  media  service  provider,  where 
applicable. While this is seen as a step towards more transparency, stakeholders have noted 
that  there  are  still  a  number  of  shortcomings  with  the  existing  framework  in  particular  as 
regards  transparency  on  funds  granted  through  intermediaries251.  Stakeholders  consider  that 
the  overall  picture  regarding  allocation  of  state  advertising  has  not  improved  in  practice252. 
The negative impact is felt, in particular, at local and regional level, where there are claims of 
state  advertising  being  used  as  a  means  to  buy  influence253.  Overall,  some  further  progress 
has been made on the recommendation made in the 2023 Rule of Law Report. 

While  legal  safeguards  for  editorial  independence  are  in  place,  indications  of  political 
and  economic  influence  over  the  media  remain.  The  principle  of  editorial  independence 
from economic and political actors is set out in the Radio and Television Law and features in 
the Code of Ethics of Bulgarian media254. In the 2024 Media Pluralism  Monitor report, the 
indicator on ‘Political independence of the media’ scored a risk of 50%255. The report notes 
that the media market is highly dependent on political and economic influences, particularly 
as regards local media256. Moreover, it refers to risks to editorial independence given certain 
practices  of  commercial  entities  influencing  editorial  content257.  Stakeholders  noted  several 
recent  changes  in  the  editorial  teams  of  some  media  outlets258.  Finally,  apart  from  general 
competition  rules,  which  are  underpinned  by  economic  considerations,  no  specific  media 
concentration rules are in place259. One notable aspect is the trend of vertical integration, with 
businesses buying telecom and media outlets260.  

249  Input from Bulgaria for the 2024 rule of law report referring to the publication of the amended law in the 
official journal No. 20 of 18 October 2023. See also CEM statement dated 18  October 2023 regarding the 
amendments to the Public Procurement Act. 

250  This  concerns  contracts  with  a  value  which  is  equal  to  or  greater  than  BGN  10 000  (approximately  EUR 

5 000). 

251  Information received in the context of the  country visit from the CEM, Access to Information Programme 
and Association of European Journalists. Most notably, these changes do not encompass contracts of value 
below 10,000 leva and do not cover contracts concluded with media agencies. 

252  Contribution from  Reporters sans frontières for the 2024 Rule of Law Report; information received in the 

context of the country visit from For the Truth Project. 

253  Information  received  in  the  context  of  the  country  visit  from  for  the  truth  project.  Contribution  from 
Reporters sans frontières for the 2024 Rule of Law Report. The 2024 Media Pluralism Monitor indicates that 
the lack of an adequate legal framework on the transparency of allocation of state advertising continues to 
have a negative impact on the media sector, especially on local and regional media (p. 21). 

254  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. 

255  2024 Media Pluralism Monitor, p. 19. 
256  2024 Media Pluralism Monitor, p. 24. 
257  2024 Media Pluralism Monitor, p.18. 
258  Editors  of  the  news  programmes  of  the  two  leading  Bulgarian  TV  channels  BTV  and  Nova  have  been 
changed in February 2024, see С усещане за Пеевски: шефовете на новините на ‘Нова’ и bTV сменени в 
синхрон (capital.bg). See information received in the context of the country visit from BNR. 

259  See 2022 Rule of Law Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Bulgaria.  
260  According to the Media Ownership Monitor project, there is a high concentration of media in Bulgaria, with 
two  foreign  investors  having  several  stakes  in  media  and  telecommunication  companies;  most  recently  in 

28 

 
 
 
The Government has resumed the work on a draft law to strengthen the  independence 
of public service media, while the CEM has not yet appointed 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-General261.  Since  the  unsuccessful  appointment  of  a  new  Director-General  of 
BNT  by  CEM  in  2022,  the  present  Director-General  continues  to  work  ad  interim  for  an 
unspecified period of time262. This  outcome has been considered  as a source of  concern by 
stakeholders  due  to  the  continued  uncertainty  and  risks  to  the  independence  of  the 
broadcaster263.  The  2024  Media  Pluralism  Monitor  considers  that  independence  of  public 
service  media  scores  a  high  risk  of  94%.  Work  on  the  envisaged264  revision  of  the  law, 
previously  reported265,  which  aims  to  strengthen  the  independence  of  public  service  media 
and define in more detail the public service remit and the related financing, has resumed with 
the intention to introduce the draft law in the Parliament this year266. 

While some obstacles remain, the positive trend as regards access to public information 
continues.  Stakeholders  note  that  the  practices  of  active  publication  of  information  on  the 
websites of the institutions continues. At the same time, some of the known obstacles, such as 
administrative  refusals,  are  still  present267.  A  stakeholder  reported  instances  of  use  of  the 
General  Data  Protection  Regulation  as  grounds  to  refuse  access  to  video  material  of  police 
violence against journalists268.  

While  the  Government  has  taken  steps  to  protect  journalists  from  strategic  lawsuits 
against  public  participation  (SLAPP  cases),  journalists  continue  to  encounter  various 
difficulties  and  threats  in  their  activities.  The  working  group  on  the  media  environment 
and access to information set up by the Council for the Rule of Law in June 2023 has been 
working  on  proposals  to  guarantee  the  protection  of  journalists  from  SLAPPs269.  In  this 
regard, a positive development relates to proposals, which could lead to amendments to the 
Civil Procedure Code, and that include the possibility for a fast-track procedure for SLAPP 

2024, United Group (which owns among others telecom operator Vivacom and Nova Broadcasting Group) 
acquired Bulsatcom; PPF is the owner of telecom operator Yettel and BTV. See for more information United 
Group  completes  the  acquisition  of  Bulsatcom  (broadbandtvnews.com).  See  also  2024  Media  Pluralism 
Monitor, p. 7. 

261  Art. 58(1) Radio and Television Act. 
262  This is due to the fact that following the unsuccessful appointment of a new Director General in 2022, 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, and this is expected to happen not earlier than June 2024. Contribution 
from Reporters sans frontières for the 2024 Rule of Law Report. 

263  Contribution from  Reporters sans frontières for the 2024 Rule of Law Report; information received in the 

context of the country visit from Association of European journalists. 

264  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.  

265  See 2022 Rule of Law Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Bulgaria, p. 22. 
266  Information received in the context of the country visit from the Ministry of Culture of Bulgaria, BNR and 

ABBRO.  

267  2024 Media Pluralism Monitor, p.12. Information received in the context of the country visit from Access to 

information programme. 

268  See information received in the context of the country visit from Access to information programme.  
269  Input from Bulgaria for the 2024 rule of law report; contribution from Center for the study of democracy for 

the 2024 Rule of Law Report. 

29 

 
 
cases,  a prohibition  of preliminary injunctions against journalists, and  early terminations of 
such cases270. Moreover, the previously reported amendments to the Criminal Code regarding 
lower fines in case of insults and defamation cases against public officials and public figures 
were adopted in August 2023271. Stakeholders reported on the ongoing use of SLAPPs cases 
against journalists272. The  defamation  claim  made in  2023 against a media  service provider 
seeking a compensation of approximately EUR 500 000 (BGN 1 million) has been dismissed 
at  first  instance273,  while  another  large  case  was  settled  in  September  2023274.  Apart  from 
lawsuits,  other  attacks  against  journalists  are  reported,  for  example  online  harassment  and 
threats which continue to be a common form of external pressure275. Stakeholders reported, in 
particular,  threats  and  intimidation  by  public  institutions  and  political  actors276.  This  is 
particularly  the  case  for  critical  journalists  at  the  local  level,  which  have  been  for  instance 
banned from entering municipal administrations or have not been informed about upcoming 
briefings by certain mayors277. Some journalists also faced physical threats and assaults278 or 
received  death  threats  and  were  granted  police  protection279.  Since  the  2023  Rule  of  Law 
Report, two new alerts regarding attacks and harassment of journalists were registered on the 
Council  of  Europe  Platform  to  promote  the  protection  of  journalism  and  safety  of 
journalists280. There were also  eight alerts  reported  by the  Media  Freedom  Rapid  Response 
mechanism covering among others physical assaults, intimidation and defamation lawsuits281. 
The  authorities  have  informed  that  a  working  group  created  by  the  Ministry  of  Interior 
reviewed  the  measures  and  practices  implemented  to  ensure  the  safety  of  journalists  and 
adopted an Action Plan282. Among others, the Action Plan aims to ensure to a greater extent 
the  protection  and  safety  of  journalists  during  protests  and  demonstrations,  online  safety  in 
relation  to  the  prevention  of  online  attacks  and  threats  to  journalists,  and  effective 
cooperation between government authorities, the media sector and civil society. 

270  Input from Bulgaria, confirmed by the Ministry of Culture in the context of the country visit. Information 
received in the context of the country visit from the Access to information programme. Contribution from 
the Center for the study of democracy for the 2024 Rule of Law Report. 

271  Contribution  from  Reporters  sans  frontières  for  the  2024  Rule  of  Law  Report.  See  also  Media  Pluralism 

Monitor, p. 12. 

272  See contribution from Reporters sans frontières for the 2024 Rule of Law Report and information received 
from  Association  of  European  Journalists  in  the  context  of  the  country  visit.  A  register  of  cases  against 
journalists  and  the  media  is  made  available  on  the  website  of  the  Supreme  Court  of  Cassation  but  its 
usefulness  does  not  seem  proven  so  far  to  identify  SLAPP  cases:  https://www.vks.bg/dela-jurnalisti-i-
medii.html 

273  Information received in the context of the country visit from Access to Information programme. 
274  Eurohold  sued  media  outlet  Bivol  for  500,000  million  euros  in  2021  –  the  case  was  settled  in  September 

2023. Information received in the context of the country visit from Access to Information programme. 
275  Information received in the context of the country visit from the Association of European Journalists. 
276  2024 Media Pluralism Monitor, p. 13; contribution from Reporters sans frontières for the 2024 Rule of Law 
Report; information received in the context of the country visit from the Association of European Journalists. 
277  MPM 2024, p. 12. Information received in the context of the country visit from the Association of European 
Journalists and for the truth project. A research project on Local Media for Democracy by the ECMPF also 
refers to this external pressure from political actors and authorities, which impact the local media market, see 
factsheet on Bulgaria. 

278  See contribution from Reporters sans frontières for the 2024 Rule of Law Report which refers to verbal and 
physical attacks against journalists during a coverage of a protest. 2024 Media Pluralism Monitor, p. 13. 

279  See 2024 Report by the Platform on the safety of journalists, p. 37. 
280  This  concerns  (i)  the  coverage  of  a  protest  against  the  Bulgarian  Football  Federation  in  November  2023 
when journalists had been physically assaulted, detained or obstructed by the police, and (ii)  a defamation 
lawsuit against two investigative journalists. 

281  See European Centre for Press and Media Freedom, Media Freedom Rapid Response – Bulgaria. 
282  Input from Bulgaria for the 2024 Rule of Law Report. 

30 

 
 
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 laws283. 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.  

The  Council  for  monitoring  of  the  judicial  reform  was  merged  with  the  Rule  of  Law 
Council,  allowing  for  wider  participation  of  civil  society.  The  Rule  of  Law  Council 
continues to function effectively284. On 5 July 2024, an amendment to the Decree establishing 
the Rule of Law Council merged it with the Council for monitoring of the judicial reform285. 
This  action  does  not  change  the  competences  of  the  Rule  of  Law  Council,  as  it  already 
includes  monitoring  the  justice  system,  but  it  aims  at  increasing  the  number  of  CSOs’ 
representatives  present  in  the  Council286.  This  was  welcomed  by  the  relevant  organisations 
working in the area of justice and anti-corruption287. 

Concerns  have  been  raised  regarding  the  significant  number  of  independent  and 
regulatory authorities which continue to operate with an expired mandate. As mentioned 
in  the 2023 Rule of Law Report288, a  number of independent  and regulatory authorities are 
operating under a prolonged expired mandate289. This creates a potential risk that decisions of 

283  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. 

284  The Rule of Law Council met twice in September and October 2023 with the European Commission in the 
context  of  follow-up  meetings  related  to  the  implementation  of  the  recommendations  of  the  2023  Rule  of 
Law Report.  

285  The Council for monitoring the judicial reform existed since 2014; Information received from the Ministry 

of Justice in the context of the country visit to Bulgaria.  

286  The members of the Council include representatives of the relevant Governmental authorities for each topic, 
judicial authorities and civil society organisations (CSOs). The CSOs are represented by 11 members from 
professional  and  non-governmental  organisations  with  proven  experience  in  dealing  with  justice,  anti-
corruption, media pluralism and other issues related to checks and balances. See Art. 7 of the Decree of the 
Council of Ministers No. 240.  

287  Information  received  from  Bulgarian  Institute  For  Legal  Initiatives,  Anti-Corruption  Fund  Foundation, 

Initiative Justice For All in the context of the country visit to Bulgaria. 

288  2023 Rule of Law Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Bulgaria, pp. 29-30. 
289  Currently,  these  are:  Supreme  Judicial  Council  –  five  members  and  Supreme  Prosecutorial  Council  –  six 
members  (quota  of  the  National  Assembly);  Inspectorate  to  the  Supreme  Judicial  Council  –  Inspector 
General and ten Inspectors; Commission for Personal Data Protection – Chairman and four members of the 
board  (it  is  noted  that  Art.  52  of  the  General  Data  Protection  Regulation  requires  a  certain  degree  of 
independence  of  the  national  authority  for  data  protection);  National  Competition  Authority  –  President, 
Vice-President and five members; 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  Fiscal  Council  –  Chairman  and  four  members;  Commission  for  Protection  against 

31 

 
 
 
these  authorities  could  be  influenced,  due  to  a  lack  of  secure  tenure290.  The  constitutional 
reform  adopted  in  December  2023  introduced  a  new  provision  declaring  that  Parliament 
respects the principles of openness, transparency, publicity and justification in the selection 
of the members of the bodies that are wholly or partially elected by it, in order to guarantee 
their  independence291.  On  19  January  2024,  Parliament  elected  two  judges  to  the 
Constitutional Court, explicitly mentioning that they will be appointed for nine years292. The 
decision  was  disputed  by  both  stakeholders293  and  the  President  of  the  Republic294,  as  it 
seems to go against a previous ruling of the Constitutional Court, which clarifies that these 
two  judges  should  stay  in  office  for  seven  and  not  nine  years295.  On  23  January  2024,  the 
appointment  was  challenged  before  the  Constitutional  Court296.  On  9  July  2024,  the  latter 
declared the appointment to be constitutional but the length of the mandate to be against the 
previous interpretation given by the Constitutional Court and lowered it from 9 to 7 years297.  

The  constitutional  reform  limited  the  powers  of  the  President  in  the  procedure  of 
appointing  an  interim  government  and  improved  the  access  to  constitutional  justice. 
The  constitutional  reform  adopted  on  20  December  2023  introduced  two  changes  to  the 

Discrimination – Chairman, Deputy Chairman and three members; Public Enterprises and Control Agency – 
one member of the Supervisory Board; National Council of the Bulgarians living abroad – President and six 
members. There are also authorities for which the mandate was prematurely terminated without appointing a 
new  person  on  the  position  or  have  been  reformed:  Anti-corruption  Commission  –  three  members,  and 
Commission  for  Illegal  Assets  Forfeiture  –  Chairman;  Energy  and  Water  Regulatory  Commission  – 
Chairperson;  National  Bureau  for  Control  over  Special  Intelligence  Means  –  one  member.  It  is  noted  that 
there is a pending request for a preliminary ruling regarding the ad interim functioning of the Inspectorate to 
the Supreme Judicial Council, see Court of Justice of the European Union, preliminary ruling request of 22 
May 2023, Inspektorat kam Visshia sadeben savet, Case C-313/23. 

290  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. 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 48 th 
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 Constitution, 
invalidating Parliament’s decision. See Constitutional Court Decision No. 5 of 22 June 2023 on Case No. 5 
of 20 January 2023. See 2023 Rule of Law Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Bulgaria, 
pp. 28-29. See also European Semester, Country Report on Bulgaria, p. 15 and 18; and European Semester 
Country Specific Recommendations for Bulgaria number 2 on page 10.  

291  Art. 91b of the Constitution.  
292  See two Decisions of Parliament of 19 January 2024, published in State Gazette No. 7 of 2024.  
293  Information  received  from  Bulgarian  Institute  For  Legal  Initiatives,  Anti-Corruption  Fund  Foundation, 
Institute  For  Market  Economics,  Center  For  The  Study  Of  Democracy,  Initiative  Justice  For  All  in  the 
context of the country visit to Bulgaria. It was noted that prior their appointment one of the nominees had 
been  involved  in  a  number  of  legislative  initiatives  that  are  currently  being  challenged  before  the 
Constitutional Court, and that the same  one of the nominees was,  before its appointment, the leader of the 
biggest political group in Parliament. For more on the methods of appointment of Constitutional Courts, see 
Figure 66 of the 2024 EU Justice Scoreboard. 

294  The  President  of  the  Republic  requested  the  interpretation  of  the  Constitution  regarding  the  length  of  the 

mandate and then challenged the appointment of the two judges.  

295  See  Constitutional  Court  Decision  No.  1  of  11  January  2024.  Prior  to  the  appointment,  clarifying  that 
according  to  the  Constitution,  judges  of  the  Constitutional  Court,  appointed  with  a  delay,  exercise  their 
powers only for the remaining term of the mandate, counted from the constitutionally due moment for the 
renewal of the composition of the Court (i.e., 7 instead of 9 years) 

296  Constitutional Court Case No. 3 of 23 January 2024.  
297  Constitutional Court Decision No. 12 of 9 July 2024. 

32 

 
 
system of checks and balances in the country. Firstly, it structured the way the President of 
the Republic appoints an interim government298. Before the reform, the President was able to 
appoint the whole interim government, which was then free to carry out all tasks that would 
normally be carried out by a regular government299. After the reform, the President appoints 
an  interim  Prime  Minister  from  a  shortlist  of  candidates300.  Then,  in  consultation  with  the 
political parties in Parliament and on a proposal by the candidate interim Prime Minister, the 
President appoints the interim Government. The main task of the interim government is now 
limited  to  organising  the  forthcoming  elections.  Other  limitations  can  be  introduced  by 
law301.  The  second  change  introduced  by  the  constitutional  reform  was  the  expansion  of 
access to constitutional justice302. Following the reform, any court, at the request of a party to 
the  case  or  on  its  own  initiative,  may  seize  the  Constitutional  Court  with  a  request  to 
determine  any  inconsistency  between  the  law  applicable  to  their  specific  case  and  the 
Constitution303. This is considered a welcome development by stakeholders304. On 23 January 
2024,  the  President  challenged  the  constitutional  changes  regarding  his  role  in  the 
appointment of interim government before the Constitutional Court305. 

Rules for law-making have been improved but there are problems over implementation 
and concerns regarding the quality of the legislative process continue. As mentioned in 
the  2022  and  2023  Rule  of  Law  Reports,  and  in  line  with  the  commitments  of  the  RRP306, 
improved  rules  for  law-making  in  the  Parliament  have  been  adopted307.  However,  the 
implementation of these rules continues to raise some concerns308. Since the majority of the 
legislative  initiatives  have  been  proposed  by  members  of  Parliament309,  these  do  not  go 
through the same mandatory procedure as for the government, including impact assessment 
and  public  consultations310.  For  draft  laws  tabled  by  members  of  Parliament,  the  Rules  of 
Procedure of Parliament state that these drafts should be subject to public consultations and 
impact assessments. However, these rules – similarly to the Law on Normative Acts, which 

298  Art. 99(5) – (7) of the Constitution.  
299  E.g. drafting laws; adopting decisions on appointment that are of the competence of the government etc.  
300  Art.  99(5) of the Constitution  - The interim Prime Minister is appointed from among the Chairman of the 
National Assembly,  the  Governor  or  Deputy  Governor  of  the  Bulgarian  National  Bank,  the  Chairman  or 
Deputy Chairman of the National Audit Office and the Ombudsperson or his/her deputy. 

301  Art. 99(7) of the Constitution. 
302  Art. 150 of the Constitution.  
303  Art. 150(2) of the Constitution. See also Figure 64 of 2023 EU Justice Scoreboard. 
304  Information  received  from  Ombudsperson,  BCNL,  OSI,  BHC  and  Deystvie  in  the  context  of  the  country 
visit  to  Bulgaria.  It  is  noted  that  stakeholders  had  shown  a  preference  for  the possibility  for  an  individual 
constitutional  complaint,  which  was  provided  for  in  an  earlier  draft  of  the  constitutional  reform,  but 
ultimately not retained in the final text. 

305  Constitutional  Court  Case  No.  3  of  2024.  The  President  of  the  Republic  considers  that  for  amending  the 
constitutional provisions related to his powers and the appointment of ad interim government it is necessary 
to use  the procedure requiring a Grand National Assembly rather than adopting them through the ordinary 
National Assembly. 

306  Milestone 241 under the RRP. 
307  See 2022 and 2023 Rule of Law Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Bulgaria, p. 23 and 

p. 29. 

308  Information  received  from  BCNL,  OSI,  BHC,  Deystvie,  Bulgarian  Institute  For  Legal  Initiatives  And 

Institute For Market Economics in the context of the country visit to Bulgaria.  

309  About 62% of the drafts were tabled by members of Parliament. See National Assembly. Study of the law-

making activity of the National Assembly (April 2023 – December 2023), p. 7. 

310  Information  received  from  BCNL,  OSI,  BHC,  Deystvie,  Bulgarian  Institute  For  Legal  Initiatives  And 

Institute For Market Economics in the context of the country visit to Bulgaria. 

33 

 
 
applies  to  drafts  tabled  by  the  government  –  have  the  same  power  as  a  law311,  however,  it 
seems  to  not  have  the  same  enforceability  as  a  law.  In  that  context,  stakeholders  have 
expressed  criticism  that  the  impact  assessment  and  public  consultations  carried  out  by  the 
Members  of  Parliament  are  often  done  pro  forma312.  The  Centre  for  Regulatory  Impact 
Assessment conducted a survey in August 2023 regarding the use of impact assessments and 
how to improve the framework for regulatory impact assessment in the country313. In 72% of 
the cases the respondents are of the opinion that there are problems with impact assessment 
and public  consultations due to  the non-compliance  and inefficient  implementation of legal 
and bylaw requirements and the methodological guidelines and rules314. In 52% of the cases 
the respondents believe that the regulatory reform can become more effective mainly through 
a  change  in  the  current  legal  framework,  by  the  introduction  of  uniform  requirements  and 
standards  for  impact  assessment  and  public  consultations  for  Parliament  and  government 
draft  laws315.  According  to  a  study  prepared  by  Parliament  itself,  in  90%  of  the  draft  laws 
there is no information about public consultations or discussions organised by the proposer to 
determine the problems and reasons necessitating the adoption of the draft law. In 93% of the 
draft laws, the arguments and different points of view of the stakeholders were not included, 
and  in  67%  there  was  no  analysis  on  the  compatibility  of  the  draft  laws  with  EU  law316. 
Stakeholders  also  reported  that  the  practice  of  introducing  legislative  changes  through 
amendments  to  other,  unrelated,  acts  between  the  first  and  the  second  reading  has  been 
reintroduced over the past year317. A notable example of the past year is the adoption of final 
and  transitional  provisions  through  the  Criminal  Procedure  Code  amendments  that  suspend 
certain  provisions  of  the  recently  adopted  constitutional  reform318.  According  to  the 
Commission  recommendation  on  promoting  engagement  and  effective  participation  of 
citizens  and  civil  society  organisations  in  a  democracy,  an  enabling  environment  for  civil 
society  organisations,  it  is  important  to  allow  them  to  effectively  engage  in  public  policy-
making319.  

311 Constitutional Court Decision No. 7 of 4 June 2010. 
312  Information  received  from  BCNL,  OSI,  BHC,  Deystvie,  Bulgarian  Institute  For  Legal  Initiatives  And 

Institute For Market Economics in the context of the country visit to Bulgaria. 

313  See Centre for Regulatory Impact Assessment, Results of Online Survey ‘Regulatory Reform In Bulgaria - 

Five Years - Stagger Or Development?’. 

314  A  considerable  percentage  (36%)  cite  as  the  reason  the  poor  regulations  in  the  Regulations  for  the 
organization and activities of the National Assembly. See Centre for Regulatory Impact Assessment, Results 
of Online Survey ‘Regulatory Reform In Bulgaria - Five Years - Stagger Or Development?’, p. 3. 

315  See Centre for Regulatory Impact Assessment, Results of Online Survey  ‘Regulatory Reform In Bulgaria - 

Five Years - Stagger Or Development?’, pp. 7-8. 

316  See National Assembly. Study of the law-making activity of the National Assembly (April 2023 – December 

2023), pp 40-43. 

317  This practice allows to circumvent the public consultations as such are not envisaged in the rules and there is 
no obligation for public discussions when these are made. This is especially true for the changes made in the 
final and transitional provisions. Information received from BCNL, OSI, BHC, Deystvie, Bulgarian Institute 
For Legal Initiatives And Institute For Market Economics in the context of the country visit to Bulgaria. 
318  See  amendments of the Criminal Procedure Code, adopted on 23 February 2024, in State Gazette No. 18, 
2024.  These  were  vetoed  by  the  President  of  the  Republic,  and  his  veto  was  accepted  by  Parliament.  See 
Decree No. 48 of the President of the Republic or 23 February 2024, in State Gazette No. 18.  In Bulgaria, 
22%  of  the  surveyed  companies  perceive  the  frequent  changes  in  legislation  or  concerns  about  quality  of 
law-making  process  as  a  reason  for  the  lack  of  confidence  in  investment  protection.  Figure  56,  2024  EU 
Justice Scoreboard. 

319  Commission recommendation on promoting the engagement and effective participation of citizens and civil 

society organisations in public policy-making processes (C/2023/8627 final). 

34 

 
 
The  Ombudsperson  was  attributed  new  competences,  while  financial  and  human 
resources  have  not  been  adequately  reinforced.  The  Ombudsperson  has  an  A-status 
accreditation  as  a  National  Human  Rights  Institution  (NHRI)320.  Under  the  Whistleblower 
law321the Ombudsperson is tasked with the external audit of the Commission for Protection 
of  Personal  Data,  which  is  the  responsible  authority  for  receiving  whistleblower  reports322. 
This  extension  of  the  competences  of  the  Ombudsperson  was  accompanied  by  additional 
financial and human resources323. However, some other competences have been attributed for 
which  the  Ombudsperson  did  not  receive  additional  support324.  While  the  Ombudsperson 
does  not  consider  having  insufficient  resources  at  this  stage,  this  discrepancy  has  been 
identified  as  a  possible  challenge  in  the  near  future  for  the  effective  performance  of  its 
duties325.  

On  1  January  2024,  Bulgaria  had  89  leading  judgments  of  the  European  Court  of 
Human  Rights  pending  implementation,  a  decrease  of  four  compared  to  the  previous 
year326.  At  that  time,  Bulgaria’s  rate  of  leading  judgments  from  the  past  10  years  that 
remained  pending  was  at  53%  (compared  to  55%  in  2023)  and  the  average  time  that  the 
judgments had been pending implementation was 6 years and 9 months (compared to 6 years 
and  10  months  in  2023)327.  The  supervision  of  the  previously  oldest  leading  pending 
judgment328,  concerning  excessive  use  of  force  by  law  enforcement  agents  and  previously 
pending  implementation  since  2000,  has  now  been  closed.  However,  outstanding  questions 
concerning  general  measures  continue  to  be  examined  under  the  heading  of  a  more  recent 
group of cases329. As regards the respect of payment deadlines, on 31 December 2023 there 
were 13 cases in total awaiting confirmation of payments (compared to 46 in 2022)330. On 1 

320  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. As regards the 
other NHRI, the Commission of the Protection against discrimination, it continues to work with an expired 
mandate.  Its  Chairperson,  Deputy  and  members  have  been  operating  with  an  expired  mandate  since  July 
2022. 

321  See  Law  on  the  Ombudsman,  SG  N.  11  of  February  2,  2023.  Resolution  of  MC  N  147  of  September  20, 
2023, Input from Bulgaria for the 2024 Rule of Law Report p. 38. See also Decree 190 of 5 October 2023, 
published in State Gazette No. 88 of 2023. 

322  Art. 30 of the Whistleblower law of 2 February 2023. 
323  Information received from the Ombudsperson in the context of the country visit to Bulgaria. 
324  Related  to  the  Common  Provisions  Regulation,  the  Ombudsperson  is  now  part  of  the  committees  for 
overseeing the implementation of the Charter of Fundamental Rights in Bulgaria. Information received from 
the Ombudsperson in the context of the country visit to Bulgaria. 

325  Information received from the Ombudsperson Office in the context of the country visit to Bulgaria. 
326  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. 

327  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  2024.  See  the  Contribution  from  the 
European Implementation Network for the 2024 Rule of Law Report, p. 2. 

328  Judgment of the European Court of Human Rights of 18 May 2000, Velikova v. Bulgaria, 41488/98. 
329  Judgment  of  the  European  Court  of  Human  Rights  of  1  July  2014,  Dimitrov  and  Others  v.  Bulgaria, 

41488/98, pending implementation since 2014. 

330  Council  of  Europe  (2024),  Supervision  of  the  execution  of  judgments  decisions  of  the  European  Court  of 

Human Rights – 17th Annual Report of the Committee of Ministers – 2023, p. 137.  

35 

 
 
July 2024, the number of leading judgments pending implementation had increased to 90331. 
It is noted that the Ministry of Justice presented a project for creating a national mechanism 
for the effective execution of European Court of Human Rights judgments332.  

The  work  of  the  Council  for  Civil  Society  Development  is  blocked  due  to  the  political 
situation. As mentioned in the 2023 Rule of Law Report, the Council started operating and 
one  of  their  main  goals  is  to  create  a  national  funding  mechanism  for  civil  society 
organisations (CSOs)333. This is supposed to address the difficulties of CSOs  to receive EU 
funding  (through  state  agencies  dealing  with  EU  funds)  caused  by  the  fact  that  they  are 
considered as commercial entities and the state applies the same state aid restrictions as for 
private  companies  receiving  EU  funding334.  Due  to  the  political  situation335,  the  Council 
managed to meet only three times since its creation in 2022. Despite the previous agreement 
with the interim Government in the spring of 2023 that such a funding mechanism is possible 
in  the  current  legislative  framework,  the  members  of  the  Council  were  informed  by  the 
regular  Government,  in  power  until  March  2024,  at  the  moment  of  their  last  meeting,  that 
establishing  such  a  mechanism  would  require  an  amendment  to  the  law336.  The  planned 
rotation in the Government did not take place and new elections took place on 9 June 2024. 
Once a new Government is appointed the work of the Council will resume. It should be noted 
that the mandate of the current members of the Council will elapse by the end of this year and 
new  ones  will  be  appointed.  This  would  entail  that  the  work  on  developing  a  national 
mechanism for funding would be further delayed. 

The draft law for the registration of foreign agents tabled by members of one political 
group in the Parliament continues to be a serious  concern  while most political  parties 
did  not  take  part  in  the  discussions.  As  mentioned  in  the  2023  Rule  of  Law  Report,  the 
draft law for the registration of foreign agents was tabled at Parliament on 28 April 2023337 
for the second time. On 17 January 2024, the draft law was discussed in the plenary of the 
Parliament.  However,  given  the  decision  of  most  political  parties  not  to  take  part  in  the 
discussion, no vote took place in the absence of sufficient quorum338. The draft envisages to 
set up a system where every entity, including CSOs, academics, and journalists, that receives 

331  Data according to the online database of the Council of Europe (HUDOC). 
332  See Press release of the Ministry of Justice of 10 April 2024. A draft Decree of the Council of Ministers on 
the establishment of a Coordination Mechanism for the implementation of the judgments of the ECtHR in 
fulfilment of Bulgaria's international legal obligations is also prepared and soon will be published for public 
consultations. 

333  See 2023 Rule of Law Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Bulgaria, pp. 30-31. 
334  Written  contribution  from  European  Civic  Forum  (2024)  -  Civic  Space  Report  2024  Bulgaria  (Bulgarian 
Center for Not-for-Profit Law), p.16. Information also received from BCNL, OSI, BHC and Deystvie 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).  

335  The  convening  of  Council  meetings  is  done  by  the  cabinet  of  the  Deputy  Prime  Minister.  Following  the 
elections of April 2023, a government was established only in July 2023. The first meetings were convened 
only in the autumn of 2023.  

336  Written  contribution  from  BCNL  following  the  country  visit  to  Bulgaria.  Information  also  received  from 

OSI, BHC and Deystvie in the context of the country visit to Bulgaria. 

337  See 2023 Rule of Law Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Bulgaria, p. 31. 
338  See Transcript of the meeting of the 49th National Assembly 76th Session, of 17 January 2024. It is noted that 
only  the  party  that  proposed  this  and  another  smaller  party  stayed  for  discussions.  This  is  similar  to  the 
situation described in the 2023 Rule of Law Report, where there was also a clear opposition by most of the 
political parties against this same draft law that was now re-tabled. 

36 

 
 
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’339.  Serious  concerns  have  been  raised  as  this  draft  law  could  have  a 
stigmatising effect and negatively affect the civic space in the country, which continues to be 
rated as narrowed340.  

339  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  also  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. See 
also Venice Commission Opinion (CDL-PI(2024)013), paras. 97-101. 

340  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. 

37 

 
 
Annex I: List of sources in alphabetical order* 

* The list of contributions received in the context of the consultation for the 2024 Rule of Law report 
can 
https://commission.europa.eu/publications/2024-rule-law-report-targeted-
stakeholder-consultation_en. 

found 

be 

at 

Anti-Corruption Commission (2024), Activity Report 6.10.2023-31.12.2023 

Anti-Corruption Fund (2021), Quick Checklist: The Story of Veselin Denkov and Specialised Justice, 
https://acf.bg/bg/spisak-za-barz-kontrol-istoriyata-na-ve/  

Anti-Corruption  Fund  (2023),  Analysis  of  new  Anti-Corruption  Law:  "New  investigative  bodies 
cannot compensate for lack of vision for comprehensive criminal justice reform" (Анализ на АКФ на 
новия  Закон  за  противодействие  на  корупцията:  „Нови  разследващи  органи  не  могат  да 
компенсират  липсата  на  визия  за  цялостна  реформа  на  наказателното  правосъдие“), 
https://acf.bg/bg/analiz-na-akf-na-noviya-zakon-za-protivo/  

Anti-Corruption Fund (2024), Anti-Corruption institutions 2023: a freezing point, 2023 annual report 
(Анти-корупционни институции 2023: точка на замръзване).  

Anti-Corruption Fund, A. Yankulov (2023), “What needs to change in the criminal justice system”, 
https://acf.bg/wp-content/uploads/2023/03/reforma_web-1.pdf  

(2023),  Sofia  city  prosecution 

BTA 
https://www.bta.bg/en/news/bulgaria/547988-sofia-city-prosecution-office-terminates-barcelonagate-
money-laundering-case-ove 

terminates  Barecelonagate  money 

laundering  case. 

BTA  (2024),  CC-DB’s  Atanas  Atanasov  Heads  Ad  Hoc  Committee  on  Possible  Illegal  Granting  of 
Bulgarian Citizenship, https://www.bta.bg/en/news/618178?download=1  

Bulgarian  Center  for  Not-for-Profit  Law  (BCNL)  (2024),  Written  contribution  from  BCNL  in  the 
context of the country visit to Bulgaria. 

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

Bulgarian 
Judicial 
Ministers 
https://www.strategy.bg/PublicConsultations/View.aspx?lang=bg-BG&Id=8240  

Council 

(2024), 

Draft 

of 

System 

Act, 

Bulgarian Government (2024), Input from Bulgaria for the 2023 Rule of Law Report. 

Bulgarian Institute for Legal Initiatives (BILI), (2024), Contribution from BILI for the 2024 Rule of 
Law Report. 

Bulgarian  Judges  Association  (BJA)  (2023),  Opinion  on  the  election  of  members  to  the  Supreme 
Judicial 
Council, 
https://judgesbg.org/2023/11/22/%d0%be%d1%82%d0%bd%d0%be%d1%81%d0%bd%d0%be-
%d0%b8%d0%b7%d0%b1%d0%be%d1%80%d0%b0-%d0%bd%d0%b0-
%d1%87%d0%bb%d0%b5%d0%bd%d0%be%d0%b2%d0%b5-%d0%bd%d0%b0-
%d0%b2%d1%81%d1%81/  

Bulgarian  Judges  Association  (BJA),  (2024),  Contribution  from  BJA  for  the  2024  Rule  of  Law 
Report. 

Bulgarian 
https://www.justice.government.bg/home/index/396aedca-f63a-48c5-a5c2-e145d29fa69d  

Ministry 

Council 

Justice, 

Rule 

Law 

of 

of 

meeting, 

Bulgarian  Parliament  (2023),  Decision  on  the  election  of  chair  for  the  Bulgarian  National  Audit 
Office, https://www.parliament.bg/bg/desision/ID/165032 

Center for the Study of Democracy (2023), Bridges to Nowhere. State Capture and Corruption Risks 
in  Southeast  Europe, 
in  Fiscal  Transfers  and  Public  Procurement  at 

the  Local  Level 

38 

 
https://seldi.net/publications/reports/bridges-to-nowhere-state-capture-and-corruption-risks-in-fiscal-
transfers-and-public-procurement-at-the-local-level-in-southeast-europe/ 

Center for the Study of Democracy (2023), Rolling Back State Capture in Southeast Europe - Second 
Good Governance Report: Implementing Effective Instruments for Asset Declaration and Politically 
Exposed  Companies,  https://csd.bg/publications/publication/rolling-back-state-capture-in-southeast-
europe/  

Center  for  the  Study  of  Democracy  (2024),  The  State  Of  Capture:  The  Elusive  Quest  For  Anti-
Corruption Results, Policy brief 144 

Centre for  Regulatory  Impact  Assessment (2023),  Results  of  Online  Survey "Regulatory  Reform  In 
Bulgaria - Five Years - Stagger Or Development?", https://ria.bg/?p=579  

Centre for the Study of Democracy (CSD), (2024), Contribution from CSR for the 2024 Rule of Law 
Report. 

CEPEJ (2023), 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/ 

Commission for Counteracting Corruption and Illegal Assets Forfeiture, Activity Report 2023 

Constitutional Court Case No. 1 of 8 January 2024. 

Constitutional Court Case No. 10 of 5 June 2023. 

Constitutional Court Case No. 11 of 6 March 2024. 

Constitutional Court Case No. 2 of 11 January 2024. 

Constitutional Court Case No. 3 of 23 January 2024. 

Constitutional Court Decision No. 1 of 11 January 2024. 

Constitutional Court Decision No. 5 of 22 June 2023. 

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. 

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),  Decision  CM/Del/Dec(2021)1398/H46-6  of  11 
March 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),  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: Committee of Ministers (2023), Analysis H/Exec(2023)10 of 22 September 2023. 

39 

 
Council  of  Europe:  Committee  of  Ministers  (2023),  Decision  CM/Del/Dec(2023)1483/H46-10  of  7 
December 2023. 

Council  of  Europe:  Committee  of  Ministers  (2023),  Notes  CM/Notes/1483/H46-10  of  7  December 
2023. 

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

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), Bulgaria - Urgent interim opinion on the draft new 
constitution (CDL-AD(2020)035). 

Council of Europe: Venice Commission (2023), Bulgaria - Opinion on the judicial system act (CDL-
AD(2023)039). 

Council  of  Europe:  Platform  to  promote  the  protection  of  journalism  and  safety  of  journalists 
(coe.int). 

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 18 June 2020, Commission v. Hungary, C-78/18, 
ECLI:EU:C:2018:790. 

Court of Justice of the European Union, preliminary ruling request of 22 May 2023, Inspektorat kam 
Visshia sadeben savet Case C-313/23. 

Dnevnik (2024), The action in customs: It became clear who ordered it, the director and three others 
are  accused  (Обвинен  директор,  претърсван  главен  секретар  и  издирван  Паскал:  какво  е 
митниците), 
акцията 
известно 
https://www.dnevnik.bg/bulgaria/2024/04/04/4609548_arestite_v_mitnicite_mvr_i_prokuraturata_se_
ochakva_da/#4610706 

за 

в 

Dnevnik (2024), How the new Anti-Corruption Commission works - like the old one, but with more 
powers  (Как  работи  новата  Антикорупционна  комисия  –  като  старата,  но  с  повече 
правомощия), 
https://www.dnevnik.bg/bulgaria/2024/04/06/4610344_kak_raboti_novata_antikorupcionna_komisiia
_-_kato/  

EPPO  (2024),  Bulgaria:  Designated  police  officers  to  work  exclusively  on  EPPO  investigations, 
https://www.eppo.europa.eu/en/news/bulgaria-designated-police-officers-work-exclusively-eppo-
investigations 

European  Civic  Forum  (2024),  Contribution  from  the  European  Civic  Forum  for  the  2024  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 
the  Cooperation  and  Verification  Mechanism, 
Council  on  Progress 
COM(2019)498.  

in  Bulgaria  under 

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.  

40 

 
European Commission (2022), 2022 EU Justice Scoreboard.  

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), 2023 Rule of Law Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation 
in Bulgaria. 

European  Commission  (2023),  Commission  recommendation  on  promoting  the  engagement  and 
effective  participation  of  citizens  and  civil  society  organisations  in  public  policy-making  processes 
(C/2023/8627 final). 

European Commission (2023), Report of the third voluntary fact-finding mission to Bulgaria – latest 
developments 
https://home-
affairs.ec.europa.eu/document/download/634c9fb4-9860-472b-9d1b-
09762a782ab4_en?filename=Report%20fact-finding%20mission%20to%20Bulgaria_en.pdf 

application 

Schengen 

acquis, 

the 

the 

of 

in 

European Commission (2024), EU Justice Scoreboard. 

European Court of Human Rights, judgment of 18 May 2000, Velikova v. Bulgaria, 41488/98. 

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

European Implementation Network (2024), Contribution from the European Implementation Network 
for the 2024 Rule of Law Report.  

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. 

Institute  for  Market  Economics  (IME),  (2024),  Contribution  from  IME  for  the  2024  Rule  of  Law 
Report. 

Joint letter to Council of Europe Commissioner for Human Rights and EU Commissioner for Justice 
on  the  situation  of  the  judiciary  in  Bulgaria  of  20  March  2024,  https://medelnet.eu/joint-letter-to-
council-of-europe-commissioner-for-human-rights-and-eu-commissioner-for-justice-on-the-situation-
of-the-judiciary-in-bulgaria/  

Kapital Inisghts (2023), The end of Barcelonagate? Borissov’s whistewashing continues as planned, 
https://kinsights.capital.bg/politics_and_society/2023/10/24/4542971_the_end_of_barcelonagate_bori
ssovs_whitewashing/. 

Magistrats  Européens  pour  la  Démocrate  et  les  Libertés  (MEDEL),  (2024),  Contirbution  from 
MEDEL for the 2024 Rule of Law Report. 

Local media for democracy project, factsheet on Bulgaria available at Fact Sheets LM4D (eui.eu). 

Mediapool (2024), The "Gleb Mishin" scheme: Over 4,000 people from the former USSR are trying 
to  get  a  BG  passport  https://www.mediapool.bg/shemata-gleb-mishin-nad-4000-dushi-ot-bivshiya-
sssr-opitvat-da-vzemat-bg-pasport-news355952.html  

Media Ownership Monitor: Bulgaria - Euromedia Ownership Monitor (media-ownership.eu). 

Centre for Media Pluralism and Media Freedom, Monitoring Media Pluralism in the digital era in the 
year 2023, (2024) Country report: Bulgaria 

41 

 
(2024), 
Ministry 
https://mjs.bg/home/index/89644a15-9db2-44b5-a742-b16d4788439b 

release 

Justice 

Press 

of 

of 

the  Ministry 

of 

Justice, 

Mixed panel of the Supreme Court of Cassation and Supreme Administrative Court, Decision No. 1 of 
21 July 2022, on Case No. 18 of 27 June 2022.  

National Assembly (2023), Study of the law-making activity of the National Assembly (April 2023 – 
December 2023) 

National Assembly (2024), Decision for the establishment of an ad hoc committee to verify facts and 
around  Martin  Bojanov, 
circumstances 
https://www.parliament.bg/bg/desision/ID/165345 

activities 

related 

group 

the 

the 

of 

to 

National  Assembly  (2024),  Decisions  on  the  appointment  of  Constitutional  Court  judges  of  19 
and 
January 
https://www.parliament.bg/bg/desision/ID/165320 

https://www.parliament.bg/bg/desision/ID/165321 

2024, 

National Assembly (2024), Hearings in the ad hoc committee to verify facts and circumstances related 
to 
Bojanov, 
https://www.parliament.bg/bg/parliamentarycommittees/3350  

activities 

around 

Martin 

group 

the 

the 

of 

 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), Bulgaria Phase 4 Follow-up Report, p. 4 “The [OECD] Working Group [on Bribery] 
remains  seriously  concerned  about  Bulgaria’s  enforcement  situation”  https://www.oecd.org/daf/anti-
bribery/bulgaria-phase-4-follow-up-report.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  

Prosecutor’s 
https://prb.bg/bg/news/aktualno/67770-poradi-lipsa-na-dokazatelstva-za-prestaplenie-sgp-prekrati-
razsledvaneto-za-tvar  

December 

(2023), 

release 

Office 

Press 

12 

of 

2023, 

Prosecutor’s Office (2023), Press release of 17 October 2023, https://prb.bg/bg/news/aktualno/66981-
poradi-lipsa-na-danni-za-prestaplenie-sgp-prekrati-razsledvaneto-za-organizirana 

Prosecutor’s Office (2023), Press release of 24 August 2023, https://prb.bg/bg/news/aktualno/66246-
ne-sa-ustanoveni-danni-za-prestaplenie-po-obrazuvano-v-sgp-na-29.07.2020-g.-dosa 

Public  Procurement  Agency  (2023),  Amendments  to  the  Public  Procurement  Act  are  adopted 
(Обнародвани са промени в Закона за обществените поръчки), https://www2.aop.bg/promeni-v-
zop/  

Public register on media ownership of the Ministry of Culture, Министерство на културата на 
Република България (government.bg). 

Report  from  the  meeting  of  the  National  Council  on  Anti-Corruption  Policies  on  18  October  2023, 
https://www.government.bg/files/common/_заседание_НСАП-18_октомври_2023.pdf 

Report for the Platform for the safety of journalists 2024, available at 1680aeb373 (coe.int). 

Reporters Without Borders (2024), 2024 World Press Freedom Index. 

Sofia  City 
(2023), 
https://prb.bg/sgp/bg/news/68547-pressaobshtenie 

Prosecutor’s  Office 

Press 

release 

of 

19 

February 

2024, 

Supreme Judicial Council meeting (2024), Protocol No. 4 of 13 February 2024. 

Supreme Judicial Council, Judge’s Chamber meeting (2023), Protocol No. 30 of 31 October 2023. 

Supreme Judicial Council, Prosecutor’s Chamber meeting (2023), Protocol No. 26-27 of 5 and 19 July 
2023 

42 

 
Supreme  Judicial  Council,  Prosecutor’s  Chamber  meeting  (2023),  Protocol  No.  38  of  18  October 
2023 

Supreme Prosecutorial Council meeting (2024), Protocol No. 9 of 6 March 2024. 

Tsabala,  K.  Yordanova,  M.  Horvat,  K.  Dr.  Kaskanis,  A.  Mpaltas,  A.  Ernu,  S.  Macsut,  A. 
Transposition  of  the  EU  2019/1937  directive  on  whistleblower  protection  in  Southeast  Europe: 
Challenges  and  lessons  learned.  Southeast  European  Coalition  on  Whistleblower  Protection, 
https://see-whistleblowing.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/07/Transposition-of-the-EU-20191937-
directive-on-whistleblower-protection-in-Southeast-Europe.pdf  

43 

 
 
 
Annex II: Country visit to Bulgaria 

The Commission services held virtual meetings in February 2024 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  
•  Commission for forfeiture of illegally acquired assets 
•  Constitutional court 
•  Deystvie 
•  For the truth project 
•  Group of academics 
• 
• 
• 
•  Justice for All Initiative 
•  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 

Inspectorate to the Supreme Judicial Council 
Internal Security Directorate – Ministry of Interior 
Institute for Market Economics 

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

•  Amnesty International EU 
•  Centre for Democracy and Technology Europe  

44 

 
 
•  Centre for European Volunteering 
•  Civil Liberties Union for Europe 
•  Civil Rights Defenders 
•  Civil Society Europe 
•  Culture Action Europe 
•  Democracy Reporting International 
•  European Centre for Non-Profit Law 
•  European Civic Forum 
•  European Federation of Journalists  
•  European Partnership for Democracy 
•  European Youth Forum 
•  Free Press Unlimited 
• 
• 
• 
• 
•  JEF Europe 
•  Open Society Foundations 
•  Philanthropy Europe Association 
•  PICUM 
•  Reporters Without Borders 
•  SOLIDAR 
•  Transparency International EU 

International Federation for Human Rights 
International Planned Parenthood Federation 
International Press Institute  
Irish Council for Civil Liberties 

45