The official Minister of Environment in the "Donev" cabinet, Rositsa Karamfilova, tried to terminate the signed agreement between the Ministry of Environment and Water (MESW) and a non-governmental organization associated with Ivaylo Kalushev - the "National Agency for Control of Protected Areas" (NACPTA).
This was announced on the show "Face to Face" by the former co-chairman of the "Green Movement" Vladislav Panev.
The agreement was signed in 2022 by the then Minister of the Environment Borislav Sandov, represented by the “Green Movement“. According to Panev, a month after the signing, the party received signals and criticism, including from members and tourists, related to the organization's activities - among them complaints about limiting access to tourist routes.
The topic was discussed at a meeting of the party's National Council in the spring of 2022. According to Panev, Sandov explained at the time that the document had no financial part and was more of a framework agreement for cooperation in the field of environmental protection.
Later, after the fall of Kiril Petkov's government and the appointment of Galab Donev's caretaker cabinet, the case came up again. Panev said that he was invited to a conversation by acting Minister Karamfilova. According to him, she expressed concern regarding the agreement, including due to increased interest from institutions and services.
“It is normal for a minister to be concerned“, commented Panev, specifying that according to his recollections, representatives of authorities had shown interest in the case.
He did not provide details about the specific conversations, but confirmed that there was tension at the time regarding the organization's refusal to terminate the agreement. Karamfilova ultimately failed to stop it.
Panev emphasized that in principle he considers cooperation between the state and private organizations in the field of nature conservation to be permissible and even useful, as long as there is transparency and a clear distinction of responsibilities.
According to him, it was the lack of sufficient transparency in this particular case that led to public distrust and continuing doubts about the “Petrohan“ case.