Link to main version

71

Constitutional Court files case over parliament's decision on the Peace Council

On March 13, MPs adopted a decision ultimatum ordering the government to initiate the procedure for joining the international organization

Снимка: БГНЕС

The Constitutional Court today filed a case at the request of the Council of Ministers against an unprecedented attempt by the parliament to dictate the country's foreign policy. The cabinet is attacking the decision of the MPs, which obliges it to submit a law to ratify Bulgaria's membership as a founding member of the controversial Peace Council of US President Donald Trump.

On March 13, MPs adopted a decision ultimatum ordering the government to initiate the procedure for joining the international organization. However, the Council of Ministers countered that such an obligation grossly violates the basic law. According to the government, the parliament's intervention undermines the powers of the executive branch.

"The parliament's decision contradicts the principle of the rule of law, the principle of separation of powers and the established authority of the Council of Ministers to implement the country's domestic and foreign policy", the government's press service is categorical.

The MPs' insistence that our country enter the Peace Council with the status of a founding state hides a serious financial commitment. According to the statute of the organization, established in Davos earlier this year, a permanent seat requires an initial contribution of an impressive one billion dollars. It is this colossal expense and the specific requirements of Donald Trump's initiative that are at the heart of the tension between the executive and legislative branches in Sofia.

In its request to the magistrates, the government refers to a binding interpretation of the Constitutional Court from 2021, which clearly distinguishes the powers of the institutions. Judge Galina Toneva has been appointed rapporteur for the newly formed constitutional case. Her decision will be key not only for the specific case with Donald Trump, but also for the future balance of power between state bodies in our country.