The current concepts of Dobrinka Kalcheva, Vladimir Nikolov, and Krasimira Filipova contain critical assessments of personnel policy, internal dependencies, the deficit of trust, and the way the prosecution is managed. Read together with their concepts from 2022, however, they raise an inevitable question: why is this criticism only emerging now?
In 2022, the three do not deny the existence of problems, but present them primarily as individual organizational shortcomings that can be overcome with analysis, improvement of rules, and better communication. Their texts do not clearly distinguish between the then-current Supreme Judicial Council and the management model of the Prosecutor General. On the contrary, the language of institutional continuity, the protection of the prosecutor's office and the moderate improvement of the existing system dominates.
With Dobrinka Kalcheva, the change is mostly in tone. In 2022, she views personnel difficulties, appraisals and disciplinary practice as fixable imperfections in a generally working normative and institutional framework. Today, she already talks about appointments dependent on personal relationships, about informal influences, about “eternal” performing functions and for internal dependence as a major threat to prosecutorial independence.
This diagnosis may be well-founded, but it is difficult to reconcile with the caution of 2022. If the model was systemic, the logical question is why it was then described as a series of technical problems, and not as a management problem.
With Vladimir Nikolov, the difference is even more visible. His previous concept was built around the protection of the prosecutor's office, its place in the judiciary, and the need for prosecutors not to be made the object of continuous reforms and public attacks. The current text now emphasizes institutional integrity, the traceability of decisions, limiting managerial arbitrariness, and restoring trust.
This is a serious change in vocabulary, but it remains unclear what his assessment of the previous management model and his own public support for the institutional leadership is. Without such an answer, the new concept risks looking like a strategic rearrangement of positions according to the changed environment.
With Krasimira Filipova, the continuity between the two texts is strongest. Already in 2022, she explicitly proceeds from the understanding that the SJC has achieved significant progress, which should be continued. The problems are presented carefully, without a critical assessment of the management model and without distance from the leadership of the prosecutor's office.
The current concept already speaks of a crisis of confidence and the need for changes, but the basic structure, approach and many of the proposed solutions have been preserved. This raises the most difficult question: how will a candidate who then saw mainly progress and the need for continuity, today overcome the consequences of the same management?
With Plamen Petkov, the difference between the two concepts is smaller. The main problems it poses today – delayed competitions, prolonged secondments, formal attestation, uneven workload and opaque personnel decisions - are also present in his positions from 2022. The current concept develops and specifies them, without a significant change in the attitude towards the system. This in itself does not prove the applicability of the proposed solutions, but outlines a clearer continuity between his two participations.
Therefore, the essential difference is not who uses the most critical words today. What is more important is when the candidates started naming the problems - while the current SJC and Prosecutor General had real power, or only after the change in the institutional environment.
Criticism is necessary, but its persuasiveness also depends on the moment in which it is expressed. In a choice for a body called upon to guarantee the independence of prosecutors, the consistency between previous positions, public behavior, and current promises deserves at least as much attention as the volume and sharpness of the new concepts.