Assoc. Prof. Hristo Hristev stated that there are indications of collusion between the administration of Rumen Radev and key factors in the status quo of the judicial system. He made the comment during a pre-election debate on bTV with the participation of former Interior Minister Emanuil Yordanov.
“Unfortunately, I think there are many indications that some kind of collusion is taking place between the administration of Mr. Radev and key factors in the status quo of the judicial system“, said Hristev.
The law professor cited as an argument the professional development of the Minister of Justice, which, according to him, is related to a period in which Sotir Tsatsarov was a key figure in the Supreme Judicial Council. Hristev also commented on Tatyana Doncheva's public claims that Tsatsarov influences personnel decisions in the Ministry of Justice.
„I cannot say whether it is so, because in order to say such a thing, there must be facts“, he specified. However, according to him, the minister's professional path passes through key positions in the administration of the Supreme Judicial Council and other law enforcement institutions during a period when Tsatsarov held leadership positions.
Is there a real judicial reform in dispute
Emanuil Yordanov said that it is too early to talk about dismantling the status quo in the judicial system. „In the judicial system, everything happens very slowly“, he said and added that significant changes can hardly be expected without a change in the Constitution.
Hristev also expressed skepticism. According to him, the changes made in May to the Law on the Judiciary and the subsequent actions of the ruling majority do not constitute an effective step towards overcoming long-standing problems.
Yordanov defended the closure of the specialized courts and prosecutor's offices. According to him, this change has had a positive impact on the judiciary, as there are no longer detainees in custody who "aim for anything other than what the law requires."
Transparency in pardons
The debate also discussed the case of a pardoned prisoner known by the nickname "Pablo Escobar of Petritsk". Hristev stated that under the rule of Rumen Radev and Iliana Yotova, the practice of publicity in pardons has deteriorated.
“There is a very clear, so to speak, deterioration of the previously established sustainable good practice of exercising the powers of pardon“, said Hristev. He cited as an example the period of Rosen Plevneliev and Margarita Popova, when, in his opinion, there was more publicity about the criteria, the work of the commission and the motives in individual cases.
Yordanov rejected suggestions that the case proves Iliana Yotova's improper behavior. “No one has won elections with compromising material”, he stated and defined the topic as part of the political campaign.
Hristev did not agree with this definition. According to him, the issue is not limited to whether a specific legal norm has been violated, but also to the way in which decisions are made and to what extent the public can trace the motives behind them.
Different positions on presidential powers
Hristev stated that presidential candidate Andrey Gyurov is committed to more open work of the presidential institution, clear motives for key decisions, and consultations with specialists and representatives of the affected professional communities.
He also defended the restriction of the president's freedom in choosing an acting prime minister and the composition of the acting government. According to Hristev, such a change was necessary in order to prevent excessive concentration of power.
Yordanov also stated that the return of the previous presidential powers cannot be decided solely by the head of state. However, he described the constitutional change related to the election of an acting prime minister as a serious mistake.
The debate ended without any convergence of positions on the issues of judicial reform, the transparency of the presidential institution, and the role of pardons in the election campaign.
Sources: btvnovinite.bg