Link to main version

6 Юни, 2024 13:18, renew at 6 Юни, 2024 13:18 742

After driving with 2.52 per thousand: The District Court in Sofia did not impound the car of Ivaylo Tsvetkov-Noyzi

The Prosecutor's Office will appeal this dangerous precedent

The District Court in Sofia decided that the car of Ivaylo Tsvetkov-Noyzi will not be impounded in benefit of the state.

The prosecution will appeal the jury's decision.

„ The Sofia District Prosecutor's Office will protest the court act determined in this way. In our opinion, he creates a worrying precedent, announced prosecutor Nikolay Nikolaev.

In March, Tsvetkov received a suspended sentence for driving after consuming alcohol. He was caught on November 17 last year driving on the ring road in Sofia while intoxicated.

A breathalyzer test showed a sample of 2.12 parts per million of alcohol. The blood test showed the presence of 2.52 per thousand.

After his arrest, Ivaylo Tsvetkov was released on bail of BGN 15,000.

His suspended sentence was reached after an agreement with the prosecutor's office, whereby the journalist was sentenced to a 10-month suspended sentence with a 3-year probationary period.

It also stipulates that his driver's license will be revoked for one year and two months, and his car will be confiscated for the benefit of the state.

We remind you that in the meantime the Supreme Court of Cassation came out with a position in which it insists on canceling the decision to confiscate the cars of drunk and drugged drivers because they contradict the Constitution.

For his part, judge Dobrinka Kireva from the district court in Svilengrad asked the SC to declare unconstitutional the entire provision of art. 343b, para. 5 of the Criminal Code as contradicting several basic principles in the basic law. The first four paragraphs provide different penalties for those drivers who drive cars drunk or drugged.

The text of para. 5 reads: “In the cases under para. 1 – 4 the court confiscates in favor of the state the motor vehicle used to commit the crime and owned by the perpetrator, and when the perpetrator is not the owner – to award his equality“.

So the seizure of cars from drunk and drugged drivers went to the Constitutional Court (CC).