The prosecutors have chosen who will represent them in the Supreme Judicial Council, but the race continues. The judges are about to cast their vote, but the National Assembly is also about to choose which of the proposed candidates from the parliamentary quota to vote confidence in. Before the deputies make their choice for the SJC, professional organizations, university professors, magistrates and representatives of the civil sector expressed their support and gave an assessment of the candidates. 55 documents have been published on the parliament's website. „Trud news” analyzed them to make it clear who and why supports the candidates for the Supreme Judicial Council from the parliamentary quota.
Candidates for the Prosecutor's CollegeStefan Milev: prosecutor's office, court and training of magistrates
Stefan Milev is supported by the former chief prosecutor, Prof. Boris Velchev, Prof. Margarita Chinova, Prof. Atanas Simeonov and Prof. Ognyan Gerdzhikov. His long-standing teaching activity is also indicated by data from the National Institute of Justice. Prof. Boris Velchev refers to direct impressions of Milev's work and points out that he "knows in detail the internal problems of the prosecutor's office". For a future member of the Prosecutor's College, this is directly relevant to decisions on the organization, workload and personnel development in the system. Prof. Margarita Chinova traces his professional development from his student years to his work as a prosecutor, judge and lecturer. Prof. Atanas Simeonov emphasizes his broad legal culture and experience in complex economic and financial crimes, and Prof. Ognyan Gerdzhikov - on the combination of prosecutorial and judicial practice. The National Institute of Justice indicates that Milev participated in training from 2009 to 2025, including in the preparation of junior prosecutors, and received excellent feedback. The published materials outline a candidate who knows the prosecutor's office from the inside, but can also assess it from the position of a judge and lecturer. Such a perspective has practical significance in decisions about appointments, attestation, workload and professional training.
Veselin Vuchkov: concrete institutional results
Veselin Vuchkov is supported by the Notary Chamber, the Crime Prevention Fund IGA and the association “Knowledge, Success, Change“ - Dupnitsa. The Notary Chamber indicates as a concrete result the provision of notaries access to a database of identity documents as a measure against property fraud. The two civil society organizations highlight his work on crime prevention, domestic violence and the interaction between the police and the non-governmental sector. At the time of publication of the analysis, there are no separately published opinions on Andrey Yankulov, Ekaterina Getova, Ivan Kalibatsev, Krasimir Komsalov, Milena Karagyozova and Emil Dechev. For this reason, their candidacies were not considered in the analysis.
Judicial CollegeMihail Malchev: a concept placed at the center of support
The 11 materials published about Mihail Malchev bring together three different points of view - of acting judges, of the academic community and of institutions in which he participates in the training of lawyers and magistrates. His candidacy is supported by the Bulgarian Judges Association, the Association of Bulgarian Administrative Judges, Prof. Tencho Kolev Dundov, Prof. Valentina Popova, Prof. Malina Novkirishka-Stoyanova, Prof. Dimitar Kostov, Prof. Lyuba Panayotova-Chalakova, Prof. Irena Ilieva and the Faculty of Law of the University of Ruse. These assessments are supplemented by specific data from the National Institute of Justice and the Center for Training of Lawyers “Krusty Tsonchev“ about his long-standing teaching work. The strongest common thread in the opinions is the attention paid to the concept itself. The Bulgarian Judges Association defines it as “one of the most fully developed programs for work in the Judicial College“ and states that “it is precisely the concept that is the strongest basis for our support.“ The organization highlights the commitments made for the first 30 days, 100 days, one year and the entire mandate - a predictable calendar of competitions, limiting prolonged secondments, real measurement of workload, protection against external pressure and clearer responsibility for the decisions of the college. The Association of Bulgarian Administrative Judges adds direct impressions of Malchev's work as a judge, defined by the expression “speed without haste“. Prof. Tencho Kolev Dundov points out that he “looks for an argument, not convenient support“, Prof. Valentina Popova - that he “holds to his word“, and Prof. Malina Novkirishka-Stoyanova defines his concept as “institutional, realistic and concrete“.
Professional assessments are also supported by measurable results. The National Institute of Justice reports an overall rating of 5.86 out of 6 from 98 participants in Malchev's trainings. The Lawyers' Training Center indicates that he has been teaching there since 2013 and receives entirely positive feedback. This shows support that is not limited to a good opinion of the candidate. It connects observations of his work with a specific program, deadlines and the opportunity for the results to be verified. This is precisely what gives his concept its own weight in the upcoming election.
Vasil Pandov: most published opinions
12 opinions have been published about Vasil Pandov. He is supported by the Faculty of Law of Sofia University, the Lawyers' Training Center, the Institute of Private International Law, Hristo Hristev, Krasimira Sredkova, Dimitar Dekov, the director of the British Law Center Stephen Terrett, the initiative “Colorful Tomorrow for Our Children“, the organization “Healthy Baby - Healthy Future“, Juliana Naskova, Antoniy Donchev and attorney Daniela Mihaylova. Prof. Daniel Valchev points out on behalf of the Faculty of Law of Sofia University that Pandov “covers and even exceeds all the criteria provided for in the law“. The remaining positions highlight his academic work, expertise in international and European law, participation in legislative processes and commitment to public causes.
Aneta Antonova: academic and managerial authority
Nine opinions have been published about Aneta Antonova. Support is expressed by the Faculty of Law of Sofia University, Miroslav Dimitrov, Georgi Mitov, Gabriela Belova, Ventsislav Petrov, the Union of Scientists in Bulgaria, the Bulgarian Chamber of Commerce and Industry, the “Law and Internet“ Foundation and the Executive Director of “Siela“ Vesselin Todorov. Sofia University summarizes her qualities with the phrase “professional authority, expertise and impartiality“. The emphasis is on the long-term academic work, management experience, participation in legislative initiatives and practical knowledge of commercial law.
Kalin Batalski: management experience and specific proposals
Nine opinions have also been published about Kalin Batalski. His candidacy is supported by the Association of Bulgarian Administrative Judges, the President of the Patent Office Olya Dimitrova, the President of the Notary Chamber Luiza Stoeva, Vladya Borisova, Zhivko Draganov, Vesselina Maneva, Rosen Karadimov, Judge Marieta Nedelcheva, the Professional Association of Mediators, the Center for Dispute Resolution and the association "I Want to Know". The administrative judges highlight his proposals for a predictable calendar of competitions, more consistent disciplinary practice and an independent audit of information systems. His work is described through "dialogue, consistency and institutional responsibility".
Petyo Slavov: professional and public experience
Petyo Slavov is supported by Prof. Emilia Drumeva, former constitutional judge Stefka Stoeva and the “Boris Hristov“ Foundation. The opinions highlight his legal training, experience in collective bodies and the free legal assistance provided. Prof. Drumeva speaks of “professional maturity and rich practical experience“.
Evgeniy Staykov and Tsveta Rangelova
The Bulgarian Chamber of Commerce and Industry stands behind Evgeniy Staykov, which points to his judicial and managerial experience, knowledge of national and European law and participation in arbitration proceedings.
Tsveta Rangelova is supported by the Bar Council in Blagoevgrad. The position is based on more than 20 years of professional observations and emphasizes its practical work, collegiality and independent professional judgment.
At the time of publication of the analysis, there are no separately published opinions for Emil Dechev, Ivan Ranchev, Svetlozar Georgiev, Silviya Tsanova, Tanya Radulovska-Madamzhieva and Tsvetko Lazarov.
This is a finding of the available documentation, not an assessment of their professional qualities.
What does the support showThe opinions do not replace the hearing, but they show who is ready to associate their name and professional authority with a particular candidacy. At the Judicial College, the support for Mihail Malchev is distinguished by the consistent attention to his concept, the specific deadlines and the verifiability of the results. At the Prosecutorial College, the opinions about Stefan Milev outline a combination of insider knowledge of the prosecution, judicial experience and many years of work in the training of magistrates.
The hearing should show to what extent these professional advantages can be translated into consistent decisions in the SJC. The documents published so far provide sufficient grounds for the candidacies to be followed with particular attention.