The execution of judicial acts does not mean that they cannot be discussed and criticized. This is a way to develop judicial practice, make adjustments and seek political solutions to eliminate shortcomings.
This was stated to the Bulgarian National Radio by the judge from the Sofia City Court Miroslava Todorova, former chairwoman of the Union of Judges.
We are obliged to explain what the powers of the court are, when it is appropriate to expect a reaction from it and when - not, and whether this should be a public concern or not, she said in connection with the pressure on the court in certain cases, public sentiment, the political situation and attempts to so-called. street justice.
"It is absurd for the court to sit under siege. (…) Cases should be decided in the courtroom. Whether a trial is political or not – there are legal criteria."
Ethical rules require judges not to comment on their cases while they are pending, so as not to shake citizens' trust in the court, Todorova noted.
If citizens consider judges to be incompetent or there are suspicions of corruption, the attestation process should take such a problem into account. There are legal means to establish a perverted exercise of justice, the judge assured.
If there is a problem with the personnel composition of the bodies, we must seek a solution to this problem, and not shift it by distorting basic principles, believes Miroslava Todorova.
"The people are the sovereign. They are responsible for the political authorities they construct", she noted.
In her words, "the years of bitterness that were manipulated, dictated, the result of long-term abuses of political power with the people's sense of protection" have led to severe processes. The purge of the system in the 1990s is at the root of the political abuse of the court, the judge added.
"The idea that judges can be someone else's is at the root of all our misfortunes", she expressed her opinion on the program "Politically Incorrect".
It is very important not to deepen the process of devaluation and legal nihilism, insisted Miroslava Todorova and warned of the risk of "increasingly easy and corrupting public opinion decisions".
All data related to the progress of the case can have legal significance. It is reasonable to interpret whether there is any hesitation and doubts about the selection of an appropriate judicial panel. This can be assessed as biased and these facts will have significance in the trial on the merits. If the proceedings are terminated, there is a legal remedy – compensation under the State Responsibility Act, Judge Todorova further explained.
We have warned what happens when a system is filled with clones of the politically powerful or the parallel government, she added.
In addition to the cases that are in the focus of public attention, there are many other cases in which self-dealing is underway because they take advantage of the imposed tone and have an impact on the court, Miroslava Todorova said. She admits that citizens sometimes underestimate the judge's refusal to step aside so as not to compromise the process.