A promise for more work and less noise was stated by the acting Chief Prosecutor Vanya Stefanova in her first television interview. In the program "The Day Begins with Georgi Lyubenov" on BNT, she declared a desire to restore trust in the Prosecutor's Office and unravel the networks of dependencies that have shaken the judicial system in recent years. She stated that the Prosecutor's Office should be neither a bat nor an umbrella, but should be guided solely by evidence and the law.
- Ms. Stefanova, you are the first female Prosecutor General. With gratitude for receiving us in your office and with the desire and your permission to start precisely from this topic, because it is a precedent for Bulgaria. In your opinion, will there be anything different in the administration? Does this phrase "a lady in the prosecutor's office with an iron fist" suit you?
- Vanya Stefanova, acting prosecutor general: I was expecting this question. It is indeed a precedent for the prosecutor's office in Bulgaria to be headed by a woman. But if you look at Bulgaria at the moment, such important positions are headed by women - the president is a woman, the chairman of the National Assembly is a woman, some of the most important courts are headed by women, both the Supreme Constitutional Court and the Constitutional Court. So it is clear that the time has come for the prosecutor's office to see a woman at its head. Even if for 6 months. As you know, I was appointed acting prosecutor general for a term that is determined by law. It is 6 months. As for this period of time, my ambition is to restore normality in the prosecutor's office, professionalism and, above all, dialogue between institutions. In the very first days, when the new government was formed and voted, I held talks with the Minister of the Interior and the Minister of Justice, respectively with the new acting chairman of the State Agency for National Security and Defense. My communication also improved with the new director of the Customs Agency. So, for me, it is important that there is a good dialogue between the institutions. I can even boast that Mr. Demerdzhiev and I hold weekly meetings. When there is a good dialogue, the work goes well. So, this is extremely important. For this six-month period of time, I expect my fellow prosecutors and investigators to be active. When I say active, however, I do not mean only ostentatiously active. For me, it is important that the public sees the results, sees them in court, and not just sees press conferences. From my side, what they can expect, and I think it is already felt in the system, is to provide them with peace of mind, to work in comfort, not to worry, to freely express their opinion, to make their decisions, without any threat to their personal or career development.
- You perform the function of Prosecutor General, albeit in this limited time horizon that you are talking about right now. Do you think that in this short time you will be able to highlight, to see this balance that so much suits this system, the reproach on the one hand that the prosecution and this system is a bat, and on the other, that you very often stretch a political umbrella and protect precisely the powerful of the day?
- That's right. In recent years, the prosecution has very often been put in such situations that no matter what it did, it was always to blame. If it acts - a bat, if it does not act - they stretch an umbrella. In fact, the prosecution is not, or rather should not be, either of the two. The problem is if it starts to be experienced as one of the two things, whether it is a bat or an umbrella, in principle I hate these clichés, because for me they are clichés. It is important for the prosecution to work in a way that shows that it is effective, that what it does and what it collects as evidence can stand up in court. It is very dangerous for a judicial system to have the feeling that there are some people who are above the law, that they are untouchable. However, we must pay attention to something else - the prosecution does not work on lists of names. We saw such things back in time, especially around elections. It also does not work when someone has gone to television studios or on social networks and says that someone else should be accused or should be investigated. Naturally, however, when there is evidence, no one should be spared. Regardless of political affiliation, regardless of their position in society. And here there are situations that are the last two weeks maybe, and that new cases have arisen, society expects from us, almost or not, with the filing of the signal and immediately there will be an indictment. My style of work is a little different. Not so much noise, more work, but work such that the results will hold up in court.
- In this sense, will you be able to respond to the expectations and the request made by the new majority, the new Prime Minister Rumen Radev, that very soon the ministers will be taking out specific violations, abuses, excessive spending, invoices in drawers. Does this mean that we will soon see mayors and former ministers, high-ranking political figures, and why not political leaders of parties that are now in opposition, accused by the prosecutor's office?
- What I said is especially true here - when the institutions are doing their job, we rely a lot on the Ministry of Internal Affairs and the security services, when quality evidence is collected, I expect the prosecutors to act decisively. That is, there should be no people who are above the law, but even then, when the evidence indicates that a person should be acquitted, the prosecutor must make an independent and calm assessment. It is very dangerous when prosecutors start to base their decisions on how they will appear on the evening news. What is important for prosecutors is to take into account what they have on the case file, the evidence. When they make their decisions on the evidence, on the law, on an internal conviction that is not under pressure from certain political influences, I think that their decisions will be... first they will stand up in court and then they will not be reprehensible.
- There are many and very different cases related to the prosecution and the stories under the attention of the prosecution in the public and social space, especially, as you say, those that viewers want to see on the evening news. This week it became clear that immediately after the detention of Stoyan Mavrodiev in Belgrade, the prosecution was notified, of course. What is the prosecution's concern? Please clarify what exactly the pre-trial investigation against Mavrodiev is about?
- The pre-trial proceedings are being monitored by the Sofia City Prosecutor's Office, and concern embezzlement on a particularly large scale, which is a particularly serious case. This is in fact what prompted the request for Mr. Mavrodiev's detention. What I can tell you as news is that my colleagues from the Sofia City Prosecutor's Office have already sent the necessary documents to the Supreme Cassation Prosecutor's Office, so I expect, perhaps by the end of the day at the latest (editor's note: yesterday, June 5), to sign the request for Mr. Mavrodiev's extradition and at the beginning of next week, of course, within the deadline set by the Serbian authorities, the relevant documents will be sent to Serbia through all channels.
- And the extradition itself as a time horizon, will it be carried out within 40 days, in your opinion?
- This is a procedure that depends on the Serbian authorities, it depends on the will of Mr. Mavrodiev.
- Isn't there a deadline of 40 days?
- I say again, if Mr. Mavrodiev says that he wants to be... gives his consent to be extradited, things can become much faster.
- Why is there still no indictment against the case of the illegal Ukrainian city near Varna? Is there so little evidence that there are any indictees?
- This is truly one of the important cases that have arisen in recent weeks. Indeed, society is asking itself the very serious question of how something like this, on such a large scale, could have appeared and the institutions have not established its existence. Because it does not only concern buildings. This is a large complex of actions and inactions. I want to draw attention here that many institutions owe a number of answers and this is not only the prosecutor's office. In recent days, I have heard on television studios that the prosecutor's office was at fault for not taking measures in a timely manner regarding the illegal construction. When we provided information about the pre-trial proceedings that are being conducted in the two prosecutor's offices in the city of Varna, it was established that back in 2024, the District Prosecutor's Office in Varna sent a decree to the mayor of the "Primorski" district. Precisely in view of the established illegal construction and with a proposal, more precisely with instructions for actions within his competence under the Spatial Planning Act, Art. 223, if I am not mistaken. Precisely what, given the extent of the construction, the category of the construction, he can undertake. It turns out that the decree was received with a return receipt in the municipality. However, why and whether any actions were taken, as we saw from the buildings, obviously not. But let's not prejudge the case. Here again, it is true that the public expects that there will be charges immediately after the reports are filed. This is not exactly the case, the evidence is collected first. And indeed, if everything that was brought forward is confirmed, even about organized criminal activity, money laundering and inaction, I expect really decisive action from my fellow prosecutors.
- And in this sense, could you specify who exactly is in the crosshairs in the "Baba Alino" case?
- I say again, no one is above the law and untouchable. For anyone we find who has violated the law in any way, whether in their capacity as an official, has not taken the actions required by law, or it turns out that there is money laundering by the Ukrainian group, or organized criminal activity, whatever is found, be assured that we will take the appropriate action.
- Do you allow a political umbrella to be investigated for the entire case in Varna?
- If evidence is collected, no one will be spared. No matter the color.
- At the time when this area is being built up?
- Not only that. And with the felling of trees, for which we have pre-trial proceedings, in connection with the preparation of false documents. All of this is subject to verification. And in pre-trial proceedings, of course.
- Many questions have accumulated in the prosecutor's office, related to the accusation that acting magistrates are connected to the networks of individuals we call personnel in the system, such as the Notary or Petar Petrov - the Euro. Do you think it is time for the prosecutor's office to categorically clarify their role?
- This is a very unpleasant topic. I expected, by the way, that you would ask such a question. In fact, these two really so-called networks of influence, they caused the most serious damage to the judicial system and, I would say, even to the prosecutor's office most of all. And not because many magistrates are affected, but simply because when there are any suspicions of dependencies, especially in the judiciary, this affects everyone. And here is the place to say that trust in the judicial system is most affected. And when trust is violated and affected, this is already very scary. Restoring this trust is a very difficult process.
- Is it possible with dismissals?
- So, I will get to that. Trust, in my opinion, is built not with words, not with interviews, but with actions and consequences. I cannot explain, and this is my understanding of the issue, how names can be pointed out, they are on the covers of the case, the institutions pretend not to see them. For me, this is inexplicable. And that is why in this month and a half, in which I was appointed to perform the functions of Prosecutor General, I took appropriate actions and I can say that at the moment, actions have also been activated in the case of extortion against Petyo Petrov - the Euro, which is still pending in the Sofia City Prosecutor's Office, as well as in relation to the pre-trial proceedings concerning the property fraud group of Martin Bozanov - the Notary. You are right, not only criminal liability. We are also talking about disciplinary responsibility, but above all, moral responsibility. It is very important for a magistrate what his professional name is, and the trust in his work, in his professional position, his honor, his integrity. And I still think that if this trust is irretrievably lost in relation to a magistrate, he himself must realize whether he has a place in this system or not. Regarding the property fraud group of Martin Bozanov - the Notary, what I can say, perhaps as news, is that we had several conversations with Mr. Demerdzhiev. The work is currently activated, the colleagues from the Sofia City Prosecutor's Office and the General Directorate of Anti-Corruption are working well together. My goal is to clarify absolutely all dependencies, networks of dependencies. They are extremely important. A system is cleaned when there are no dependencies. And what is important to me is not to remove some convenient guilty magistrates, but to clarify everything and to the end. At least to the extent that my strength and the time in which I will perform these functions allow me.
- And the case of Teodora Georgieva, who is the dismissed Bulgarian European Prosecutor, is also connected to Petyo Euroto. There are no charges against Ms. Georgieva at the moment. How far has this case, the investigation, reached?
- This is the other unpleasant case. And I would say that it is even more unpleasant because a European institution was affected here. And for this, whatever my colleagues from the Sofia City Prosecutor's Office decide, it must be very well-founded and motivated. Yes, work is being done. There really is no accusation. But it is important to point out here that the accusations cannot follow any public expectations or media pressure. Accusations, if any, will be at the discretion of the supervising prosecutors from the Sofia City Prosecutor's Office based on the evidence collected. What I know about the case is that correspondence is being conducted with the European Chief Prosecutor, Ms. Kövesi, and documents are being requested on the matter. All necessary actions have been taken to clarify the entire factual situation. I repeat, however, the Chief Prosecutor will not make a decision, the supervising prosecutor will make that. But be sure that whatever decision is made, the public will be informed, because the case is indeed very important - for the image of the European institution, the European Prosecutor's Office, and the judicial system in general.
- Let's add another unpleasant case - with the city prosecutor Emilia Rusinova, who also shows closeness by riding in Petyo Euroto's car and not only. She is the subject of a disciplinary check. When will it end, what can you tell us about this?
- Here I think that the question should not be directed at me. You know that the disciplinary proceedings were initiated at the request of the acting minister, Mr. Yankulov, during the time of my predecessor, Mr. Sarafov. Everything is in the hands of the Prosecutor's College of the Supreme Judicial Council, so I cannot say when they will conduct these disciplinary proceedings, in what time frame and what will happen next for the fate of the Prosecutor's College. So the question is for the Prosecutor's Office.
- Since you have cited your joint work with Mr. Demerdzhiev several times, he recently announced that the father of the Pernik recidivist Vasil Mihaylov, who is already in prison, himself helped to protect his son. Didn't you know it for so many years, since this boy has been wanted - that the father protects his son?
- So, indeed, from the interview with Mr. Demerdzhiev, which he gave, I think in a program on your television, the Supreme Cassation Prosecutor's Office, the "Inspectorate" department, took action and began an investigation. We expect, at this point we have not yet received, the Ministry of Internal Affairs has been requested to provide the necessary information, documents, from which, respectively, Mr. Demerdzhiev gave this interview and explained that he had helped his son, prosecutor Biser Mihaylov. Here it is very important to note the following - The law does not always coincide with morality. In the sense that in this case it is a question of a father and a son. Criminal liability in this case is unlikely to be realized, but I return to what I said before. Disciplinary liability is also important here. The established, and quite serious, ethical standards for magistrates are important. And in this sense, I would say that if what was stated by Mr. Demerdzhiev is confirmed, we have data about other actions of this magistrate. In my opinion, he should not have a place in this system. Because he, as a father, does not bear criminal liability for personal concealment, but a magistrate whom society should trust, as part of the judicial system, cannot be forgiven.
- In other words, you are finally distinguishing the moral from the disciplinary side. And you already see disciplinary reasons to request the removal of the father as a prosecutor.
- The investigation is currently underway. If this information is established and confirmed, and it turns out that he used his position to assist his own son, be sure that I will use my powers under the Judiciary Act and demand even the most severe disciplinary punishment.
- The Minister of the Interior, Mr. Demerdzhiev, made accusations against the Plovdiv appeal prosecutor that he exerted pressure on the prosecutor from Kardzhali and obstructed an investigation against the mayor?
- Actually, to correct you somewhat, the accusations regarding the Plovdiv appeal prosecutor were related to a signal that was filed by a senior officer, let's say, in the Ministry of the Interior. The signal was about pressure exerted on him in connection with a member of the appeal prosecutor's family. This signal was administered to the Sofia City Prosecutor's Office, which is solely competent to work on signals against magistrates. At the same time, the Inspectorate of the Supreme Cassation Prosecutor's Office also began an inspection, which was accordingly notified by the acting Minister, Mr. Yankulov. The inspection is also ongoing here. During the week, I had the opportunity to say what my opinion is on the matter. The accusations and allegations in the report are extremely serious. If they are confirmed, we are again talking about disciplinary liability at the moment, the least I would expect is for the colleague to resign. But I say again, if the allegations that have been made are confirmed, because they are really very serious. The question of criminal liability and other consequences is another matter, which I say again, if they are confirmed, there will be action by the competent prosecutor's office. As for the case in Kardzhali, there is also an inspection there, I even think that my colleagues are on site this week to take explanations, to check the situation. What is different here is that the colleague himself even asked to be checked for his actions, in view of Mr. Demerdzhiev's statements that were made to the media. The checks are ongoing, they will come to a result. I do not want to prejudge in any case and influence their outcome on colleagues, since these cases are of public importance. I very much want to work with respected and worthy magistrates, colleagues in the prosecutor's office, so the results of the check, as well as the Minister of Justice, whom we are obliged to inform, and, in my opinion, the society, to which we also owe answers, will also be informed about the results of the checks.
- The case that your predecessor called "Twin Peaks" – the "Petrokhan" case, is there any new data on the investigation? When will you finish it, when will we know everything about Petrokhan?
- Indeed, this is an unprecedented case in our history. I know that the public is very interested. This is an investigation that involved hundreds of employees. These are experts, I want to emphasize their extremely important merit – here really a lot of expertise, many investigative actions have been carried out. At the moment, such have even been carried out at the request of the relatives of the deceased. That is, we are not limited to only what we consider necessary. Our aspiration, our ambition, I speak as the prosecutor's office and myself as the acting prosecutor general, is to clarify everything to the end, that is, to leave nothing that has not been clarified. At the moment, according to the information I have, this factual situation, which was presented in previous briefings, press conferences, including with the participation of the previous leadership of the Ministry of Internal Affairs, has not changed. But I want to emphasize that we are awaiting the conclusions of several extremely key expert reports. They are complex. They involve forensic doctors, physicists, chemists, and criminalists. They, generally speaking, must provide an answer to the mechanism for obtaining the disabilities. In addition, we have another expert report, which is also complex, which we hope will largely give us answers as to why and what is the reason for this. It is important for me to reveal everything and give the real picture, what really happened, and not the convenient picture, if you understand what I mean.
- I understand you, but since this is an unprecedented case, can there be charges? Will the investigation lead to accusations if there are no living participants in the entire Petrokhan affair?
- This is the question of establishing from these expert reports, which we expect to present their conclusions, what the mechanism of the injuries is. That is, whether some other person, for the moment we have no data about such, participated in what happened. Naturally, if it turns out that one of the deceased committed the murders, part of the murders, then there is no way that he can be held responsible, that he can be held criminally liable in any way. I say this again, absolutely all evidence, all expert reports must be collected, so that colleagues can objectively, calmly make their decision.
- Ms. Stefanova, perhaps I will ask you a delicate question, asking you to comment on your predecessor - Mr. Sarafov. But you know what a huge media influence was focused on him for staying more than 6 months, as it was legally accepted to hold this position, after the amendments to the Law on the Judiciary. Did Mr. Sarafov go too far with more than 6 months?
- Allow me not to comment on his decisions. He presented his arguments and they are publicly known. In my opinion, something else is more important here - the judicial system and in particular the prosecutor's office, the same situation is in the Supreme Administrative Court at the moment, there is neither a need nor will it achieve any results in this long period of temporary status - an acting prosecutor general, an acting chairman of the Supreme Administrative Court. And specifically for the prosecutor's office, in my opinion, it is important for it to have legitimacy, to have a sustainable management model and predictability. This, in my opinion, would be achieved after the new Supreme Judicial Council elects a new Prosecutor General with his concept, which will be accordingly approved by those who will vote for him, possibly in the future.
- Is this the only way to overcome this major reproach that you receive, that the changes at the top of the prosecutor's office are made solely and solely to regroup? Well, did you regroup in six months?
- First, this is the very beginning. A month and a half have passed. I don't like the word regrouping at all. A system cannot be reformed in six months. If someone expects a system to be reformed, it will never happen. I think, however, that in six months it can be shown whether a person has the will, whether he wants to make some reforms in this system. And since you mentioned regrouping, everyone is responsible for their decisions and actions. That's why I don't think this question should be put to me. Indeed, after my election to the Supreme Judicial Council, I heard a lot of comments, suggestions, speculation. What I can say about myself is that I have 30 years of experience as of this year. I started at the lowest level in the judicial system, back then there were assistant investigators. I have gone through almost all levels of the prosecutor's office. I also have experience in the security services. Wherever I have gone, I have always been guided in my work only by professionalism, independence and with a thought for the interest, be it of society or the state. I have never perceived my work as part of any circles, of any internal groups. And that is why I am here before you now – I have nothing to hide. I am calm in my work and consider myself a professional. Naturally, the assessment of me should also be given by my colleagues. That is why I think that it is important for the prosecutor's office to show that it works effectively, honestly and professionally. And perhaps this was the reason why I gave my consent to take on this position, to perform these functions, even for 6 months, because I think that there is something to give precisely in the direction of the prosecutor's office showing such results. Even for 6 months.
- One way or another, are we looking towards the new Supreme Judicial Council? Of course, and the desire of the political majority to implement it. What is the horizon through your eyes, through your eyes, should it go on a fast track? Should we hurry, should we hurry moderately? When will we have a new SJC? When will we have a new Prosecutor General?
- On Friday, June 5, the deadline for submitting proposals between the two readings on the general bill to amend the Judiciary Act expired. Accordingly, the Prosecutor's Office has deposited its opinion on the proposals inside. We generally admire the aspiration of the new ruling majority to interrupt this long period of this temporary nature and institutional timelessness, I would say. You know that 4 years ago the professional quota was elected. We elected representatives. However, for other reasons, the Supreme Judicial Council was not formed, because the people's representatives back in time, the National Assemblies did not elect their parliamentary quota. Here, the issue is not only about speed. Although we discussed this issue, the Minister of Justice Mr. Naydenov had gathered two weeks ago all the representatives of the courts, I am talking about the supreme courts, respectively I was also there, of professional organizations, members of the Supreme Judicial Council, to discuss exactly how the time frames are seen, whether things will be able to happen within the deadlines set in the bill. For me, speed is not so important, although I admire it. It is more important to have a real debate.