The fate of the 2026 state budget is now in the hands of the Constitutional Court. Just a day after the promulgation of the law, GERB-SDF and “We Continue the Change“ filed two separate constitutional appeals, challenging the legality of the adopted financial framework. Although their motives differ, both parliamentary forces question the budget's compliance with the Constitution and the Public Finance Act and insist that the magistrates rule on its constitutionality.
GERB has filed a request with the Constitutional Court to declare the 2026 State Budget Act unconstitutional. According to the party, the adopted financial framework contradicts both the Constitution and the Public Finance Act and Bulgaria's commitments under European law.
When filing the complaint, MP Vladislav Goranov stated that the request is based on a violation of the principles of the rule of law enshrined in the Constitution, as well as the principle of the primacy of international law.
„We claim a contradiction with the principles of the rule of law guaranteed by the Constitution, as well as with the principle of the primacy of international law. I hope that the Constitutional Court will rule on our request in a short time“, said Goranov.
According to him, the main problem is that the budget was prepared in violation of the current fiscal rules. “The existing fiscal rules, set out in the Public Finance Act, cannot be violated lightly. The legislative initiative for the budget lies with the Council of Ministers, but this does not mean that the executive branch can propose a law in violation of another current law“, he said.
According to Goranov, if such an approach is allowed, the very existence of the Public Finance Act becomes meaningless. “If public finances can be managed in violation of the law, then the question arises as to why fiscal rules and the Public Finance Act exist at all“, the MP commented.
He also pointed out that in addition to the risk of a high budget deficit and growing public debt, there is also a violation of European rules for budgetary discipline.
“The Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union and the Stability and Growth Pact oblige member states to maintain a budget deficit of up to 3%. Bulgaria has adopted these rules with the ratification of the European treaties and we believe that the budget violates them“, said Goranov.
According to him, this is precisely the reason for GERB to claim that the constitutional provisions regarding the operation of international law have also been violated.
Goranov announced that the complaint was submitted with the signatures of 50 MPs. “We were mainly supported by our colleagues from “Continuing the Change“. We understood that they will also file their own complaint with the Constitutional Court“, said the MP.
According to him, if the Constitutional Court grants the request, the rules of the previous extension law, which was repealed with the adoption of the 2026 budget, will come into effect.
“Continuing the Change“ filed two complaints with the Constitutional Court against the 2026 State Budget Act and the State Social Security Budget Act (SSSI). The party claims that the two laws contain texts that contradict the Constitution and violate basic principles of the rule of law.
When submitting the request, MP Stoyu Stoev stated that the party is challenging four specific provisions that, in its opinion, are unconstitutional. “Today we are filing two constitutional complaints – against the State Budget Law for 2026 and against the State Social Security Budget Law. We are filing a complaint with the Constitutional Court on four grounds of unconstitutionality“, Stoev stated.
According to him, the most serious problem is the linking of the salaries of magistrates to those of members of parliament. “This is the most striking example of unconstitutionality in this budget. The principle of separation of powers is being violated and magistrates are being placed under political influence, which also contradicts international standards for the independence of the judiciary“, the MP pointed out.
The second controversial change, according to “We Continue the Change“, is the suspension of the current mechanism for determining the minimum wage. “It is not mandatory to preserve the current mechanism, but Bulgaria has an international commitment to have a clear formula for determining the minimum wage. Currently, this mechanism is suspended, without a new one being proposed, which violates the principles of predictability and legality“, Stoev said.
According to him, the text has no direct relation to the 2026 budget, as it will continue to have effect in the coming years.
The third ground of appeal is related to provisions in the State Social Security Budget Act, which affect the decisions of the TELC.
> “Only on the basis of allegations, without a judicial or administrative act that has entered into force, is the possibility of reviewing TELC decisions provided for. We proposed an option that, in our opinion, is legal, but it was not adopted by the National Assembly“, the MP stated.
The fourth contested ground is a change in the Labor Code. “The texts will enter into force only in 2027, have no relevance to the budget for 2026 and create legal uncertainty regarding the way in which the length of service will be calculated. This limits the rights of a large part of Bulgarian citizens and creates a constitutional problem“, Stoev argued.
He expressed confidence that at least some of the party's arguments will be respected by the Constitutional Court. Stoev announced that the request had been signed by more than 50 deputies. “For the moment, only our colleagues from GERB have supported us“, he specified. In his words, “We Continue the Change“ has not received support from “Democratic Bulgaria“ and “Vazrazhdane“.