The National Security Service Act allows the use of physical force only when absolutely necessary. This was stated by constitutional law expert Borislav Tsekov in the program “Offensive with Lyubo Ognyanov“ on NOVA NEWS.
His comment was the reason for the court's decision on October 23 to disregard the prosecutor's request to impose a measure of “detention in custody“ against NSO employee Martin Varadinov.
Tsekov emphasized that the court's refusal to determine the most severe measure of detention does not resolve the issue of guilt on the merits. “When it comes to a measure of detention, this is one thing. Whether the accusation will be confirmed by the court with a criminal sentence is a completely different matter,“ he pointed out.
What the Law on NSO requires
According to Tsekov, the task of the security guard is to prevent unlawful encroachments and attacks. It does not include preventing attempts to talk, the expert said.
He described as unfounded the argument that the officer could not have known what would happen, since in this particular case it was a journalist. According to Tsekov, the use of force must be consistent not only with the need for a response, but also with the requirement to protect the health and life of people.
“In addition to the absolute necessity, the use of force, as mandated by the Law on the National Security Service, must be such as to protect the health and life of people“, he stated.
Tsekov added that the officer should be convicted if the law is applied correctly. His statement represents a legal assessment of the case, and the final decision on criminal liability is within the jurisdiction of the court.
His prediction for the midterm elections in the US
In the same program, Borislav Tsekov also commented on the political situation in the United States before the midterm elections. According to him, at the moment, the likelihood of Republicans losing control of the House of Representatives is greater than losing their majority in the Senate.
Tsekov pointed out that midterm elections traditionally show public attitudes, but the loss of a majority in one or both chambers of Congress does not automatically mean blocking the presidential administration.
According to him, the situation is more special because of the tension in the coalition that supported Donald Trump in the last elections. He noted that the president's political line is also creating disagreements among traditional Republicans.
As an example, Tsekov pointed to the reactions to the diesel fuel deal with Russia, which, according to him, has caused dissatisfaction among some of the traditional Republican circles. If the disagreements deepen, the risk of Republicans losing their majority in one or both chambers may increase, he believes.