Prof. Plamen Kirov and I, each on our own grounds, these days publicly raised the issue of advocating for the newly elected deputies and those acting in the period from the date of the elections to the swearing-in.
Professor Borislav Tsekov commented on this.
This is what the deputies predicted with the latest constitutional changes. From this directly follows the fact that salaries will be paid to all these deputies - to the newly elected, but not inaugurated, and to the acting ones. This is because their salaries are accrued from the date of selection.
At the same time, we learned that Mr. Radomir Cholakov, who was the chairman of the Constitutional Commission that voted on these ill-conceived amendments, announced that these were "speculations" and it wasn't true. In this regard, I recommend that before commenting, you read and understand what you have read. In addition to the constitutional theory, where this issue is clarified, there is an interpretive decision of the Constitutional Court - RKS No. 5 of 2001 under k. case No. 5 of 2001 - which expressly states that the term of office of the National Assembly starts from the date of the elections.
There is a difference between acquiring the constitutional status of a representative of the people and stepping into the exercise of the powers that this status includes.
As constitutional jurisdiction points out: "the law-generating act is the act of election", not the taking of the oath. This is because the Court accepts that "the constitutional provision distinguishes two separate moments. The first moment is the election of the National Assembly in the sense of art. 64, para. 1 of the Constitution. From that moment (the date of the election) the four-year term established in the same norm begins to run. A second, separate moment is the beginning of exercising the powers of the National Assembly as a collective, structured body, which begins with the first session."
The changes that the deputies voted do not in any way change these constitutional provisions regarding the beginning of the parliamentary mandate. What the deputies accepted is that: "With the swearing in of the newly elected people's representatives, the powers of the previous National Assembly are terminated." (Art. 64, para. 4 CRC). This is what they wrote - do you see anything about the beginning of the mandate?
Therefore, the newly elected people's representatives in the upcoming elections will acquire this constitutional status not from the date of the oath, when the powers of the previous National Assembly will be terminated, but from the date of the parliamentary elections. Because, as the Constitutional Court emphasizes again in the cited decision: "In the beginning is the choice".