The procedure for the election of a new chief prosecutor was opened in June last year, it was stopped at the beginning of July. This was immediately after the early release of Ivan Geshev as chief prosecutor. The suspension was until the end of the proceedings before the Constitutional Court, on the question of Ivan Geshev himself, whether the amendment to the Law on the Judiciary, which establishes a majority of 13 votes for the election of the chief prosecutor against 17 votes for the presidents of the Supreme Court and Supreme Court, does not contradict the Constitution .
This proceeding before the SC has ended and this is the formal basis for resuming the procedure. This was stated by Atanaska Disheva from the SCC in the program “ More from the day” according to BNT.
This is a continuation of the old procedure, she specified.
The arguments with which the three members voted against were related to texts from the Law on Amendments and Supplements to the Constitution and from the Law on Judiciary. It is about paragraph 23, para. 2 of the Law on Amendments and Supplements to the Constitution, which established that the two collegiums of the previous SJC exercise the powers of the SJC and the High Prosecutorial Council, with the exception of the powers to elect the chief prosecutor, presidents of courts and dismiss them. These texts have not been canceled, the lawyer added.
In the reasons for the decision of the SC on Decision 13 of July 26, 2024, he says that the transitional and final provisions have no independent meaning, and this was the main argument of the colleagues that they are considered tacitly declared unconstitutional. Such a phenomenon cannot exist in law. A constitutional norm cannot remain unapplied, nor be considered tacitly abrogated. I don't know what was the goal of the SC with this decision, but if he had the intention and intended to have this text repealed, he should have indicated it. This has not been done, which is why we at the SJC cannot say that we will not apply it, although it exists, explained Disheva.
In her words, this SJC has an expired mandate and is illegitimate for the election of a new chief prosecutor, regardless of the fact that it was he who relieved Ivan Geshev from his post. She specified that this text did not exist then. Due to the turbulence, there is currently a rush to continue this procedure, Atanaska Disheva also said and asked why they do not start procedures for the election of the chairman of the Supreme Court, whose mandate expires in November.