Ivan Bregov in front of FACTS: Radev can constitutionally intervene in the procedure for choosing the chief prosecutor

ID Chief Prosecutor Borislav Sarafov submitted to the 51st National Assembly a request to remove the immunity of the People's Representative Kiril Petkov. The request is based on the proposal of the Sofia City Prosecutor's Office (SGP) in connection with an ongoing investigation. For his part, Kiril Petkov gave it. What kind of situation are we in, will Sarafov become the chief prosecutor or the bill introduced in the parliament can stop him… Ivan Bregov, a legal expert at the Institute for Market Economy, spoke to FAKTI.

- Mr. Bregov, is now the right time to request Kiril Petkov's immunity. Two and a half years later…
- The context is definitely important for when the prosecution will act. And I think that this thing is primarily politically motivated, not so much legal. Apart from that, there is also a personal element, because a bill has been introduced that aims to stop the current procedure for electing the chief prosecutor. But not only that, but also to correct some regulatory deficits that have accumulated for more than 20 years. That, I think, has definitely pissed off the attorney general candidate right now.

- The National Assembly started working. Is there time to stop, change and postpone the procedure for choosing a new chief prosecutor, or has everything already passed as deadlines?
- It has not yet passed as deadlines. On December 4, a bill to amend and supplement the Law on the Judiciary was introduced. It stipulates that a person who holds the position of acting chief prosecutor, the same applies to the Supreme Court and Supreme Court, cannot participate in this procedure. Apart from that, it is foreseen the urgency of how to occupy this function of a temporary acting official and that this should not be for more than six months. Apart from that, the vicious practice of the Supreme Administrative Court is being corrected, that the temporary executive is chosen by the relevant collegium, and this will already be done by a decision of the Plenum of the SJC. All things that matter. Of course, as a consequence of all this it redefines the legal framework for the procedure itself and says it should be discontinued.

- But will there be time to accept this in the parliament…
- There is time to accept. The terms of the law on normative acts are sufficient. Moreover, consultations are currently underway with the president to obtain mandates to form a government. With a good organization of the Law Commission, this can happen. Another question is whether the political majority will be there for this to happen.

- From “Fighter“ presented interesting data on the financial income of Borislav Sarafov's son and ex-wife. They received money from various companies. Will this have an impact on the procedure for selecting a new Attorney General...
- Here it is appropriate to thank the civil organization "Boets" for doing it, but this was an obligation that the Inspectorate at the Supreme Prosecutor's Office had to first check and establish, then the Inspectorate at the SJC had to check and establish, the Commission on ethics at the prosecutor's collegium had to review and find out if there is any data related to Mr. Sarafov's relatives. To find out if there is a strange relationship between the behavior of a person from the prosecution, his relatives and a large transport company. These are all things that have not yet been done by the listed institutions. And something no less important. The SJC itself, when it came out with a report on the professional and moral qualities of Mr. Sarafov, could also raise this issue. At the moment, what can be done is to suspend or terminate the procedure pending investigation of these facts and circumstances related to the information of “Fighter”. The procedure can be suspended, if not terminated, and on the basis that the Constitutional Court is asked whether the SJC with an expired mandate can make such a choice. We know that such a question before the Constitutional Court has already stopped the procedure once. This was when a question was asked by the former chief prosecutor Ivan Geshev, whether with 13 votes he could be released and elect a new chief prosecutor. These are all things that the SJC can comply with.

- And what can Daniela Taleva, who has the authority to investigate the chief prosecutor, do in this situation?
- Daniela Taleva can self-report information on "Boets". Of course, her work will require a little more time, but she can, on purely procedural grounds under the NPC, see if she can start some kind of investigation, respectively inform the public what she has undertaken – has an investigation started, how far has it reached and so on.

- President Rumen Radev where is he in this whole situation. However, in order to elect a new Attorney General, he must sign the decree…
- Rumen Radev has the opportunity to intervene absolutely constitutionally in the current procedure by choosing the chief prosecutor. First, to refuse to sign the appointment decree until the Constitutional Court has ruled on the question of the mandate of the SJC. Secondly, if the draft law on the Judiciary Powers Act, which PP-DB submitted to the parliament, is voted on, it foresees a hypothesis, when the president refuses the first time to sign a decree for the appointment of the candidate proposed by the SJC as chief prosecutor, there is a two-month period, in which the SJC must vote accordingly and decide whether to start a new procedure for the election of the Prosecutor General, or to confirm its opinion. We know that now, at the present moment, the SJC can organize a meeting within a day and re-vote, thus returning the ball to the presidency. So the president will have useful moves. For all of this to happen, changes to the law must be passed. A useful move for the president is to wait for the Constitutional Court's ruling. He can refuse to sign the decree without incurring any responsibility from him, that you see, he is not fulfilling his constitutional powers.