The president's request for a referendum on the euro and the state of the Bulgarian justice system was commented on by legal expert Ivan Bregov for the Bulgarian National Radio.
"From the point of view of law, we can say relatively little. But let's look at the facts: Radev made a political address, to which he has the right. From there, political escalation began. As we well know, a political spectrum always wants to impeach Radev and speculation began. Then came the moment when Natalia Kiselova, as Speaker of the National Assembly, refused to allow his request. And she did this with her own executive act, as Speaker of the National Assembly.
What will Radev want to be interpreted: can there be a referendum on the topic of Bulgaria revising an international treaty, such as the Treaty on the Accession of Bulgaria and Romania to the European Union? Or Radev will ask for an interpretation of what the powers of the National Assembly and its chairman are – we do not know at this point. However, we can say what the legal effect of all this is."
With this move, Radev cannot stop the process of Bulgaria's accession to the eurozone.
"That is, this is now only at the level of politics, of state administration of constitutional law. Radev's act is irrelevant. The action of Natalia Kiselova, as the Chairman of the National Assembly, cannot in itself be challenged before the Constitutional Court, in my opinion, because the Constitution says that the acts of the National Assembly and the decisions of the National Assembly are challenged, but not the decisions of the chairman. What the Constitutional Court will say in terms of interpretation remains to be seen. So that's it with the legal commentary on this issue."
And when Ms. Kiselova does not allow such a thing to be voted on, does this not carry with it some danger for the democratic processes in the country?
"During the time of Tsetska Tsacheva, when a request for a referendum was made on the issues of the structure of the judiciary with the required number of signatures, that is, with much higher civil and public legitimacy, she did not allow this. She dragged it into committees, acted in a rather controversial manner. This was also an action, controversial in its nature. But still, I think that there is a very big difference between making a request for a referendum, backed by thousands of signatures of Bulgarian citizens (a condition that meets the law on direct participation of citizens), and making a desperate political move on the part of the presidency. My colleague, economist Petar Ganev, gave a very good example: the problem right now is not whether there will be a wedding, we have passed the wedding issue, we are already in the process of where the guests will stand.
If the campaign of the Ministry of Finance and the previous governments on the issue of the euro was slow, Radev had the opportunity to encourage this campaign. At one point, he appeared on the political scene on a Friday afternoon and said: "I need political action", without giving any context. His request is untenable from a legal perspective and devoid of economic motives. In other words, no one has seriously argued this political action of his. We know that all acts of power are motivated - not only by the court, but by every power.
And I will allow myself to say something else about Radev, which I know will affect him personally, but perhaps it is important that this happens. Mr. Radev likes to abuse socially important topics. He cruelly abused the topic of "justice" when he himself was going to exercise one of his powers to demand a change to the Bulgarian Constitution. He organized a broad public discussion in December 2019 and gave a deadline of January 30, 2020 to submit opinions on what should be revised in the chapter "Judiciary". Then he abandoned this topic after his political attraction and benefit from it disappeared. I want to say briefly that Mr. Radev is very confused about the behavior of a head of state with the behavior of a politician who will make a career. His sense of his own survival and political superiority is stronger than his sense of being a head of state."
A unifier...
"He does not need to be a unifier. We do not have unifying politicians. We mainly have divisive politicians, but I do not want to talk about politics because it is not my business. I will only say the following: Up until now, all the political divisive ones have been under the umbrella of Bulgaria being on the western side of the value order that guarantees property, privacy and dignity of Bulgarian citizens. When a politician appears who questions this certainty, motivating himself with inflation and prices, it seems to me to be low-quality politics."
Mr. Radev said that he made the decision about the referendum now, and not before, because the law on accession does not contain any dates, only conditions and procedures.
"The procedure for our accession to the single European currency has been in motion since the accession treaty and with the many efforts that have been made in recent years. Including by Mr. Radev's caretaker governments. Bulgaria has been preparing for a convergence report for a very long time, since the moment we entered the waiting room (ERM II).
Let us not forget that two years ago Bulgaria reached the highest economic growth, achieving the highest Gross Domestic Product per capita in its recent history since 1878. And I will open a historical context again. Tsar Ferdinand's dream was for the Bulgarian lev to enter the Golden Monetary Union of Europe, so that the 20 Bulgarian levs could be minted in gold and have the same status as the 20 French francs or the 20 Greek drachmas. Ferdinand fails to achieve this because several national catastrophes occur, the First World War and a serious, deep global economic crisis. The currency union collapses and Bulgaria never meets this standard.
For the first time in our recent history, Bulgaria is on its way to meeting a high economic standard according to economic and inflation criteria. Whether it meets the legal criterion is another question. And instead of Radev welcoming this process, he appears to be some kind of disintegrator who is chasing his own political ego and political survival. Why not throw away the presidential mandate and descend into the territory of politics then.
Let's imagine the following: Those who do not want the euro remain in the Bulgarian lev, but we untie the lev from the currency board. And we are left with all the real forces of the Bulgarian lev to be quoted against all other quoted international currencies. Let's see then how many of these Bulgarian citizens, admirers of the lev, will keep their own savings and disposable funds in Bulgarian levs. Let's try this experimentally for a month. Let's see what the percentage of people who hold leva will be. At one time, when they lined up in front of the exchange bureau in the 90s, everyone understood it. Then, when they lined up in front of the cashiers of CorpBank, everyone understood it. And I think that when it comes to property and money, everyone feels it."
Borislav Sarafov and the subjective feeling of society
"Mr. Sarafov knows very well what he is talking about. The bad thing is that all these controversial figures in the judiciary are very good at using the vocabulary of people who have been trying to reform the Bulgarian judiciary for many years. Which is the most problematic knot in the Bulgarian state, if we consider the three branches of government.
The judiciary is the biggest constitutional mess. My objective feeling is that for the first time since the cop Ivan Geshev, Bulgaria will have a guard as the chief prosecutor, who was a guard and a Apache from the "Eight Dwarfs". Mr. Sarafov is just a tong in the hands of two political centers. And they know very well when to bring Mr. Sarafov onto the stage and when to pull him out. He will most likely have the same fate as Ivan Geshev and I do not want to be in his place. Because the removal of Ivan Geshev did not happen with the legally provided grounds, which many had during his short and pitiful mandate, but happened when GERB and MRF decided to get rid of him.
He is in this position today, but on July 21 the 6-month term expires with the latest changes to the Judiciary Act and he should not be in this position. Let's see until then whether the National Assembly will not change the Judiciary Law again, so that it will serve Mr. Sarafov to be the chief prosecutor, because there is this danger too."
This is your "however"...
"However, that's all. We live in an environment in which we have had several waves over the last 15-20 years. Waves in which most cops became prosecutors. Then, from prosecutors, the law allowed them to move to the court. So they first took over the prosecutor's office, multiplied there. They took over the court, – and multiplied there. They very well replaced the personnel of the Bulgarian judiciary. If you remember Lozan Panov's speech at the 125th anniversary of the Supreme Court of Cassation in December 2015, she very objectively predicted what would happen. Alas, I can say that our legal community, our society, political class and pro-reform circles of justice are very good at fighting each other. Today Lozan Panov is in non-existence - unfortunately, because he was a fundamentally important figure in our political and legal reality, who fell out because he was not well appreciated. Other important people are also falling out. And Mr. Sarafov, who studied to be a guard, I think, at the School in Simeonovo, will be the Prosecutor General. This is the counterpoint of the Bulgarian reality."
The judicial system we can rely on
"We have a judicial system that we can rely on in serious cases that do not concern individuals from the high echelons of power, from the high economic circles of Mutren. However, if it relies on the interests of these individuals, we remain defenseless. The defenselessness of this system is very easily verified in the case of Judge Vladislava Tsarigradska. A Bulgarian judge was threatened. His professional status and the guarantee that the law should give him were violated in every way. And to this day, Mr. Sarafov's prosecutor's office has not led this investigation anywhere. If not everyone is equal before the same justice, then what kind of justice is this?".