In 30 minutes, the parliament voted on the second reading of the Lobbying Law, whose final title is the Law on Transparency and Representation of Interests. This happened despite serious criticism against it from the non-governmental sector, according to which the law creates real risks for freedom of expression, freedom of association and the right of citizens and organizations to participate in public life. How did the law come to be adopted… Zahari Yankov from the Bulgarian Center for Non-Profit Law speaks in front of FACTI.
- Mr. Yankov, the law avoids the very term “lobbying“ and uses “representation of interests“. Is this an attempt to soften public perception, or a real conceptual difference?
- The purpose of the Law on Transparency in Representation of Interests is to ensure transparency, through which more information is provided to the public on how political and legislative decisions are formed in our country. Insofar as lobbying is a completely legitimate and normal activity in a democratic society, the word itself has acquired a negative meaning in everyday language.
That is why the Law adheres to common terms - representation of interests and transparency register, first of all, in order not to create a label “lobbyist“ and “list of lobbyists“, which can then be used for defamatory campaigns.
Next - Lobbying is most often associated with a type of commission or activity for payment with the aim of protecting a private or economic interest, generally speaking, in contrast to advocacy, which aims at a change for the public benefit. The law regulates both lobbying for payment and advocacy, and therefore the neutral general term is more appropriate. By the way, the European institutions also have a voluntary “transparency register“, i.e. the terminology used is already established, not new.
- How will it be guaranteed that the wide list of exceptions – including lawyers, employers' and professional organizations – will not render the transparency register itself meaningless?
- We - from the Bulgarian Center for Non-Profit Law, objected both in our opinions and in our statements in parliamentary committees to the too general exceptions for employers' organizations and lawyers. They do create a risk of circumventing the law. The legislator did not accept our proposals on this issue and accordingly it will now be up to the responsible body under the law – the Court of Auditors – to monitor violations. However, it should be noted that the law provides for some incentive measures such as providing information to those registered in the transparency register and specifically inviting them to discuss the topics they have declared on which they represent interests. In the future, it may turn out that registration in the transparency register will be considered useful by most interest representatives, rather than another administrative obligation. Time will tell.
- Civil society organizations claim that in practice they will remain the main ones obliged to register. Doesn't this create inequality between the various participants in the public debate?
- Indeed, the logic of the numerous exceptions – for religious organizations, for trade unions, for employer organizations, for political parties, also necessitated an exception for civil society organizations in the public interest. A proposal for such an exception was made by many of those who participated in the public discussion of the law, but it was ultimately not adopted. However, it is important to say that not every opinion sent by a civil society organization means that it is obliged to enter into a register. The law provides for the entry in the register only of those civil society organizations that have made at least 9 contacts - meetings, opinions or letters - with decision-makers within three months. Not every participation in a working group or advisory board is considered contact with decision-makers either. Finally, it should also be noted that civil society organizations that advocate for public causes value publicity and transparency. They actively inform the public with whom they meet and why. From this perspective, registration is certainly an administrative burden, but it would in itself duplicate something that civil society organizations are already doing.
- Is there a risk that business interests will use lawyers as intermediaries to circumvent registration and transparency requirements?
- As I mentioned, the broad exception for lawyers creates a risk of circumventing the legal obligations to enter into the envisaged transparency register. In the initial version of the bill, the exception for lawyers was actually intended to be limited only to their activities related to procedural representation. Before the second reading of the bill, the exception for lawyers was expanded. This is the fact, and why it came to this is a question that should be addressed to the members of parliament.
- The law is being adopted under pressure because of the Recovery and Resilience Plan. To what extent does this affect the quality of the texts and the lack of a broader public debate?
- The law was indeed adopted urgently before the dissolution of the 51st National Assembly. There was practically no debate in the committees and in the hall. But to claim that the law was written in a hurry or that it was not consulted is not correct. The law has been in the works since 2022 and is not only provided for in the Recovery and Resilience Plan, but is also a condition for the country's accession to the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD). It is also not entirely correct to talk about pressure, because the Bulgarian authorities, who prepared the Recovery Plan, themselves decided to include a measure to adopt a regulation of lobbying activities - the European Commission did not require such a commitment from Bulgaria.
During these 4 years, the law has been worked on within working groups in the Ministry of Justice under the leadership of 4 ministers.
First, at the end of 2023, a Concept for the Regulation of Lobbying Activities was published for public consultation, then at the end of 2024, a new working group was created to draft legal texts. In early 2025, the Bulgarian Center for Non-Profit Law organized a large conference dedicated to this regulation, which was attended by representatives of non-governmental organizations, business and the Ministry of Justice, headed by the then Minister. Later in 2025, the Ministry of Justice held a public consultation on the main legislative decisions that are envisaged in the future project. Finally, a draft law was published in early 2026 for public consultation, and a detailed report was published on this consultation, from which it becomes clear that many of the submitted proposals were adopted. Although a bill submitted by members of parliament was finally adopted, due to the rush due to the approaching dissolution of parliament, the proposals from the public consultation were taken before the second reading and were mostly reflected in the finally adopted law.
- How will the distinction between legitimate civic activity – for example, expert opinions and journalistic work – and lobbying?
- First of all, lobbying is a legitimate civic activity. Lobbying is not corruption, nor is it harmful, and transparency simply gives society the opportunity to better understand why certain political or legislative decisions were made. Otherwise, a specific exception is provided for journalistic work.
- In the long term, do you think that this law will increase trust in institutions, or does it risk creating new doubts about non-transparency?
- From our point of view, this law has a legitimate goal, but it is vulnerable to creating negative, undesirable consequences for civic participation. First of all, we - as a civil organization, will monitor that these risks do not materialize. To what extent it will create transparency is already a matter of law enforcement and the good faith of interest representatives. I have no doubt about civil organizations – they rely on transparency and public opinion to fight for their socially beneficial causes anyway. Time will tell if business will be as conscientious.