In the midst of public discontent against animal violence and against the backdrop of the intensifying political debate on the topic, the question of real solutions is becoming increasingly urgent. After a series of shocking cases and mass protests in the country, the topic of animal protection is now at the center of public attention and even finds a place in the election programs of the parties. Will Bulgaria have a specialized institution responsible for this problem, and are the latest legislative changes sufficient? What is missing in the work of the state and what specific measures are needed? Stefan Dimitrov from the organization “Invisible Animals“ speaks to FACTI.
- Mr. Dimitrov, will we ever see a moment when we will have a National Agency for Animal Protection? We are in an election campaign, all politicians make promises, and then what happens...
- I am convinced that we will see it, and in the foreseeable future, because the current situation is intolerable. Bulgarians are witnessing case after case of brutal torture and cruelty to animals. People have run out of patience and this is evident in the huge protests that already follow each such case that reaches the media. And there are many more cases of cruelty and violence that surround us daily without reaching national airwaves.
All these cases prove several things - first, the inability of the state to exercise effective control and prevention against violence against animals, and second, the need to create a specialized body to break the cycle of cruelty. A National Agency for Animal Protection is needed. This need is realized among politicians. It is even enshrined in the election programs of some of the formations that we can expect in the next National Assembly.
Moreover, over 200 candidates for national representatives have already declared their support for both the creation of a National Agency for Animal Protection and a number of other key legal changes for adequate treatment of animals in Bulgaria. These over 200 candidates are from the entire political spectrum and from all formations that sociologists give a chance to enter the 52nd National Assembly. From all but one party, for now.
The survey of candidates for MPs shows that the consensus on the need for a National Agency for Animal Protection is at a very high political level. Half of these over 200 candidates are prominent figures and leaders of lists or in second or third place on the lists in the largest parties and coalitions. Of course, we will seek these commitments from future MPs after the elections and will monitor their statements and votes, and we will make sure that Bulgarian citizens understand any deviation from what was promised.
- Why do you think the existing institutions are not sufficient for effective animal protection in Bulgaria?
- Currently, the control body under the animal welfare legislation is formally the Bulgarian Food Safety Agency (BFSA). In practice, however, the BFSA does not have the necessary resources, staff and expertise to be an effective control body for animal protection, but this does not depend on it. The BFSA practically has its hands tied. It is under the umbrella of the Ministry of Agriculture and Food and its main priority is food safety and the control of animal diseases, which is quite natural. The control of everything related to animal welfare is in the Directorate “Animal Health, Identification and Humane Treatment“ and the latter should close the door.
This responsibility is sewn onto the BFSA and will never be its priority, because its other responsibilities will obviously always take precedence in the BFSA. The BFSA employees themselves from this Directorate, with whom I have spoken, support the creation of a new Agency to take over these functions from them. They do not want this responsibility now, they did not want it 15 years ago, when the BFSA was still called the National Veterinary Service and it was assigned to them.
For these reasons, a new specialized agency is needed.
- What specific powers should a future Animal Protection Agency have?
- First of all, it must be structurally located outside the Ministry of Agriculture and Food. Be it under the Council of Ministers, or under the Ministry of Interior, or under the Ministry of Environment and Water. Secondly, it must have real capacity and fulfill the role of a coordination, control and preventive unit. This means:
-- coordination between the police, the prosecutor's office, the judiciary, local authorities and civil society;
-- active prevention work through educational and information campaigns, cooperation with schools and social services;
-- training for police officers, prosecutors, etc. on global best practices for working on animal cruelty cases;
-- control over the implementation of animal protection legislation and the imposition of administrative sanctions.
The existence of such a specialized agency would therefore allow, in addition to control functions, it to deploy a comprehensive strategy against animal cruelty.
- How do you assess the recent changes in legislation related to animal cruelty - are they sufficient?
- As for the changes to the Criminal Code, they are sufficient. In July 2025, the National Assembly practically unanimously adopted these changes to the Criminal Code, which now impose up to 12 years in prison in particularly serious cases of animal cruelty. These are among the highest penalties in all of Europe. The Penal Code should not be touched in this regard anymore.
From then on, however, the problem cannot be solved only with changes to the Penal Code. There must be inevitability of the punishment in order for these high penalties that were adopted to have a preventive effect. And that is the problem.
When it comes to crimes against animals, the authority is the police. On paper, there is a “zoopolice“, which, however, is based on an order of the minister, on the basis of which about 400 ordinary police officers in the country, on top of all their other duties, must also investigate crimes against animals.
Accordingly, this is again an additional responsibility that remains in the background and is ignored by the system.
Even if a police officer has a great desire to work on crimes against animals, the chief decides to direct the police officer to other cases and that's it. The solution is for the zoopolice to be police officers who deal only with this type of crime. This is necessary in order to effectively prosecute and punish the perpetrators when it comes to the most serious form of cruelty to animals: the crime under the Criminal Code - causing death, serious or permanent injury with cruelty. This is complementary to the National Agency for Animal Protection, which covers all other, "lighter" cases of cruelty, for which the punishment is administrative - for example, a fine, confiscation of an animal in favor of the state, etc.
Separately, it should not be ignored as perhaps the most effective means of preventing violence and reducing the population of stray animals. This goes through mandatory tracking of animals, which means both strict regulation of the trade in animals and strict regulation of breeding activities. Instead, we currently have fragmented registration systems and weak control, which results in massive animal trafficking without anyone knowing who is selling which animal to whom, and massive animal dumping without the owner being able to be found and consequently without any consequences for him. Unless this is resolved, there will continue to be an endless influx of animals onto the streets and from there to shelters, which are already chronically exhausted and bursting at the seams.
- At the end of last year, you participated in several parliamentary committees examining the problem. What are the main difficulties you face in trying to push through legislative changes?
- Political instability. It makes the agenda of the legislative branch extremely unpredictable and changeable, so that although there was understanding and intentions for legal changes for animals, the time in the 51st National Assembly did not allow them to be implemented, except for the adopted changes to the Penal Code.
For example, the Committee for Direct Citizen Participation managed to consider our petition with over 110 thousand signatures for an end to cages for calves. There were statements from a number of MPs from the different parliamentary groups and absolutely all of them expressed their support. The Committee even issued a letter to the government, where it also expressed support for the petition's demands. Subsequently, however, there was not enough time for legislative changes before the National Assembly went on vacation.
However, I am convinced that the next National Assembly will support the necessary legislative changes for adequate treatment of animals in Bulgaria to an even greater extent. This is shown by our survey of candidates for national representatives, and every voter can familiarize themselves with the positions of the candidates in their MIR on our website.
- Do you observe a change in people's attitudes when we talk about animal abuse?
- I think we all see this change. After all, in 2025, some of the biggest protests were against animal cruelty. Tens of thousands of Bulgarians protested against cruelty. For weeks on end, in dozens of settlements throughout Bulgaria. The demands were for a comprehensive reform to end animal cruelty in our country. We - from “Invisible Animals“, were among the organizers of these mass protests.
Since last year, no one has any doubt that animal protection has long been a peripheral topic in Bulgarian society. Because although Bulgarians have always loved animals and there has always been high public support for laws that protect animals from cruelty, in recent years there has clearly been a huge intolerance towards any manifestations of cruelty and an understanding among people that decisions about animal cruelty go through the state and are accordingly political. And with this, the responsible people are clearly outlined - the political class.