From the Facebook profile of constitutional law expert Borislav Tsekov
Adopting the state budget falls within the exclusive competence of the National Assembly. This is the highest representative institution, in which the legitimate political representatives of the Bulgarian nation participate—both the governing majority and the opposition. It is there—and nowhere else!—that the pluralistic interests and views of Bulgarian citizens are represented. That is why the Council of Ministers is obliged to present its draft budget precisely there. This should not be confused with public discussions and public consultations, because it is part of the constitutionally established order in the state.
Prime Minister Radev’s idea to replace the legitimate presentation of the budget to Parliament with some kind of gathering, regardless of whether it is held at a university or in the square in Kurtovo Konare, is an act that erodes the democratic constitutional order.
Yes, there is nothing wrong with—in fact, quite the opposite!—explaining and discussing the draft budget with the public, experts and professional groups in all kinds of formats and venues, at symposiums, in villages and hamlets, and even in stadiums and on social media. But these are solely accompanying forms of communication that have nothing to do with the constitutional meaning and substance of presenting the budget to the National Assembly. And this is so because there—and only there!—in the National Assembly lies the legitimate institutional space in which the budget should not only be publicly justified by those in power, but also be subject to legitimate opposition criticism. One thing must be clear—the right to opposition is fundamental to democracy. Restricting, circumventing, disregarding, suppressing, ridiculing or violating it is an attack on democracy and on the rights of citizens.
Pluralistic parliamentary debate must not be circumvented through extra-parliamentary acclamations. The Council of Ministers cannot simply technically submit the draft budget to the National Assembly’s office and then rush it through with the guillotine of its mechanical party majority. Because, whether this is recognised or not, it leads to the transformation of the National Assembly into a facade institution—the dream of every authoritarian regime. Is this what those in power want today?
Do not engage in unconstitutionalism!