Last news in Fakti

Diana Damyanova: Escalation of the cassation appeal

Even for the blind, it is obvious that decisive changes are needed in the electoral law, but this cannot be done by a "confused national assembly

Nov 5, 2024 11:42 105

FAKTI.BG publishes opinions with a wide range of perspectives to encourage constructive debates.

After in for a week they had been silent about the glaring injustice done to Majesty, now they all shouted – we want a full recount or cassation or both.

To ask the Constitutional Court for a new full recount of the vote is the same as asking it to overturn the law of gravity. That is exactly how much power and opportunities the CC has to “satisfy” the forward-looking demands of the later PPDB and the incredibly coinciding demands of Vazrazhdane.

As strange as it may sound for these two political forces, the Constitutional Court is a COURT. This is recalled on "Facebook" Diana Damyanova.

He considers pleadings based on evidence, not on feelings and opinions, and in this sense “we know the elections were not fair” is an allegation of exceptional probative value that the SC has no choice but to disregard.

But the PR is over, we've asked for everything. Well, yes, we will get nothing, but we are used to it. Well, in partnership with Vazrazhdane, with which, as we will see further down in this text, we may even be about to govern.

So there is irrefutable evidence that the Majesty was “stolen” and everyone who has at least a little bit of conscience in himself must accept the fact that it enters the parliament and assist him, through a reasoned appeal to the Constitutional Court.

The rest are oaths, incantations and false statements, such as this – we want a full census /by whom was ajeba/, but we will also support any other request to the Constitutional Court /, even the one to cancel the law of gravity/.

In conclusion on this matter, I will say that the lesson of the assembly is precisely that when you want everything, you get nothing. But we learn the lessons empirically. We kick the same hoe until it damages our already softened brains and then….. oh then we admit to the whole world that the constitutional changes were a mistake!!!

Precisely that for the sake of which we allied with Peevski and Borisov, oh my god, that was a mistake.

But, now onward.

Since before the elections, it is clear that PPDB will wait for a miracle to happen in the second term. They wait like this before assembling.

Borisov has no way to make a new assembly with them, no matter how much he wants to.

The new mantra is “after we washed Borisov, now we want to straighten him”.

How did we define Borisov as "good"? and Peevski for "bad" it will remain a secret for me, but the "good" and "the bad" cannot be separated by a declaration.

Evolution, not revolution, is the right political path at the moment, but this is the opinion of a "ossified" /by PP/ brain, which please do not take into account.

So much for the chances of a GERB-PPDB cabinet.

As I suggested back on election day, the only option left is a loosely supported minority cabinet.

Whether this is possible, I do not know and time will tell.

Is this the best cabinet – no it isn't! But it is much better than a new series of office cabinets.

Then comes the cherished second term.

There will have to be ala-bala with Revival.

I would like to believe in the common sense of the PPDB, but I already have the unhealthy feeling that in “the name of national interests, etc., etc., some combination with Vazrazhdane is possible.

I hope I'm not right.

After the third, fourth and fifth term they are doomed as usual.

After … elections.

And now comes the sweetest part.

The last election showed that the biggest “abuses” willy-nilly are done in the sectional committees.

Where some hundreds of thousands of people named by the parties, but paid by the state, due to simple insolence, simple stupidity or simple corruption, practically falsify the elections. Another question is whether this is not a form of “bought” vote, but it is a moral judgment that has morals.

It is also obvious to the blind that decisive changes are needed in the electoral law, but this cannot be done from a “argued” national assembly.

So, the most – probably, we will have new elections with the old electoral law, the old /new/ caretaker government, the old /new/ minister of the interior, the old /new/ sectional committees.

What makes parliament think that doing the same thing in the same way will get a different result is a third grade question.