[ad_1]
The conversation about a new Bulgarian Constitution at the moment is not legal, but purely political. This was stated to bTV by the Dean of the Faculty of Law of the University of Sofia, Prof. Daniel Valchev.
According to him, there is no reason to adopt a new Basic Law, as nothing special has happened in society.
A new Constitution is approved to give institutional and legal weight to an existing political process, and it is not a drawing on which we will develop in the coming years, Valchev stressed.
He said it was “utter nonsense” and a “ritual dance” intended to secure the government’s mandate.
We are angry at Mareshki for signing the Constitution without reading it, but we should be even angrier at those who have read it, Valchev joked.
According to him, the GERB project is more than 90% exactly the same as the current Constitution. The only changes are on the number of deputies, which is decreasing, the mandates of the big three, which is also decreasing, the way to change the Constitution itself and the individual constitutional complaint, which was an important but neglected issue.
Valchev emphasized that the question is not to create a “wonderful legal act”, but under what conditions it will operate.
“We are obscuring the problem, until that day we did not know that Mr. Borissov did not even know that there was a Constitution in Bulgaria. It did not pass parliamentary control or a vote of no confidence. Complete disregard for the constitutional framework, this is extremely frivolous.” . he was adamant.
According to him, the ruling party is afraid, and when the prime minister is afraid, the only way is for him to go through elections to legitimize himself. However, Valchev did not understand why Borisov refused to do so. He predicts that the prime minister will pay a very high political price for giving up the only useful move right now: going through elections. All kinds of monkeys can be invented alone and just not to give up, Valchev summed up the situation.
According to him, the debate on the Constitution is not without meaning, but it is now extremely fruitless because it obscures a much sharper debate.
Valchev explained that the problem in the prosecution issue is not constitutional either.
“We have changed the Constitution four times in relation to the Judiciary and four times we have said that we are taking the first step towards change. Let’s take a second step,” he insisted.
Valchev highlighted the introduction of the understanding that everyone is good for everything, agreements with everyone who is most vocal and influential, the complete lack of institutional responsibility, the wrong priorities and the lack of long-term policies as the main problems.
If the government does not resign, we will witness terrible fairs, Valchev predicted again.
According to him, there may be a debate on constitutional changes, but it must be calm, long-term and cautious, especially for the Judiciary.
The problem is not in the personality or the mandate of the chief prosecutor, but in the powers of the prosecution, he stressed.
Sofia, Bulgaria
[ad_2]
