[ad_1]
Chief prosecutor Ivan Geshev on Thursday refused to attend a session of the Supreme Judicial Council (SJC), which was dedicated to the most significant scandals in which he has been involved since the beginning of his mandate. The debate was sparked by the Bulgarian Union of Judges, which demanded that Geshev be evaluated by every member of the SJC. A letter was attached to this application detailing the “public knowledge” facts about Geshev and the conclusion that expulsion proceedings should be initiated.
The Attorney General was the first to speak, explaining that the objective was not him, but the removal of the SJC. During this time, there was a protest by “Democratic Bulgaria” in front of the building, led by the co-chair of the formation Hristo Ivanov. The non-parliamentary coalition demands Geshev’s resignation.
“I am not worried about such a debateGeshev said while explaining why he would not participate in it. The chief prosecutor said that it was “very difficult” for him to respond to the “comments” of the Bulgarian Union of Judges because they had “political overtones”.
“Reading them, I have the feeling that we are going back to Orwell’s novels or late social realism.Geshev commented, but without explaining why he thinks so. He only mentioned that there were no legal arguments in them.
In this spirit, the Prosecutor General said that he had already answered all the questions raised by the Union of Judges before the LIBE Commission of the European Parliament and clearly did not need to answer again before the SJC. He recalled that he had been in parliament for 10 hours. Therefore, he ignored the institution that elected him Attorney General and the only institution to which he is accountable.
“On the LIBE commission website there is a detailed answer (to the questions asked. Anyone who wishes, can find outGeshev explained, adding: “I can repeat everything, but there is no use talking for hours about something I have talked about“.
With the message that the prosecution owes Bulgarian pensioners a better and calmer life, Geshev abandoned the SJC online session and left his advocates at the council to speak for him. They did it without hesitation.
What we are?
SJC member Yordan Stoev (College of Prosecutors) questioned the right of the SJC Plenary to debate the actions of the Attorney General. “What procedure are we in?“;”What authority will we exercise?I ask.
Stoev explained that he did not understand some of the facts in the speech of the Union of Judges in Bulgaria and in what context they were placed.
Ognyan Damyanov (College of Prosecutors) said that he sought an account from the Judges’ Union on how exactly the application to the SJC was accepted, but was not satisfied with the information provided. It was unclear on the basis of what legal order a member of the SJC has a professional organization account for the positions expressed by it.
“What procedure are we in? Will the SJC Plenary meet each time it receives an address, appeal, and other unnamed documents?Damyanov asks.
Is the Bulgarian prosecution a bat?
Damyanov was angry with a statement by the president of the Supreme Court of Cassation (SCC), Lozan Panov, who is the petitioner for the position of the judges’ union. And he asked him to answer if the Bulgarian prosecutor’s office is a bat.
“I think that when a body like the Prosecutor’s Office acts selectively, the actions show that it is a bat for some and a screen, an umbrella for others.“replied the president of the Supreme Court of Cassation.
Panov was also attacked by another council member, the former Chief Justice Sevdalin Mavrov. He asked him whether before his election as president of the Supreme Court of Cassation he had waited a long time in front of the office of Prime Minister Boyko Borissov and in whose office he would await his next election to the post of chief.
“I did not wait in front of the Prime Minister’s office, what is happening today shows the commitment in the SJCPanov replied.
Geshev sparked tensions across the country
The president of the Supreme Court of Cassation also said that the debate could not create dividing lines between prosecutors and judges, because it was about the activities of the attorney general and his actions, which “caused tension throughout the country.”
“The SJC is the body that elects the chief prosecutor. And when the resignation of the Attorney General is called for for more than three months, when we have an unprecedented resolution from the European Parliament, the SJC’s reaction is too late. It is also about the image of the judiciary. It is not your right, but your obligation to react“, he said.
Panov added that he no longer remembers the number and subject of the inspections the SJC conducted on him, but there are none for Geshev.
“Who, if not the SJC, can assess the actions of the Attorney General. How long will this SJC, which resonates not only in Bulgaria but also abroad, be closed?Panov asked.
Yordan Stoev’s reaction was that the head of the Supreme Court of Cassation made a political statement.
Atanaska Disheva (Judicial Board) explained that the absence of the Attorney General from the debate aims to invalidate this discussion.
“For me, this demonstrates once again the widespread understanding in the public sphere of his inviolability and responsibility. It is intended to downplay the content and meaning of this debate.“, she said.
According to her, the SJC claims that the resolution of the European Parliament and the report of the European Commission do not exist, as well as that “the activity of the Prosecutor’s Office does not concern us either.”
“Several things impressed him as he spoke. One is his opposition to parts of the Bulgarian people. Talk about the elderly of the country and if we know we know what the beaten grandfather is like. And does the chief prosecutor know what the beaten youth looked like behind the columns of the Council of Ministers?Disheva asked.
The former head of the prosecutors’ association and current SJC member Evgeni Ivanov said he did not understand the purpose of what was happening at the SJC. According to him, the UBB’s request did not contain specifics, but “suggestions with a political flavor.”
Lozan Panov explained that the invasion of the Defense Bureau in the presidency made society explode because it looked like a “coup d’etat.”
“Is this the style of work of the prosecution?I ask.
“An arrogant demonstrative attitude towards the judiciary and other authorities leads to the main conclusion. We have a Soviet-style prosecutor’s office, we have a person without responsibility at the top. What happened at this time reinforces this politically dependent SJC modelPanov explained.
You are defending foreign forces
Former SCC judge Veronika Imova explained that Panov’s thesis was extremely manipulative and frivolous. He fully defended Geshev’s actions from last year. According to her, citizens were tricked into protesting and involved in this deception “opposition groups and NGOs that are supported by external funds, probably pursuing external ends.”
“Neither the work of the Attorney General, nor his personality, nor his public statements raise concerns for the protection of the rule of law.Imova said.
After three hours of debate on the issue, the majority of the SJC with 19 votes in favor and only 3 against defended Geshev and accepted the request of the Judges Union for information only.
Did you find this article helpful?
We would be delighted to have you support the online edition of Mediapool.bg, so that you can continue to have an independent, professional and honest means of analysis of information.
Support us
Subscribe to the most important news, analysis and commentary on the day’s events. The newsletter is sent to your email address every day at 18:00.
Subscription
[ad_2]
