site.btaNational Assembly Approves at First Reading Three Bills Amending Criminal Procedure Code

The National Assembly on Wednesday approved at first reading three bills amending and supplementing the Criminal Procedure Code. Two of the bills were submitted by the caretaker cabinet of Andrey Gurov, and the third by Yordan Ivanov of Democratic Bulgaria and a group of MPs.

The first bill submitted by the caretaker government provides for the introduction of mandatory judicial review of the validity and legality of rulings to terminate or suspend criminal proceedings for corruption offences committed by persons holding public office. The amendments are related to the implementation of commitments under the National Recovery and Resilience Plan. 

The proposed changes aim to introduce effective institutional oversight of the actions of the ad hoc prosecutor investigating the prosecutor general or his deputies, as such oversight has so far been practically absent. Under separate amendments to the Judicial System Act, the oversight would be exercised by a judge from the Criminal Chamber of the Supreme Court of Cassation, acting as supervising prosecutor, who would be selected at random from a list approved by the General Assembly of the Criminal Chamber. The list should include judges of the highest rank and with experience in criminal justice. The supervising prosecutor will be designated upon the opening of the proceedings, thus preventing any period during which the actions of the investigating prosecutor would remain without supervision.

The second bill submitted by the caretaker cabinet contains amendments aimed at the full and correct transposition and implementation of EU directives on procedural rights. At present, the European Commission has initiated proceedings against Bulgaria to determine whether there have been violations of these directives, and these proceedings are currently at various stages. 

The amendments to the Criminal Procedure Code submitted by Yordan Ivanov propose the introduction of fast and effective judicial review of 72-hour detention ordered by a prosecutor. At present, there is no mechanism for direct judicial review immediately following an arrest, which creates a risk of unjustified infringement on personal liberty, the sponsors note. 

The bills proposed by the caretaker cabinet were supported by MPs from all parliamentary groups, with the exception of the Movement for Rights and Freedoms, who voted against. The third bill, proposed by Yordan Ivanov, was passed unanimously by Parliament. 

Regarding investigations into crimes committed by the prosecutor general or his deputies, Progressive Bulgaria MP Silvia Hristova said that it would be appropriate to consider whether judicial oversight should be refined to reach the Supreme Court of Cassation as the last instance court.

Vazrazhdane MP Peter Petrov supported the establishment of a new procedure for mandatory judicial review of corruption crimes. Such oversight should also apply to the dismissal of serious crimes, such as a traffic offense committed by a high-ranking politician or a serious bodily injury committed by a relative of a magistrate, he noted.

GERB-UDF MP Stefan Arsov said that his parliamentary group would support all three bills, which are largely the result of the intellectual work of the previous cabinet led by Rosen Zhelyazkov [GERB-UDF]. The goal is greater efficiency, control, and trust in criminal proceedings, he noted.

Democratic Bulgaria MP Nadejda Yordanova pointed out that the first bill, introduced by the caretaker cabinet, addresses issues related to inefficiencies in the prosecutor general’s investigative mechanism, while the second bill addresses the rights of individuals against whom procedural actions have been launched but who have not yet been formally charged.

Continue the Change MP Velislav Velichkov noted that changes are also being made to the Special Intelligence Means Act, which regulates how special intelligence means requests are made by the ad hoc prosecutor. In his view, the text needs to be clarified regarding the entities that may request the use of special intelligence means and those that oversee this use.