site.btaSupreme Bar Council Calls on Supreme Judicial Council to Immediately Resolve Issue Concerning Acting Prosecutor General

The Supreme Bar Council (SBC) has called on the current composition of the Supreme Judicial Council (SJC) to immediately resolve the issue concerning the acting Prosecutor General and the Chair of the Supreme Administrative Court (SAC), following the ruling of the Supreme Court of Cassation (SCC), which held that Borislav Sarafov cannot longer serve as acting Prosecutor General. The statement was published on the official website of the Supreme Bar Council on Monday.

The SBC also urged the National Assembly to initiate the procedure for electing SJC members from the parliamentary quota, a mandate that expired on July 21, and called on the parliamentary parties to nominate individuals of professional competence and moral integrity who can uphold the independence of the judiciary.

The Council’s statement further calls for a rational, professional, and depoliticized debate on issues related to justice and judicial independence, stressing that “nothing is more damaging to the independence of the judiciary than attempts at political and/or situational interference”.

The document emphasizes that in a rule-of-law state, it is unacceptable for either the prosecuting magistracy or the bar to publicly comment outside of judicial proceedings on the correctness of specific court rulings in ongoing cases or to make value judgments about the court. Generalized assertions that the judiciary is “incompetent”, “dependent”, or “politicized”, which have been repeatedly voiced in recent months, not only undermine public trust in the courts’ decisions but also erode the very foundations of the judicial system and the state. “Justice lies at the heart of statehood. It is administered by, and embodied in, the courts,” the SBC further stressed.

The Supreme Bar Council maintains that legal disputes must be resolved solely within the judiciary. Differences in legal interpretation and institutional conflicts within the judicial system should be addressed internally, in a manner that preserves the authority and dignity of the judiciary.

In a separate statement on the matter, the prosecuting magistracy claimed that the leadership of the Supreme Court of Cassation, through its actions, in contradiction to the constitutionally defined powers of the court, is pursuing purely political objectives and contributing to further instability within the judiciary, allegedly influenced by certain political circles and their representatives within the judicial system itself.