site.btaDemocratic Bulgaria Proposes Parliamentary Commission on Assets of Movement for Rights and Freedoms Leader

Yes, Bulgaria, a party within the Democratic Bulgaria (DB) coalition, said in a statement on Monday that DB will submit a draft decision to the National Assembly to establish a temporary parliamentary commission to clarify facts "regarding significant discrepancies between officially declared income, property status, substantial expenditures and the actual standard of living of [Movement for Rights and Freedoms Floor Leader] Delyan Peevski".

The purpose of the commission is to verify data on "declared dividend income, expenses for rental of real estate and vehicles, use of private aircraft, involvement of third parties and companies in covering significant expenditures, as well as the actions or inaction of the competent state authorities regarding already submitted signals," the statement further says.

According to DB, this case has long ceased to be merely a matter of personal declarations and raises a much more serious question - whether the state applies the law equally to all, or whether institutions "suddenly stop seeing when faced with a person of Peevski’s political and economic weight".

In already submitted signals to the Commission for Anti-Corruption and Illegal Assets Forfeiture (CACIAF), the National Revenue Agency (NRA) and the prosecution service, Yes, Bulgaria has presented numerous data based on publicly available information. According to them, there are significant discrepancies between Peevski’s declared dividend income and data in the annual financial statements of companies in which he is or has been the sole owner of capital.

Questions have also been raised about significant expenses for rental of vehicles and real estate, as well as publicly disclosed data on multiple flights with private aircraft. The question is no longer only who used these services, but who paid for them, on what basis, whether they were accounted for, declared and taxed, DB writes.

The commission should determine whether, in the event of third parties covering significant expenses, there is concealed provision of material benefit, income in kind, or undeclared financing. It should also verify whether the competent authorities have carried out real and in-depth checks, or whether their response has been formal, delayed, selective, or entirely absent.

DB insists that it should be examined what has been done so far by the CACIAF, the NRA, the prosecution service, the Interior Ministry, the State Agency for National Security, border control authorities, and other competent bodies. It should be clarified what inspections have been initiated, their scope, what documents have been requested, whether there has been information exchange between institutions, and whether follow-up actions have been taken.

According to DB, the temporary commission is necessary because the case concerns the public interest and the trust that the state can act equally towards everyone, regardless of political influence, economic power, or control over institutions, the statement emphasizes.

On January 22, the Sofia City Prosecutor’s Office opened a pre-trial investigation based on a signal from Yes, Bulgaria co-chairs Bozhidar Bozhanov and Ivaylo Mirchev regarding potential significant discrepancies in Peevski’s declared income.