site.btaDB Files Complaint with General Directorate for Combating Organized Crime on Peevski's Trips to Dubai, Public Procurement Influence

Democratic Bulgaria (DB) filed a complaint with the General Directorate for Combating Organized Crime (GDCOC), providing information that raises reasonable suspicion of possible improper influence in the awarding and execution of public contracts. The reason for the report is Delyan Peevski’s frequent trips to Dubai, the political alliance announced.

DB insists that an investigation be conducted to determine whether these visits involved informal coordination with representatives of companies involved in public procurement.

The political alliance emphasizes that traveling to a foreign country does not in itself constitute improper conduct. In this case, however, there are several circumstances that warrant an investigation, the frequency of the trips, the destination, and the possibility that individuals associated with companies participating in public procurement contracts may have travelled to Dubai at the same time.

The complaint urges GDCOC to identify all of Peevski’s trips to Dubai during the relevant period, including departure and return dates, routes, carriers used, specific flights, any accompanying individuals, and the type of transportation, whether scheduled flights, charters, or private jets.

GDCOC should request and analyze data from the General Directorate Border Police regarding individuals who travelled to Dubai or the United Arab Emirates up to two days prior to Peevski’s respective trips, as well as those who returned within two days of his return. This time frame would make it possible to determine whether there are people who travelled in a coordinated manner, even if they were not on the same flight or on the same day, according to DB.

The political alliance notes that to uncover the full facts, the travellers’ information should be cross-checked with the Commercial Register and the Register of Non-Profit Legal Entities. The goal is to determine whether among them there are owners, managers, authorized representatives, or other individuals associated with companies participating in public procurement.

Democratic Bulgaria points out that this is not just about the publicly visible final owners. Also important are the people who play a de facto or formal role in corporate structures but are not always recognizable at first glance. Another question is whether the affiliated companies have participated in public procurement, won contracts, received indexations, advance payments, or other financial benefits from public funds, the complaint notes.

The timing is particularly important. If, following a trip to Dubai, a procurement procedure is announced, terms are changed, competitors are eliminated, a contract is signed, or an advance payment is made to an affiliated company, this would be a serious cause for investigation, according to Democratic Bulgaria. That is why the report also points to public procurement contracting authorities.

The political alliance insists that signs of pre-determined contracts should be investigated, such as restrictive conditions, unusually short deadlines, requirements tailored to a specific company’s profile, lack of real competition, participation of affiliated companies, subsequent contract amendments, large advance payments, or unreasonably inflated prices.

Equally important is the financial trail, DB notes. The report requests an investigation into potential financial flows between the identified companies, their owners, managers, related parties, consultants, intermediaries, and individuals from Peevski’s political or administrative circle. The goal is to clarify whether there is a mechanism for influence, remuneration, concealment of benefits, or subsequent distribution of funds, DB states.

DB insists that GDCOC conduct a full investigation and, upon its completion, within the legal constraints, it should provide information on the undertaken actions and the results.