In Bulgaria, there is a striking contrast between levels of corruption and convictions against senior officials. This is one of the conclusions in the report of the GRECO organization to the Council of Europe.
The document also emphasizes that the results so far are definitely unsatisfactory and urgent measures must be taken. The report comes against the background of the ongoing political impasse in our country and another expected failure in attempts to form a government.
The document provides an overview of what has been done on the topic of anti-corruption in the last year and comes to the conclusion that the lack of convictions is not at all due to the closure of specialized courts and prosecutor’s offices. This is the thesis of the chief prosecutor Ivan Geshev, who has been saying for months that the abolition of the two institutions was done in favor of organized crime. He is also hindered by the outdated laws – NK and NPK, with which he is constantly justified.
GRECO’s report states verbatim that the organization “leaves a strong impression that the reason for the ineffective prosecution of corruption cases involving high-ranking officials is due less to the architecture of the respective prosecutorial offices and more to the overly complex preconditions imposed by the prosecutor’s office on investigative authorities and the apparent lack of determination to carry out full-fledged investigations and bring cases to court, combined with possible undue influence on and within the prosecution“.
The only anti-corruption success of the state prosecution in recent years is the final conviction of the former mayor of the metropolitan region “Mladost” Desislava Ivancheva and her former deputy Bilyana Petrova. Against this background, however, the prosecutor’s office turned a blind eye to numerous scandals such as the gold bars in the bedroom of ex-prime minister Boyko Borisov, the allegations of millions in bribes given by gambling boss Vasil Bozhkov, etc.
Formalistic reasons
It is clear from the report that before writing it, the authors had a number of meetings in Bulgaria. In addition, a comprehensive review of the legislation was made and the legislative initiatives in this direction are mentioned – for example, the division of the anti-corruption commission KPCONPI into two, an idea launched by “Continuing the change” and “Democratic Bulgaria”. The document mentions a claim by investigators who explain that there are many examples of corruption probes where data has been collected but never led to a criminal investigation. The refusal was often for “formalistic reasons”. There were also reports of gaps in the collection of evidence in such investigations.
“Representatives of the presidential administration noted that anti-corruption reforms should be primarily aimed at the prosecution, especially in light of the failure of the specialized court and the specialized prosecutor’s office to bring to justice high-ranking political figures allegedly involved in corruption over the past ten years“, the report said.
It’s fine, but not quite
GRECO points out that there is an active anti-corruption commission in Bulgaria, as well as legislation, but this does not change the situation much. Especially for KPCONPI, it was established that it checks the property declared by people in high positions, but often these checks are formal. The “Apartmentgate” scandal is also mentioned, because of which the former head of the commission, Plamen Georgiev, was forced to resign.
“The representatives of the Commission confirmed that although the Commission could carry out on-the-spot checks, this rarely happened in practice, as their resources and working methods allow primarily to carry out documentary checks on differences and inconsistencies between previous and newly submitted declarations. In addition, no comprehensive statistical information was available on the declarations submitted by the persons holding senior positions and verified by the authorized bodies. Overall, the current system does not allow for effective oversight of the income, assets and interests of senior officials to ensure transparency and accountability to the public“, the report says.
The findings are similar in relation to the other main activity of KPCONPI – the conflict of interests. According to Bulgarian legislation, this is not a crime, but an administrative offence. Even if it is confirmed and proven in court, the punishment is a fine, and in the end the victim suffers mainly image damage. Furthermore, the legislation does not consider private interest to be a presumptive conflict of interest. For example, when a collective body votes on a decision that could benefit one of its members, it only has an obligation to recuse itself.
Paychecks and checks
The report makes a total of 27 recommendations to the Bulgarian authorities. Some of them are related to the people who enter the highest echelon of power as ministerial advisers. As a rule, they are part of the so-called political offices in each department. The organization notes that the government has instructed all ministries to announce their advisors, but it is unclear whether this is being followed. Also, there is not enough publicity about the salaries they receive. GRECO therefore recommends that this information be made public and easily accessible online.
In addition, advisers must be pre-screened for incompatibility with the position. The organization points out that there was a similar initiative before the formation of Kiril Petkov’s cabinet. However, it was recorded in an agreement between the political parties, which had an effect only in relation to the individual formations.
Free the MIA from the minister
Another central theme in the organization’s report is the work and structure of the Ministry of Internal Affairs. The document states that often in Bulgaria the ministry and the police are identical, but in fact they are separate structures, and police work should be independent. According to GRECO, instructions to the police from the political level should be limited only to strategic planning and budgetary matters.
“It is also noted that the Minister of the Interior has broad powers over the police and that the leadership of the police is directly subordinated to the Minister. Although the police is clearly an executive branch, it is still important to make an organizational distinction between the ministry responsible for the police and the functions of the police. A clear expression of the principle of operational independence of the police in individual cases is of paramount importance“, the document says.
Gifts
In Bulgaria, there is no system for registering the gifts received by officials or policemen, the report says. The legislation only deals with benefits in connection with the performance of the service.
“No rules have been introduced for registering gifts received unrelated to the performance of official duties, and therefore such cases are not declared and registered. This situation is clearly unsatisfactory unless there is a total ban on receiving gifts“, the organization wrote on the occasion of the Ministry of Internal Affairs.
In the code of ethical conduct of the administration, only ordinary officials are mentioned, but not those in high positions, the organization also states. In addition, members of political cabinets, advisers and others close to a minister, for example, are not civil servants, i.e. are outside the scope of their duties.
