President Rumen Radev has vetoed amendments to the Criminal Procedure Code adopted by the Parliament. With them, the deputies temporarily restored the work of the current Supreme Judicial Council (SJC), although they had previously liquidated it with changes to the Constitution. The change of the SJC, as well as the removal of part of the powers of the Prosecutor General, were at the heart of the judicial reform. Although the amendments to the Constitution were adopted, there is still no elected composition of the council, nor a permanent acting chief prosecutor. Therefore, the parliament hastily voted new amendments which allowed the current situation to be prolonged.
Virtually cancelled
“The much heralded judicial reform with the recent amendments to the Constitution has been practically canceled for an indefinite period, which is a deliberate disregard for the supremacy of the Constitution and its immediate effect“, the president states in his reasons.
Formally, the SJC should not exist in its current form – a collegium of prosecutors and judges, as well as a plenum, i.e. joint meeting of both. The idea was to create two separate councils by changing the ratio between the quotas in them – in the judicial council, more members of the magistracy should be elected, and in the prosecutor’s office, there should be those appointed by the parliament. However, the elections for the SJC have always been the result of agreements between political parties. As of right now, they haven’t gotten around to it, probably until the rotation is over. Apart from that, Borislav Sarafov remains the chief prosecutor, albeit temporarily performing the functions. A new head of public prosecution must be elected by the next SJC.
With the changes in the constitution, some of the powers of the chief prosecutor were also taken away, which in turn limited his ability to influence ordinary prosecutors. It is about the so-called “legality supervision”, i.e. the possibility to request any file and to cancel the decision already taken. This amendment was made, although both Sarafov and his predecessor in the post, Ivan Geshev, claimed that it would lead to the lack of control of the prosecutors. The subsequent changes, which Radev vetoed, allowed the Attorney General to retain his old powers, at least temporarily.
In the president’s reasons, it is stated that with these texts, an ordinary law is given a “preferential position” over the Constitution, which is a violation. He interpreted this as a violation of the functioning of the rule of law.
All the evidence
Radev also criticized a change in the Code of Criminal Procedure, according to which, when a request for arrest (or another measure of remand) is considered, the accused is given only the evidence on the basis of which his detention is requested. As a rule, they are much smaller, and in this proceeding it is not decided whether someone is guilty, but only whether he should be detained so that he does not abscond or commit another crime.
However, the President points out that until now it has been established practice in our country that the accused and his lawyer get to know all the materials in a case. In his reasons, it is also written that this will limit the right of defense of the accused.
After the already adopted amendments, they will return for a new discussion in the parliament. Deputies can override the presidential veto.
#repealed #Constitution #Radev #vetoed #restoration #SJC