/ world today news/ The reason for the next presentation is the interview in the morning block of Nova TV from May 1 with G. Bliznashki, in which he talks about a creeping coup.
Leaving aside the mentioned statement and the apparently uncharacteristic ones for an intelligent, not only trained, but also capable of rational thinking, moral person, able to control his emotions and qualifications for the head of state, etc., if we look not only at the state and development trends of so-called political parties, and in the political representation related to them, we cannot fail to see the collapse of parliamentarism itself as a consequence. Which shows at least three things: 1/ that the parliament elected on April 4, 2021 does not have a stable parliamentary majority; 2/ none of the political formations represented in parliament is able to independently form a government; 3/ large coalitions are excluded, except for the replacement of the vote of the voters. The most immediate thing we are facing is the presence of signs of a general crisis, which cannot be resolved in a parliamentary way with the means of parliamentarism. And increasingly tangible as a prospect with the looming impossibility of forming either at all or a long-lasting regular government from the current parliament, sooner or later upcoming early elections for a new one. At the same time, we are witnessing more and more obvious manifestations, which testify that the started process towards changing the previous management model will not proceed smoothly and undisturbed. I would even say that there is a serious risk that it will be carried out within the framework of the constitutional and legally established order in the country. Since for most, if not for everyone, it is undoubted that there are quite a few representatives and participated in one form or another, in one capacity or another in this administration, incl. benefited as his clients, for whom the main and main problem is liability. From where stems not only the goal to save and preserve the status quo by any means, but also the attempts in every possible way to discredit everyone, including institutions perceived by them as a potential threat. Leaving aside incl. exercises aimed not at achieving unity but at division and opposition, including through the blabbermouths of the ignorant about who, what and how they were doing with their imagined status as Carthage, a threat to the republic emanated from the unchecked as a result of continued abuses by of the government in resignation and its fellow party members and claqueors, who have moved as deputies, chaos, as well as from the systemic obstacles to the constitutional activity of the highest representative body of the people’s power. Therefore, regardless of the length of its existence, a decisive and adequate both civil and institutional support of the still functioning parliament is needed to pass the most pressing as urgent legislative changes. Including with the aim of preventing a possible escalation of tension in society caused by such chaos and abuses, which could manifest itself in unconstitutional and illegal forms. Therefore, it should be above all that the current MPs take a responsible attitude to their duties as members of the National Assembly, specifying the agenda of their meetings both in the committees and in plenary precisely from such a point of view, and not as if they will live forever as such. On which occasion I find it fitting to remind, quoting Solon again: “Caring for the superfluous is often combined with the loss of the necessary”. And this, to no less extent, also applies to those claiming competence as constitutionalists, including qualified persons, regarding their statements and comments, instead of causing confusion and alarm. As for the president, without being an architect of one or another coalitions to govern from the heterogeneous, with different not only views, but also diverse interests, parliamentaryly represented parties and other associations as formations, or an arbiter in their quarrels and bargaining as the head of state , in addition to being a neutral observer, in publicly declared activity can have a decisive role, helping to preserve the stability and security of the republic. As a high single-person state body, it is not depoliticized and, in addition to issuing acts with significant political consequences, it can make statements and make addresses of important political significance (see also RKS No. 25 of 21.12.1995 under the Code of . No. 27/1995). Because the parliament is a parliament, but bearing in mind not only the fact of the number of people who participated as voters for their representatives who participated in the election on April 4, the inconsistencies in it undoubtedly do not contribute to its legitimacy based on the necessary trust, not only from the point of view of representativeness. And at the same time, although in resignation, there is still something like a government that governs the country at its discretion as it sees fit in the interests of a gang, for a significant number of Bulgarian citizens, undoubted criminals. While they are under the auspices of the so-called chief prosecutor, if not legally, they can and should be sanctioned politically in a democratic way, which leads to early parliamentary elections. When, depends on the third parliamentary group in a row, which is about to be given a mandate to form a regular government. And in case of failure or refusal – by the president, assuming in accordance with the Constitution his due responsibility for the temporary management of the country as head of state.
Since the republic, based on people’s rule, has a parliamentary government, incl. the powers and functions of the president as the head of state are strictly regulated according to the principle of separation of powers and strictly differentiated in accordance with the horizontal and hierarchical structure of the state’s institutional system. Including fixed temporally and without legislative functions being granted to the head of state, both when the mandate of the National Assembly has expired, and also when it is dissolved by the president in accordance with para. 5 of Art. 99. cit. provision. Not only in case of war, military or other emergency under para. 5 of Art. 100 the parliament is convened according to para. 2 of Art. 64 pursuant to Art. 78 of the Constitution. Therefore, even if it is necessary for him to temporarily step into the role as the head of the executive power, it is impossible not only legitimately, but also legally to establish a sole rule by the president. The constitutional provision aims to guarantee the stability and security of the state. From this point of view, the powers of the president should be considered according to Art. 99, para. 5 and 7, including and in conjunction with Art. 102, para. 3, items 1 and 3 of the current Bulgarian Constitution in relation to the legal figure of the official government as ultima ratio. Whether out of fear they fantasize, or in a clumsy attempt to mislead and sow discord, they trumpet danger, likening, if not entirely, certain elements of the head of state’s powers to those of a dictator of the republican era of ancient Rome, is a different matter. Which, incl. in view of the temporary nature of the position, it is not essential to merit special consideration for discussion here. What is important to point out in this case is the purpose and purpose of the constitutional arrangement, which I will emphasize again, is to preserve the stability and security of the state by not remaining without governance. How much in the search for a balance between the powers of Parliament and the President of any of the deputies in the Grand National Assembly, which adopted the present Constitution, possibly crossed the mind or was subject to such an analogy as the one used by way of allusion – a pointless exercise, unless we tend to succumb to the applied, albeit resigned, quacks of the still (non)acting Prime Minister – I will not hereafter stray into conjecture and speculation. I consider it sufficient on this occasion to note the respectable wisdom shown by them, with an undoubtedly high level of republican spirit invested in the system thus adopted, insofar as, despite the parliamentary government, the mentioned “dictatorial” powers of the president as the head of state, personifying the unity of the nation, representing the republic in international relations and supreme commander-in-chief, are assigned according to his representativeness by virtue of direct election by the people in accordance with para. 2 of Art. 1 ex lege with the Social Contract. And not for one or other occasions and reasons, in view of specific cases ad hoc, to make sure that they are or are not assigned, whatever, etc., by any other institution. While stressing that there are constitutionally introduced safeguards independent of the head of state against the abuse by any such as the president of parliamentary rule in respect of his powers pertaining to ex officio government. incl. both by the limitation in volume and in time of the activity of such a government to a much shorter period than the former Roman institution, and also in view of the requirement in a definite, much shorter period, for the scheduling of elections to a parliament. Last but not least, the need for such a government to have a parliamentary sanction, even in the event of a dissolved parliament, as a confirmation of certain of its actions and acts, both of an internal and external political character and nature.
In fact, what the country needs in a situation like today and with the looming prospect of early parliamentary elections is nothing more than reason and courage on the part of everyone who supports the process of change. As from the president, who is about to bear, if not the greatest, exclusive responsibility for fulfilling the powers assigned to him in accordance with the Constitution as the head of state. The Republic is not in danger of ruin or destruction as a result of the exercise of the constitutionally established powers and functions of the President, whoever performs that office as head of state. Because it is permanently controlled not only through their balance with those of the parliament, but also both by the latter and also by the Constitutional Court pursuant to Art. 150, para. 1 in accordance with Art. 149, para. 1, items 2 and 3 of the Constitution.
#Lets #scare #people #unnecessarily
