How to choose the right judges

This Supreme Judicial Council has many sins. For their seven years (5 official mandates and 2 given as a gift due to the inaction of the Parliament to elect the next members), the personnel officers go from scandal to scandal without the blink of an eye. And now, while the focus is on the election procedures for the chief prosecutor and the president of the Supreme Administrative Court, the council is going to set a dangerous precedent – to surface the judicial promotion competition to scratch that has been dragged on for years. . Apparently, the majority of the council are not satisfied with the results of the competition and want other people, not those registered, to get the positions.

In a time of riots, gangs and brutal violence, it was important to have your own people among the criminal judges. Times and methods are different now. And

it is much more valuable to “keep” a commercial judge.

In practice, the entire country can be ruled by the commercial judges of the Sofia Court of Appeal. These are the second positions in major commercial cases affecting businesses worth millions and billions. A company can be stolen through the court.​​​​ Safeguards can also be put in place to discourage business. Commercial judges also decide on the cases of the parties – registrations, entries, etc. The Supreme Court rarely rules on them. That is why the word of the commercial judges in the SAS is so heavy and in many cases – the last one.

Vacancies in the system are filled through competitions. At least on paper. In practice, subcontracting is still widely misused. The relevant chief justice has a central role in it. And they are no more obedient than supported judges, because they are always under pressure whether their loan will not be terminated and they will quickly return to the lowest position (and salary).

Almost a year ago, “Now” said about it the strange posting practices in the Sofia Court of Appealwhich was discovered during an investigation by the Supreme Court of Cassation. It was caused by the dissatisfaction of magistrates with how the loan is taking place, which is largely an incentive without competition.

Competitions are not the responsibility of the courts, but of the Supreme Judicial Council. It is the power to announce and carry and then announce the winners. And now we see that it is a power and

to find time to overcome the decisions of the competition commission

and the entire ranking. At the same time, with absurd reasons – there were violations in the creation of the competition commission, which was chosen by this same SJC.

This opinion was shared by five of the nine council members who attended the Judicial College meeting last week. The case was then unresolved. For now, however, there seems to be a strong majority in the college, determined to return the tournament to its original setting.

An interesting detail is that if the judges who won the competition are appointed, this will eliminate the judges on loan from the SAS. Because none of them managed to qualify for a starting place. And it is for that reason that the legitimate doubt arises that the purpose of the play is not the whole

to keep passengers in their seats,

and then qualify for a new tournament.

That competition, which is now causing a struggle, was announced more than 2 years ago – in the summer of 2022. It is for 18 places, half of them in Sofia, four – in Plovdiv, three – in Varna and two in Burgas. Furthermore, this tournament came after the one announced in 2018 was knocked down in court and started anew. The Union of Judges recalled that the SJC promised the European Commission that the new start of the competition with the aim of ending it quickly would be a step with which Bulgaria intends to respond to Brussels’ concerns about the slow growth of employment in the courts, which could lead to the pressure of corruption expressed in the report on the rule of law on 13 July 2022.

After the ranking in the College of Judges, complaints were received from five judges, who believe that the procedure was broken because the competition committee involved Assoc, Vencislav Petrov, who is a certified lecturer in civil law, and not in commercial law, as, according to them, the law required. Prof. Petrov is a certified lecturer in civil and family law at SU and Veliko Tarnovo University, where there are no “Commercial Law” departments.

The Chairman of the Supreme Administrative Court, Georgi Cholakov, announced that there is no way to go over the issue of bankruptcy when creating the composition of the commission, which should include four senior judges from the relevant college and to be an accredited scholar of legal sciences. the relevant case. According to Cholakov, Prof. Petrov is a professor of commercial law, so the competition should be returned to the level of creating a new commission. Cholakov will be a member of the council until November 22, when his term at the head of VAS ends. A procedure for the selection of the successor is to be opened and applications are now underway as are the scripts about Cholakov’s post after VAS, for which according to Hristo Ivanov, Delyan Peevski was concerned personally.

The president of the Supreme Court of Cassation, Galina Zakharova, opposed Cholakov’s competition for commercial judges, who reminded that the sciences of commercial law are part of the civil law.

“The panel of judges, in the presence of data confirmed by the dean of the two high schools, does not have the ability to rule on the professional competence of the relevant person. This is completely within the authority of SU and VTU, which have presented lists of relevant people in the regions, on which competitions will be held,” said Zakharova. She was supported by Tsvetinka Pashkunova, Atanaska Disheva and Olga Kerelska.

Olga Kerelska reminded that the 2018 promotional competitions were also announced in the commercial and civil sectors of the appeal courts. Professor Simeon Tasev was chosen as a regular member of the commission for the first competition, although he is a professor of civil law, and Associate Professor Aneta Antonova, professor of commercial law, named as a reserve member of the commission for the second. competition.

Boyan Novanski listed the works, articles and publications of Assoc Vencislav Petrov to prove that he

specialist not in commercial, but in civil law.

And he said that the debate harms all participants in the competition. According to him, to clear any doubts, nothing prevents the competition from being held again, but soon.

The Union of Judges also came out with a position that the actions of the SJC are appalling and the Judicial College of the SJC raises serious doubts

she only gets into trouble because she is not satisfied with the results of the competition.

The largest guild group also asked the council to apologize to Professor Petrov. Even the Supreme Court of Cassation issued a special opinion on the subjectapparently shocked by the callousness of the council majority. The chief judges remind, among other things, that if the competition goes back to the original position, that will extend the time of under-watch beyond all reason.

The Union of Judges also recalls the case against Iceland, in which the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg decided that the normal procedures for the selection of judges for promotion would be enhanced, including the order in which the promotion assessment should be carried out, it cannot be allowed unless it is strongly and reasonably motivated and after an assessment of the candidates’ characteristics based on new evidence, otherwise. The current case study is just that.

If we assume that Cholakov’s exhaling arguments are true and that there should be separate lists of civil and commercial law professors, then

this would also affect two other competitions

– for the civil department of the SAS and for the civil college of the High Court. Because of them, the professors in the competition committee are chosen from the same list, since Prof. Petrov too.

And speaking of these two competitions, the one for the civil sector of the SAS is also very unusual. With him, the commission wrote more than 60 sixes. That is, let the ranking happen by rank. And so almost every judge posted to the commercial division of the SAS managed to qualify for this court. To remember – they did not pass the test for the commercial sector. However, although competitions are announced by the department, the appointments are made in the relevant court, not in the specific department. This means that there is every chance (more precisely, risks) that those who are not registered for the trade department will enter as beginners through the back door.

If this happens, we will see a vicious cycle of competing startups and “scratching” of the system. Is anyone surprised? Almost. It’s just that the right judges will be in the right places.