FACTS posts opinions with a wide range of viewpoints to encourage constructive debate.
A strange letter has spread to the media from the Sofia District Administration, which is in connection with the ongoing dismantling of the Monument to the Soviet Army. The letter was signed by Lumobil Ivanov, who wrote it in his capacity as Head of the “Legal Service” Department, “Administrative-Legal Service, Finance and Property Management” Directorate.
The weirdness starts here. When Lyubomil Ivanov appears at the meeting of the Specialized Expert Council of Fine Arts (SESII) at the Ministry of Culture, he introduces himself as PR of the regional governor, and not as Head of Department… Why? Or combines both positions… This is just a slight deviation from the topic.
What do we read in this letter from Lubomil Ivanov to the regional governor Vyara Todeva.
In it, Ivanov admits that an inspector from the General Directorate “Inspector for the Protection of Cultural Heritage” carried out an on-site inspection and issued decrees for a Coercive Administrative Measure (PAM) to “stop any dismantling activities”. When a PAM is issued, a fine goes with it, because the law was not followed. The fine is set at 15,000 to 30,000 BGN. We have PAM, but no fine? Why? One goes with the other. Why did the Ministry of Culture, after issuing the PAM, not impose a fine on the Regional Governor. The question is open…
Also, the findings of the inspector from the General Directorate “Inspector for the Protection of Cultural Heritage” are related to the fact that the opinion of the Specialized Expert Council of Fine Arts (SESII) was not sought before the dismantling began.
The scheduled meeting of the SESSION was held on December 15. We already wrote about him. The meeting began at 10:00 a.m., and as an extraordinary fifth item on the agenda, the request for an opinion on the dismantling of the monument was included.
It also turned out that the Regional Administration submitted documents in connection with the dismantling also on December 15 – 3 days after the dismantling began or to say you just started pushing and then submitting documents, at 10.06 hours.
The session of the SESSION starts at 10:00, and the documents are brought in at 10:06, but an opinion is requested immediately.
SESSIONS ruled that it could not take action because:
– the dismantling has already started
– they have not familiarized themselves with the documents that have been imported
Now in Ivanov’s letter to Todeva we read (in the last paragraph):
In view of the above, I propose to send an official letter to the Minister of Culture and to DG “Inspector for Cultural Heritage Protection”, informing them that all activities under the Constitutive Protocol with our entry No. OA23-22239 of 13.12.2023 of the DG “Inspector for the Protection of Cultural Heritage” and Order with our entry No. OA23-22375/14.12.2023 FULFILLED, and on the basis of Art. 91, para. 1 of the APC to demand the withdrawal/cancellation of the issued administrative act by the administrative body that issued it.
We ask:
Which is fulfilled?
Are the dismantling activities stopped?
Is there a solution at SESSIONS?
And another interesting thing – Art. 91, para. 1 of the APC states:
Revision of the act
Art. 91. (1) Within a period of 7 days, and when the body is collective – within a period of 14 days, from receiving the complaint or protest, the administrative body may review the issue and withdraw the contested act itself, cancel or amend it, or issue the relevant act, if he refused to issue it, notifying the interested parties thereof.
(2) The new act is subject to challenge in accordance with the procedure of this Code. In these cases, re-examination of the act is not allowed.
Our consultation with several lawyers showed that the PAM is not challenged administratively, but only in court, because only the court can stop the preliminary execution of the PAM by law.
What we read in Article 192 of the Law on Cultural Heritage:
Chapter Eleven
CONTROL
Art. 192. (1) (Amended – SG No. 54 of 2011) When exercising control activities by the inspectorate under Art. 15, para. 2 the inspectors:
1. carry out checks on the spot or on documents;
2. (amended – SG No. 54 of 2011) apply coercive administrative measures to prevent and stop violations under this law, as well as to remove their harmful consequences, such as:
a) (new – SG No. 16 of 2016, in force from 26.02.2016) give written instructions to prevent or stop the violations under this law, as well as to remove their harmful consequences within a certain period;
b) (previous b. “a” – SG No. 16 of 2016, in force from 26.02.2016) stop the construction, putting into operation and use of objects, installations, devices and facilities;
c) (previous b. “b” – SG No. 16 of 2016, in force from 26.02.2016) stop other activities that create danger or damage immovable and movable cultural and historical heritage;
3. draw up acts to establish administrative violations.
(2) (New – SG No. 54 of 2011, supplemented – SG No. 77 of 2018, in force from 01.01.2019) The application of the coercive administrative measures under para. 1, item 2 is carried out by order of the inspectors. Coercive administrative measures are appealed to the relevant administrative court in accordance with the Code of Administrative Procedure.
(3) (New – SG No. 54 of 2011) The coercive administrative measures under para. 2 are subject to preliminary execution, unless the court orders otherwise.
(4) (Previous paragraph 2 – SG No. 54 of 2011) Inspectors have the right to access the objects of cultural heritage subject to control, as well as to request the necessary documents in connection with the exercise of their powers under this law.
(5) (Previous paragraph 3 – SG No. 54 of 2011) Inspectors are obliged to:
1. accurately reflect the facts during the inspection in the offense report;
2. protect the official and commercial secret that became known to them in connection with the inspections being carried out;
3. do not disclose data from the performed inspections;
4. use the information from the inspections only for the purposes of administrative criminal proceedings.
And so the question arises: Will the Ministry of Culture turn into a court to cancel its issued PAM…
Place a rating:
☆
☆
☆
☆
☆
2.8
Rating 2.8 out of 5 votes.
2023-12-19 09:59:00
#Ministry #Culture #court
