/ world today news/ The ECtHR defines the case of Yoncheva’s appeal as a case with a potential possibility of impact, which will be considered as soon as possible
Were the criminal proceedings against MEP Elena Yoncheva used as a means of repression against her because of her investigations against corruption in the administration? This is more essentially the question that the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) in Strasbourg is asking the Bulgarian authorities in the context of Yoncheva’s complaint about the violation of her rights as a result of abuse of the powers of the prosecutor’s office. The Bulgarian authorities have three months to respond.
At the end of last week, the ECHR communicated to the authorities in our country Yoncheva’s complaint regarding the investigation against her for money laundering, which began in the fall of 2018. which is still at the pre-trial stage. The court in Strasbourg asks three questions to which it expects an answer from Bulgaria:
- Has the presumption of innocence been violated against her, in particular through the press release of the special prosecutor’s office of January 23, 2019 about the investigation opened against her, in which Yoncheva’s guilt for laundering money obtained through financing from KTB is not questioned?
- Did she have an effective remedy available to her to challenge this violation?
- Were the pre-trial proceedings against her used for purposes other than the criminal proceedings?
The last question is the most interesting because it refers to the June 2020 leaked audio recording of a telephone conversation in which a voice similar to that of then-Prime Minister Boyko Borisov can be heard. The topic is the initiation of criminal proceedings against several public figures, and special attention is paid to Elena Yoncheva. One can also hear lines like: “I will burn everything so that Elena Yoncheva will also burn.” In Yoncheva’s complaint to Strasbourg, the conclusions of an independent technical expert are attached, that the voice on the recording is indeed that of Prime Minister Borisov.
The Bulgarian government has until January 18 to respond to the ECHR’s questions.
A case with great potential
This is a complaint that concerns an extremely serious issue, and the court itself notes that this case has the potential to have a significant impact, commented lawyer Mihail Ekimdzhiev, who represents Yoncheva in this case in Strasbourg, together with Adv. Katina Boncheva. For this reason, the case will be considered in shortened terms.
It is about a journalist who has been discredited through fabricated criminal proceedings to discredit his political position and the results of his journalistic investigations revealing sinister corrupt practices. The complaint complains precisely about the fact that the criminal proceedings against Yoncheva were initiated with a paralegal purpose – discrediting a journalist and politician. Yoncheva is the perfect target, commented Ekimdzhiev, she is simultaneously an opposition politician and a journalist, at the same time – a blade of the party in the parliament and investigating corruption schemes of the rulers. Therefore, along with the complaints about violated freedom of expression and right to private life, the complaint also complains about violation of Art. 18 of the European Convention on Human Rights, namely, that in the case of Yoncheva, the state imposed restrictions on fundamental rights, and the actual purpose of these restrictions is different from the one provided by law. This is also proven by the absurd accusation, according to lawyer Ekimdzhiev. According to the prosecution, in 2012, when she received funding from KTB through her company “Offroad” OOD, Yoncheva should have known about the state of KTB and the crimes committed in it. At that time, KTB was the government’s favorite bank, and Tsvetan Vassilev was awarded as the best banker.
Accusation in context
The charge against Yoncheva was brought after a series of investigations into corruption in the construction of the border fence, the poor quality road construction in Bulgaria, which GERB mainly boasts about, as well as the “Kumgate” affair, in which data on the benefiting of public funds came out of persons related to former MP Delyan Dobrev, who as a result of this scandal was forced to resign. In January 2019, Yoncheva called another press conference, where she presented an audio recording, from which the Minister of Culture Boil Banov can be heard giving instructions to his subordinates to falsify documents so that the Ministry of Culture could not receive a BGN 700,000 penalty for the delay repair of the Largo. Meanwhile, in 2017, Yoncheva filed a lawsuit for damages against Boyko Borisov, then prime minister, in the Sofia District Court over his claim that she received state funding of several million leva for interviews abroad. In January she finally condemned Borisov to pay her compensation of BGN 5,000 for defamation.
Against this background, on November 8, 2018, the then chief prosecutor Sotir Tsatsarov asked the parliament for Yoncheva’s immunity, so that pre-trial proceedings could be initiated against her following a report by three activists from GERB, including Delyan Dobrev. On January 11, 2019, the Specialized Prosecutor’s Office charged Yoncheva with money laundering, and on January 23, 2019, the Prosecutor’s Office published an unusually long and detailed press release, which was almost entirely quoted in the report to the Bulgarian authorities by the Court in Strasbourg. In this press release, it is categorically stated that Yoncheva’s guilt has been proven with expressions such as: “The collected evidence substantiated the conclusion that Elena Yoncheva knew about the criminal origin of the funds and that they were subject to embezzlement.”
“In the Yoncheva case, there is a unique combination of a general political and legal context with specific facts proving the paralegal purpose of the accusation against her, says Ekimdzhiev. From this perspective, her active political and journalistic position and her revelations about corrupt practices among In second place is the lack of control of the prosecutor’s office in Bulgaria and the “institutional culture” of abuse of procedural powers.
In Bulgaria, pre-trial proceedings are often used not to solve crimes, but as a means of threat, control and blackmail, says Ekimdzhiev. Many such cases are publicly known, and this is possible because the prosecutor’s office in Bulgaria, and more specifically the chief prosecutor, have unlimited and uncontrolled power, allowing them, whenever they want, to accuse anyone of whatever they want, he commented.
The prosecutor’s decrees, with which accusations are raised for crimes of a general nature, are not subject to judicial control, and the duration of the pre-trial proceedings is not limited by imperative terms. Even if the accused is subsequently acquitted or the case is dismissed, the prosecutor who filed the charge and filed the indictment is not personally responsible for it. At the same time, the Prosecutor General bears no responsibility for maliciously initiated criminal prosecution and request for immunity of a deputy.
#court #Strasbourg #asks #investigation #Elena #Yoncheva #targeted #repression
