/ world at the moment information/ On the finish of 2019, the long-prepared Legislation on Social Companies had each probability to get up the slumbering Bulgarian public. All over the place within the media and even on the streets, disturbing questions have been floating: who does this regulation serve, does it violate the constitutional and internationally acknowledged rights of residents, does it violate the authorized sovereignty of the Republic of Bulgaria and does it correspond to the Bulgarian household traditions recognized to us from the time of Sophronius Vrachanski, Discovered Gerov, Stefan Bogoridi, Baba Tonka, Baba Kuna, from the novels of Ivan Vazov and Dimitar Talev. It’s no accident that we witnessed probably the most huge social protests in opposition to the newly adopted authorized system in our nation.
Postponed as soon as for six months, postponed after 01.01.2020. as a circus present from metropolis to metropolis for “promotion” and “clarification”, dealing with the hazard of a second postponement, strongly contested by residents and guardian organizations, beneath the sturdy criticism of the BOC, however fanatically defended by the so-called youngsters’s NGOs, ZSU it even reached the Constitutional Court docket in an nearly parodic legislative procession. On 05.03 this 12 months, 54 Bulgarian MPs contested its constitutionality earlier than the Constitutional Court docket of the Republic of Bulgaria with a doc of 38 pages of arguments.
To date so good! The very best judicial authority in Bulgaria will arbitrate between the disputing events so far as the ZSU corresponds to the spirit and the letter of the Structure. The dearth of belief within the Bulgarian establishments and statehood and the sensation of an acute deficit of justice make many individuals have a look at the Constitutional Court docket and its actions. Expectations for a good trial are excessive, however are they justified? Hopes for the rule of regulation, which is the aim of our Structure, are at the moment directed on the final barrier to social disenchantment.
However are the hopes justified? Do we now have trigger for concern? Many are asking themselves these questions at the moment. And what can we see! Already on the first assembly of the Constitutional Court docket beneath Prison Code No. 3 of 2020, we see unusual issues that might taint any case, much more constitutionally.
1.
INEQUALITY OF INVITES
FOR NGO PARTICIPATION
Based on the order of Artwork. 20 PODCS, a complete of 16 non-governmental organizations are invited to take part with their opinions. All of them, with out exception, are inquisitive about rejecting the request of the petitioners. Amongst them there may be not a single NGO that advocates the alternative opinion.
“Why are the organizations, members of the general public and oldsters who led this initiative years in the past, ignited the spark, launched the primary supplies on the subject, made the primary public occasions and media appearances with their very own energy and funds, organized and took part within the first protests in opposition to the introduction of the ideology of this regulation in our nation. Why weren’t particularly invited ROD – “Dad and mom United for Kids”, “Union for Household and Kids”, BRCC – “Bulgarian Dad and mom’ Central Committee”, and all different organizations which have been preventing on the aspect of kids and the household for therefore lengthy?
“Supposedly, each side are referred to as to courtroom, aren’t they? Who is that this Court docket that may decide solely by the phrases of 1 with out listening to the opposite? “Is that this how it’s executed now, gents and girls of constitutionalists?” asks the mediator Alexander Zhelev, an activist in opposition to the imposition of the scandalous regulation in our nation, to the Constitutional Court docket.
Why, we additionally ask?
The precept of a good trial has been violated!
2.
CONFLICT OF INTEREST #1
THE INVITED NGOs ARE PRIVATE PROVIDERS OF SOCIAL SERVICES
Nearly all the invited NGOs are non-public suppliers of social companies, within the sense of Artwork. 30, Para. 1 ZSU. NGOs resembling “ANIMUS ASSOCIATION” Basis, “Nationwide Community for Kids”, “Institute for Social Actions and Practices” and others have a direct monetary curiosity within the adoption of ZSU. ZSU empowers these NGOs with severe powers and ensures them monetary earnings from the state price range, municipal budgets and from international sources (artwork. 41, artwork. 49, artwork. 57, para. 1, artwork. 62, para. 2, Artwork. 48, para. 2 and para. 3, and so forth.). This monetary curiosity is inadmissible when collaborating within the process earlier than the SC.
“It’s inadmissible for personal suppliers of social companies, in accordance with Article 30, gadgets 1 and a couple of of the Civil Code, to take part in a constitutional case, with the topic of exercise being the constitutionality of a regulation that grants powers and funding to the identical suppliers of social companies. These NGOs are most immediately materially inquisitive about resolving the case of their favor.
Furthermore, a few of them are associates of worldwide NGOs with the identical identify, which raises the query of the authorized sovereignty of the Republic of Bulgaria.
The battle of curiosity of those NGOs, whose public representativeness is in severe doubt resulting from their claimed giant quantity, isn’t solely apparent, however noticed. The NGOs in query have been obliged to state this circumstance earlier than the SC already within the software process and for it to be verified by the SC. Each authorized continuing begins with such an inspection.” – commented on the violations of authorized norms, lawyer Vladimir Sheitanov, the chairman of the administration board of “Dad and mom United for Kids” – probably the most authoritative guardian organizations within the nation.
Why is that this allowed?
The precept of a good trial has been violated!
3.
CONFLICT OF INTEREST #2
THE INVITED TO PARTICIPATE IN THE JUDICIAL PROCESS ARE PARTICIPANTS IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE LAW
“The battle of curiosity of the above-mentioned NGOs turns into much more apparent, in view of the truth that a big variety of these NGOs participated within the drafting of the “Social Companies Legislation”: the Animus Affiliation Basis, members of the “Nationwide Kids’s Community” and others. ” – provides lawyer Sheitanov
Why?
The precept of a good trial has been violated!
The entire above are vital violations of the precept of a good trial. If all these circumstances are admitted within the decree no. 3/2020, they may discredit a constitutional case that has an especially giant public response. For an entire 12 months, the guardian neighborhood protested in opposition to the adoption of the ZSU. Right now, this protest vitality has reached the Constitutional Court docket. In a constitutional case, there isn’t any proper to such compromises with the appropriate to a good trial, particularly after the entry into power of the disputed regulation on 01.07.2020.
See additionally the complete video of this system on “Bulgaria 24” TV, during which lawyer Vladimir Sheitanov and mediator Alexander Zhelev clarify with concrete information and arguments what a ticking time bomb is hidden within the Legislation on Social Companies in opposition to the household and household relations, in opposition to the weak teams of the inhabitants.
“And why did it really occur that this scandalous parasitic regulation reached the Constitutional Court docket, similar to its predecessor – the Istanbul Conference? By the way, each paperwork have been written, funded and lobbied for by the identical “” and “involved” people and organizations about us and our kids. Draw your personal conclusions. “- remark by Alexander Zhelev, 04/30/2020
You’ll be able to watch the present right here:
Right now, we’re witnessing a shameful legislative precedent – a extremely contested regulation in society has entered into power in Bulgaria beneath the dictates of the authorities, most certainly because of the fee of giant sums of cash by exterior donors. What’s the social nature of this regulation, because it “enjoys” such sturdy social negativity. Since when did coercion on society grow to be an instrument of social coverage?
Bulgarians are pressured to implement a regulation imposed from exterior and denied by nearly all of them.
Authorized arguments have misplaced all power. The parliamentary vote has legitimized one more dictate of political energy. The rule of regulation has began on the highway to its authorized non-existence.
It stays to be seen the Resolution of the Constitutional Court docket on Constitutional Legislation No. 3/2020. and make our ultimate conclusion on 14.07.2020.
Affiliation ROD
#precept #honest #trial #violated #constitutional #case #ZSU #focus #justice
