The European Prosecutor's Office has launched an investigation against Bulgarian European Prosecutor Teodora Georgieva. This scandal is once again damaging the prestige of Bulgaria, but will there be consequences? One fact is - so far she has not denied it. What should we expect… Bilyana Gyaurova-Wegertseder from the Bulgarian Institute for Legal Initiatives (BILI) spoke to FACTI on the topic.
- Ms. Gyaurova, did we understand from Pepi Euro's clips how the prosecutorial hierarchy grows?
- Over the years, various brokers or even pimps have appeared in the judicial system – Krasi Cherniya, Martin Bozanov-Notary, Petyo Petrov-Euro. Their very existence and the way in which they have promoted magistrates is very indicative of the gradual corruption of personnel processes in the judiciary. Much more worrying is the fact that the judiciary itself allows it and apparently has no problem with it. And as long as there is no reaction from within, these processes will continue to deepen and give wings to such dubious types.
- What do these two clips, which allegedly record European Prosecutor Teodora Georgieva, show us?
- The answer can be in two directions - if the clips are authentic, which has not yet been proven, they are evidence of the deep judiciary, where decisions are made not in and by the Supreme Judicial Council or other institutions officially responsible for the relevant processes, but by completely different factors and in completely different places. And this, by the way, was said for the first time many years ago by Konstantin Penchev, who announced that important decisions are made “on white tablecloths“. On the other hand - if the clips are artificially assembled, this will be another proof, but this time of how far the deep judiciary and the deep state are ready to go when their interests are affected and when illuminating processes can be launched against them. In both cases, we need to seriously think about as a society what values we are building our development on and where our tolerance threshold for such situations is.
- European Chief Prosecutor Laura Kövesi released Prosecutor Georgieva while the investigation against her is ongoing. What do you expect to happen?
- According to the facts, an administrative investigation has been initiated against Prosecutor Georgieva for possible illegal actions in connection with a certain investigation and then she was removed, having previously been removed from the investigation related to the “Chiren” gas storage facility. Removal is the right and logical step in this process. The European Public Prosecutor’s Office is a young institution, burdened with extremely serious responsibilities and expectations, and as such it must defend its authority and prove to the public and other EU institutions that it can work independently, objectively and effectively. So this removal is not a punishment, but an action that would guarantee further work on the investigation of the case and the subsequent participation of Teodora Georgieva as a witness /such public information has already appeared, but has not been confirmed/. And, by the way, it would not be bad to see more similar actions from the Bulgarian prosecutor’s office. Now the European Public Prosecutor's Office will be able to continue the investigation with a bit more peace of mind and I hope that the Bulgarian institutions will cooperate so that it can be completed more quickly and its results can be made public.
- Prosecutor Georgieva mentioned Delyan Peevski's name, saying that she was threatened. Why now?
- Most likely, this is related to the already mentioned investigation, which is obviously at some key stage. One cannot help but notice the intensification of events over the last two months. First, there was the fire in her mother's house, where she herself was found, and it has not yet been proven whether she really died in the fire or under other circumstances. Then, one after another, the clips started to appear and they led to the reaction of the European Public Prosecutor's Office. To me, this seems like something that has been prepared for at least several months, but, I will say again, it is obviously related to the work of the European Public Prosecutor's Office on a specific investigation. I think that the question should also be asked here: has there been a leak of information related to this investigation and if so, where did it come from? I do not think that Prosecutor Georgieva accidentally threw into the public domain the information about the obstruction of the investigation into “Chiren“ by local institutions.
- What does it mean for a prosecutor to withdraw from a case because he is threatened. How do you accept this act of hers?
- We do not know in what way exactly she is threatened. We do not know, for example, whether the fire is part of the threat. Usually, in the case of threats, the prosecutor can be taken away if there is a danger to his personal safety. In such cases, this is a correct reaction and this prosecutor must be provided with protection. However, here, law enforcement agencies must be involved to investigate the causes of the threats and determine the relevant security measures. So far, there has been no public reaction in this direction from either the Bulgarian prosecutor's office or the Ministry of Interior. And this is worrying. If these threats are only the result of Ms. Georgieva's subjective assessment, then this must be refuted in the appropriate manner and then her recusal would not be so correct, but would be interpreted as obstruction of justice. But, I repeat, the response and reaction of the Bulgarian institutions - the prosecutor's office and the Ministry of Interior - is necessary and important. So far, there hasn't been one.
- When it comes to a case involving high-level people, it gets scary. Literally. And when cases are being heard about small things, there's no problem. They are decided with all the rigor of the law. Is that how it turns out?
- We have a saying: “The law is for the horse, not the lion!“
That is, the powerful of the day can remain outside or above the law. Bulgaria remains the country in which no politician from the high echelons of power has been effectively convicted.
The highest level that has been reached in our country is a district mayor. At the same time, during these 35 years of transition, it is not as if investigations have not been conducted against such people. Obviously, somewhere along the chain, things are changing, and this is most likely related to the deep judiciary, which does not allow random people or those who are not “vetted” to occupy key leadership positions in it. Even now, procedures are underway in the National Assembly to fill many of the bodies that have been operating with expired mandates for years. The only two bodies for which the procedural rules for election have not even been adopted are the Supreme Judicial Council and the Inspectorate to the SJC - also with expired mandates. And this is no coincidence. First, these bodies require a qualified majority of 160 votes, and second, this implies serious political negotiations in order to elect people who will guarantee that things in the judiciary will continue as before.
- And again, Bulgaria became famous for the fact that the first European prosecutor to be vetted is from our country. How big is this stain?
- I don't think the size of the stain matters. The very fact that the European Public Prosecutor's Office has taken such measures puts our country in an unenviable position. The European Union is largely built on trust, and our country keeps giving signals that it cannot be trusted. That is why it is really of utmost importance how the investigation into “Chiren“ will develop, what the subsequent actions of the Bulgarian and European Public Prosecutor's Offices will be and when they will be announced. It could go even further - the case of the Bulgarian European Prosecutor should perhaps also provoke a conversation about how adequate the regulation of the European Public Prosecutor's Office itself is. Because the European Prosecutors continue to be prosecutors under the legislation of the Member State from which they come. And in countries like Bulgaria, where the prosecution service continues to be unchanged in terms of concentration of power and hierarchical dependence, such “dual subordination“ can lead to deviations and damage to the authority of this very important European institution.
- How many people from the legal world have sat on the bench against Pepi Euroto. Is there fear among our magistrates?
- Maybe there is fear, but what is more frightening is that there is great apathy and demotivation.
Unfortunately, over the years, magistrates have turned into highly paid officials and have begun to think like such.
And this is a very bad trend, because then a person ceases to be interested in independence, impartiality, ethics, morality and ensuring justice and protection of rights. In this situation, at the top of your professional value pyramid is material satisfaction and security, guaranteed by the privileges and power that the judicial system provides. And these are serious reasons for making compromises. And once you start with them, it is very difficult to stop and get out of this vicious circle.
- How do you get out of this situation of addiction?
- It will sound like a cliché, but it takes time. The past 35 years are a very short period, absolutely insufficient for the accumulation of democratic practice that would change thinking and attitudes. Other factors must be added to this - active media and civil society, more critical thinking and intolerance towards processes, the building of a political class that will not be self-centered, but will work to ensure that Bulgaria is not on the political periphery of the EU, but is seen as a reliable partner.
- How strong is the “family“ in the judicial system?
- As much as it is allowed. And right now, apparently, it is allowed an awful lot, to the point that this has even been echoed in the European Public Prosecutor's Office. Hopefully the rumble will be loud enough to start ruining “family relations“.