First we must say that instead of dispelling the doubts in the electoral process organized when the new amendment to the Constitution came into effect, this government has once again shown that a cabinet constituted in this way cannot ensure honest elections. And it cannot ensure the fight against the bought, manipulated, corporate vote. Now to this vote was added a new vote - given out of fear. And fear, mind you, of the state institutions themselves, which have somehow become subordinate to one person who, having issued a certain order, they act. And they act in a specific way. That's one thing. Secondly, these concerns, which were expressed today by the president, are the concerns of the Bulgarian citizens, the impressions of the Bulgarian citizens. Once again, it happens that this impression and discontent, which is growing in the Bulgarian society, rarely finds a way to come out and be publicly disclosed. Once again, it was through the President's statement. But the questions posed in this statement must find their answers. And to find their most correct possible answers in order to get to the genesis of these events, which led to this result. And until the next election, which will leave a parliament with too many doubts about the way in which one or another candidate became a representative of the people. And this already directly affects both the legitimacy of the legislative power, and subsequently of the executive, which will be elected by the National Assembly in such a situation.
This is what lawyer Ivan Demerdzhiev, former acting minister of the interior, said in the FACTS studio to Lili Marinkova in his analysis of the past elections, the fight against vote-buying and the work of the interior ministry. Here are more of his words:
I think it's quite startling the things we've seen - like the footage of a woman we've seen operating a pen in a shot. She claims that she does not make corrections to the ballots. All of us who watch the footage see something else. And we perceive something else. Thus, the second problem with video surveillance - in many places it did not work, in other places the devices looked at the wall, and not where the events should happen. Obviously, the process of video surveillance and video recording needs to be significantly optimized. everything else needs to be optimized and thought about the way the voting machines are used. Here I will open a parenthesis - even as the Minister of Internal Affairs, I had meetings with representatives of the British Embassy. They asked very sharply why we use the machines only as printers, since they have much more possibilities. And doesn't it happen that these votes that come out of the printers, so to speak, are counted by these same people, that we saw in footage are reflected in protocols by those same people we saw in footage. Many corrections are often made to these protocols - we have witnessed this. And finally, all the results are summarized and counted with one program that manages "Information Service". Which has never been audited to this day, although we have repeatedly raised this question.
All this is the government's commitment. When organizing elections, to this commitment is added the commitment of the Ministry of Internal Affairs to counter election crimes.
More from the comment of lawyer Ivan Demerdzhiev - in the Video