Thematic Legal Study on National Human Rights Institutions and Human Rights Organisations

Thematic legal Study on National Human rights Institutions and Human Rights Organisations [country]

FRA

Thematic Legal Study on National Human Rights Institutions and Human

Rights Organisations [Bulgaria]

[Sofia][Bulgaria]August 2008

A.

Thematic legal study on National Human Rights Institutions and Human Rights Organisations [country]

Contents

Executive summary.........................................................................................................4

A. Overview................................................................................................................8A.1. Subsection level 1...........................................................................8

A.1.1. Subsection level 2..................................................................8A.1.1.1. Subsection level 3........................................................9

A.2. Subsection level 1...........................................................................9

B. Independence and Pluralism.............................................................................10B.1. Subsection level 1.........................................................................10

C. Mandate and human rights areas covered.......................................................11C.1. Subsection level 1.........................................................................11

D. Monitoring human rights violations.................................................................12D.1. Subsection level 1.........................................................................12

E. Reporting.............................................................................................................13E.1. Subsection level 1.........................................................................13

F. Advisory function...............................................................................................14F.1. Subsection level 1.........................................................................14

G. Research..............................................................................................................15G.1. Subsection level 1.........................................................................15

H. Cooperation with Civil Society..........................................................................16H.1. Subsection level 1.........................................................................16

I. Promotion of International Treaties.................................................................17I.1. Subsection level 1.........................................................................17

J. Human Rights Education and Awareness........................................................18J.1. Subsection level 1.........................................................................18

K. Individual Complaints Procedures...................................................................19K.1. Subsection level 1.........................................................................19

L. Miscellaneous......................................................................................................20L.1. Subsection level 1.........................................................................20

M. Good practices....................................................................................................21M.1. Subsection level 1.........................................................................21

N. Independent Public Bodies................................................................................22N.1. Subsection level 1.........................................................................22

O. Human Rights NGOs.........................................................................................23

2


O.1. Subsection level 1.........................................................................23

A. Annexes................................................................................................................24

3


A. Executive summary

Overview[1]. The public debate about establishment of a National Human Rights Institution

in Bulgaria started in 1991 when the first democratic Constitution had been drafted. The introduction of different types and levels of control over the executive power by the Constitution left an impression that rights of the citizens in their relations with administration were sufficiently and effectively protected. Lack of tradition and expertise about the practice of human rights institution led to lack of its regulation in Bulgarian legislation. In 1998 a Bulgarian NGO – Център за изследване на демокрацията (ЦИД) [Center for the Study of Democracy (CSD)]1 initiated the first public discussion about the need of national and local human rights institutions. A working group established at CSD drafted the Закон за обществения защитник [Law for the Public Advocate] during the period 1998-2000. National ombudsman-type institution was considered to act as a complementary mechanism for monitoring and control over the public administration and as out-of-court means of respecting and restoring the rights of citizens violated by the State. The draft was introduced in the Parliament but was not reviewed by it. In 2002 there were three drafts for Закон за омбудсмана [Ombudsman Act] already that were discussed for the first time on 5 June 2002 by the Parliament. The final draft was adopted on 8 Мay 2003 and entered into force on 1 January 2004. The Ombudsman Act was perceived as necessary mechanism for protection of the rights of the citizens operating together with other control, judicial and legal mechanisms and can be either their alternative or can support, intervene, initiate their activities.

[2]. The election of the ombudsman was much delayed because all political parties had their nominee and none of them was supported by half of the votes in the Parliament. The ombudsman had to be elected till March 2004, the first elections took place on 14 May 2004 and the members of the parliament voted for 7 nominees. None of them was supported by half of the MPs who voted. On 8 October 2004 the second elections took place. None of the two candidates was elected. On 13 April 2005 the first Bulgarian ombudsman was elected with 141 votes out of 194 MPs voting and he was the only nominee at that time. The broad support was ensured after backstage political bargaining that included agreements on nominations for other key vacant positions in important institutions such as Protection against Discrimination Commission, National

1 http://www.csd.bg.

4


Audit Office and National Statistical Institute.2 The subcommittee for accreditation did not accredit Bulgarian ombudsman.

Independence and pluralism[3]. According to Art. 3 of the Ombudsman Act he/she shall be independent and

shall obey to the Constitution, the laws, the ratified international treaties to which Republic of Bulgaria is a party. The ombudsman elaborates the rules of the organisation of his/her administration him/herself 3 and is funded by the State budget and administrates the budget as a first-rate administrator.4 The documentation of the ombudsman cannot be subject to check or confiscation.5

The ombudsman enjoys the same immunity as a member of the Parliament.6

The office of the ombudsman and deputy-ombudsman is incompatible with any other state office, managerial position in commercial company or non-profit legal entity as well as with membership in political party or trade union. The ombudsman and the deputy ombudsman are not allowed to perform commercial activities.7 Such legal provisions were meant to ensure the independence of the ombudsman. However, the procedure for election of the ombudsman is disputable in terms of his/her independence as the nominations for ombudsman are to be submitted by parliamentary groups and members of the Parliament 8

and the Parliament elects the ombudsman with half of the votes of the members who voted. Thus election of the ombudsman is dependent on a small number of MPs and consequently on the will of the parliamentary majority. Termination of office before its expiry in case of ‘failure to carry out his/her duties and violation of the Constitution and the laws of the country or the commonly accepted ethical rules’ 9 is also a rather broad definition allowing a fairly small parliamentary majority remove a problematic ombudsman on the grounds of subjective motives derived from its political inclinations.

2 Center for the Study of Democracy, Ombudsman Institution in Bulgaria, Sofia, 2005, p. 24, available in Bulgarian at http://www.anticorruption.bg/ombudsman/eng/readnews.php?id=6315&lang=en&t_style=tex&l_style=default.

3 Bulgaria/Закон за омбудсмана [Ombudsman Act] (1.01.2004), Аrt. 3, para. 2.4 Bulgaria/Закон за омбудсмана [Ombudsman Act] (1.01.2004), Art. 7.5 Bulgaria/Правилник за организацията и дейността на омбудсмана [Regulation for

the Organisation and Activities of the Ombudsman] (31.05.2005), Art 7.6 Bulgaria/Закон за омбудсмана [Ombudsman Act] (1.01.2004), Art. 16, para. 1.7 Bulgaria/Закон за омбудсмана [Ombudsman Act] (1.01.2004), Art. 14.8 Bulgaria/Закон за омбудсмана [Ombudsman Act] (1.01.2004), Art. 10.9 Bulgaria/Закон за омбудсмана [Ombudsman Act] (1.01.2004), Art. 15, para. 1, item

4.

5


Mandate and human rights areas covered[4]. Pursuant Art. 19 of the Ombudsman Act and Art. 9 of the Правилник за

организацията и дейността на омбудсмана [Regulation for the Organisation and Activities of the Ombudsman], the ombudsman shall: receive and consider complaints and signals regarding violations of rights and freedoms by the State and municipal authorities as well as by persons assigned with the provision of public services; perform investigation upon the complaints and signals received; make proposals and recommendations for reinstatement of the violated rights and freedoms before the respective authorities and providers of public services; mediate between the administrative authorities and the persons concerned for overcoming the violations admitted and shall reconcile their positions; make proposals and recommendations for eliminating the reasons and conditions, which create prerequisites for violation of rights and freedoms. The ombudsman may act on his/her own initiative as well when he/she has established that the necessary conditions for protecting citizens' rights and freedoms have not been created. The ombudsman may also propose to one fifth of the MPs, the president, the Council of Ministers, the Върховен касационен съд [Supreme Cassation Court], the Върховен административен съд [Supreme Administrative Court] or the chief prosecutor to approach the Constitutional Court if he decides that interpretation of the Constitution is necessary or announcement of the unconstitutionality of a law and to inform the Prosecutor’s Office about the results of his checks when there is information about committed crime.

[5]. An overview of the activities of the ombudsman show that his agenda is not set in advance but it mainly depends on the individual complaints’ topic, the current political agenda and the concerns and actions of NGOs or informal civil groups about certain issues. The majority of the individual complaints the ombudsman received in 2005, 2006 and 2007 concern right to real estate/property, right to public services and right to social services/welfare.

Monitoring human rights violations[6]. The ombudsman legislation does not provide explicitly for any monitoring

activities. Some activities related to investigation/check of violations of human rights are regulated in Art.19, para.1, item 2 of the Ombudsman Act – ‘the ombudsman can make checks in relation with the complaints and signals received’. He may also act on his own initiative when he has established that the necessary conditions for protection of the citizens’ rights and freedoms had not been created.10 In his activities so far the ombudsman performed monitoring of five (out of 13) prisons in 2007 (the rest are scheduled for monitoring during the

10 Bulgaria/Закон за омбудсмана [Ombudsman Act] (1.01.2004), Art. 19, para. 2.

6


first half of 2008) 11 and issued and published a 16-pages report identifying some of the main human rights violations that had been actively discussed in details for the last 10 years by several NGOs. 12 According to the ombudsman the methodology for this monitoring was based on the CPT standards, ECHR standards and the Convention for the Prevention of Torture, Inhuman and Degrading Treatment standards and Association for the Prevention of Torture (APT) standards but the methodology is not published in his reports. In 2007 the ombudsman also monitored children care institutions for children deprived of parental care in nine municipalities and the methodology for this monitoring is not published in his reports either.13

[7]. In his 2006 annual reports the ombudsman declares he and his administration monitor the public debate and the response from authorities on the issues of protected areas under European ecological network “Natura 2000”14, the implementation of the territory arrangement plan for Sofia (which threatens to reduce radically the green areas in Sofia)15, the Decentralisation Strategy (2006-2015)16 for the implementation of which many municipalities were not prepared and are still avoiding the public discussions with citizens on issues of public importance.

Reporting[8]. According to Art. 22 of the Ombudsman Act the ombudsman shall submit

annual report on his activities to the National Assembly by 31 March every year. The ombudsman shall also prepare reports on particular cases upon request by the National Assembly or his/her own initiative.17 The annual report

11 Bulgaria/Омбудсман на Република България/Годишен доклад за 2007 “Доброто управление, правата на хората и органите на властта” [Annual Report of the Ombudsman of the Republic of Bulgaria ‘Good governance, rights of the people and institutions of power’ 2007], p.34, http://ombudsman.bg/annual_report_2007.pdf.

12 Bulgarian Helsinki Committee/Annual Reports Human Rights in Bulgaria 1998-2008, available in English at http://www.bghelsinki.org/index.php?module=resources&lg=en&cat_id=24.


14 Bulgaria/Омбудсман на Република България/Годишен доклад за 2006 [Annual Report of the Ombudsman of the Republic of Bulgaria 2006], p. 84-85, available in English at http://www.ombudsman.bg/index.php?action=list&item=opinions&type=10.

15 Bulgaria/Омбудсман на Република България/Годишен доклад за 2006 [Annual Report of the Ombudsman of the Republic of Bulgaria 2006], p. 95, available in English at http://www.ombudsman.bg/index.php?action=list&item=opinions&type=10.


17 Bulgaria/Закон за омбудсмана [Ombudsman Act] (1.01.2004), Art. 22, para. 4 and Bulgaria/Правилник за организацията и дейността на омбудсмана [Regulation for the

A.


shall contain information on the complaints and signals received, the checks on which have been completed, the cases the ombudsman worked on and the results of his/her intervention, the proposals and recommendations made and whether these have been taken into consideration, the respect for the human rights and fundamental freedoms and the efficiency of the legislation in force in this area, report on the expenditures and a summary. So far the Bulgarian ombudsman has issued three annual reports for 2005, 2006 and 2007. The annual reports are very detailed and comprehensive. The annual reports contain a description of the priority areas of the ombudsman, areas where the ombudsman intervened on his own initiative, individual complaints and signals analysis, data and outcome, specific issues of concern, legislative interventions and participation in legislative process, international activities, other issues of importance and concern, capacity building of the administration of the ombudsman’s office. In July 2007 the ombudsman issued a 16-pages report on prisons.18 It was based on monitoring during the period February-May 2007 in five prisons in Bulgaria and contains observations, conclusions and recommendations to the Ministry of Justice.

Advisory function[9]. The first advisory statement of the ombudsman in 2005 was provoked by the

garbage crisis in Sofia. It was addressed to the main relevant ministries, Sofia municipality and the Chief Prosecutor asking them to select a company for collecting and processing the garbage and identify the servants who were responsible for the crisis. 19 The second statement issued in 2006 concerned the police brutality during a detention, which led to death of a man due to excessive use of coercion.20 The statement is addressed to the Министерство на вътрешните работи [Ministry of Interior] asking it to elaborate instructions to the policemen to respect the law and international human rights standards for detention and to train the staff to legal and proportionate use of coercion etc.21

The ombudsman was involved in the Комисия за превенция и борба с корупцията [Commission for Prevention and Combating against Corruption] at the Council of Ministers as an independent participant where he takes part in:

Organisation and Activities of the Ombudsman] (31.05.2005), Art. 35.18 Bulgaria/Омбудсман на Република България/Годишен доклад за 2007 “Доброто

управление, правата на хората и органите на властта” [Annual Report of the Ombudsman of the Republic of Bulgaria ‘Good governance, rights of the people and institutions of power’ 2007], p.167-183, http://ombudsman.bg/annual_report_2007.pdf.

19 Bulgaria/Омбудсман на Република България/Годишен доклад за 2005 [Annual Report of the Ombudsman of the Republic of Bulgaria 2005] (June 2005-March 2006), p. 29-30, available at http://www.ombudsman.bg/annual_report.pdf, in Bulgarian.



A.

http://www.ombudsman.bg/annual_report.pdf




elaboration of Закон за лобирането [Lobbying Activities Act]; assessment of implementation of the Concept for Improvement of Administrative Services at State Administration following the “one desk” principle; introduction of internal administrative procedures for co-operation and compliance with the ombudsman’s recommendations, establishment of mechanism for co-operation of the national and local ombudsmen in anti-corruption field.22 In 2006 the ombudsman advised the Council of Ministers and the Агенция за финансова инспекция [State Financial Inspection Office] to review the procedure for selecting sub-contractors in provision of public services to make it compliant with Закон за обществените поръчки [Public Procurement Act] if the other party is using state funding.23 He advised the Ministry of Environment and Waters and Министерство на земеделието и храните [Ministry of Agriculture and Foods] to raise broad awareness campaign about the European ecological network ‘Natura 2000’ 24 and recommended in 2007 to the Council of Ministers to present to the European Commission a list of selected protected areas in Bulgaria. He suggested that the National Assembly review the Закон за биоразнообразието [Biological Diversity Act] and introduce provisions allowing public discussions about determination of protected areas and possibility for appeal of the orders of the Ministry of Environment and Waters declaring certain area as protected. In 2006 the ombudsman advised Ministry of Health to review and amend the long procedure for medical assessment of labour capability of people with disabilities which by law should continue three months and in practice it could be as long as three years.25 The ombudsman also issued a statement 26 on the abuse of a quarry (stone-pit) and recommended measures to be taken by all relevant ministries and local authorities to stop the illegal extraction of stones and sand. The other ombudsman’s statement 27 for 2007 is focused on the violation of consumers’ rights by two main providers of

22 Bulgaria/Омбудсман на Република България/Годишен доклад за 2005 [Annual Report of the Ombudsman of the Republic of Bulgaria 2005] (June 2005-March 2006), p. 36, available at http://www.ombudsman.bg/annual_report.pdf, in Bulgarian.



25 Bulgaria/Омбудсман на Република България/Годишен доклад за 2006 [Annual Report of the Ombudsman of the Republic of Bulgaria 2006], p. 86, available in English at http://www.ombudsman.bg/index.php?action=list&item=opinions&type=10 and Bulgaria/Омбудсман на Република България/Годишен доклад за 2007 “Доброто управление, правата на хората и органите на властта” [Annual Report of the Ombudsman of the Republic of Bulgaria ‘Good governance, rights of the people and institutions of power’ 2007], p.104, http://ombudsman.bg/annual_report_2007.pdf.

26 Bulgaria/Омбудсман на Република България/Годишен доклад за 2007 “Доброто управление, правата на хората и органите на властта” [Annual Report of the Ombudsman of the Republic of Bulgaria ‘Good governance, rights of the people and institutions of power’ 2007], pp.184-195, http://ombudsman.bg/annual_report_2007.pdf.

27 Bulgaria/Омбудсман на Република България/Годишен доклад за 2007 “Доброто управление, правата на хората и органите на властта” [Annual Report of the Ombudsman of the Republic of Bulgaria ‘Good governance, rights of the people and institutions of power’ 2007], p.164-166, http://ombudsman.bg/annual_report_2007.pdf.

A.

http://www.ombudsman.bg/index.php?action=list&item=opinions&type=10



central heating and electricity in Sofia that did not send the invoices of the clients in closed envelopes.

[10]. On July 2006 the ombudsman issued Recommendations to state and municipal authorities for elaboration of internal rules for checks initiated by the ombudsman. Slowly the state authorities started issuing their own rules based on these recommendations but the municipalities had not started yet.28 In 2007 the ombudsman issued and distributed Recommendations to municipalities to advise them on effective and transparent procedures for decision making, respect for the citizens’ rights and active participation of citizens in solutions of problems of great significance.29 In September 2007 the ombudsman issued also Recommendations for improvement of the business conditions development in local communities.30

[11]. In 2006 a Protocol for Co-operation between the ombudsman and the Commission for Combating against Corruption at the National Assembly31 and a Protocol for co-operation with the Ministry of Agriculture and Foods were signed 32 and in 2007 protocols for co-operation were signed also with Ministry of Justice and National Audit Office.33

[12]. Regarding his legislative function the ombudsman has been active in drafting legislation and proposing amendments in current legislation pushed by individual complaints and signals from NGOs and informal civil groups. In 2005 he managed to provoke a Constitutional Court decision on pronouncing a provision prohibiting persons on remand in prisons to have secret correspondence as contradicting to the Constitution. In 2006 together with a civil society working group he proposed legislative amendments to the Implementation of Sofia Territory Plan Act, 34 drafted with another working







34 Bulgaria/Омбудсман на Република България/Годишен доклад за 2006 [Annual Report of the Ombudsman of the Republic of Bulgaria 2006], p. 27, available in English at

A.




group the Закон за лобирането [Lobbying Activities Act], 35 proposed amendments, and many of them were adopted, in several laws – Energetics Act, Approval and Implementation of the General Territory Plan of Sofia Municipality Act, Access to Documentation of State Secret Services Act,36

drafted provisions (adopted later on) in the Наредба за общите правила за административно обслужване [Ordinance for the General Rules for Administrative Service] adopted by the Министество на държавната администрация и административната реформа [Ministry of State Administration and Administrative Reform] in 2006.37 In 2006 the ombudsman also proposed legislative amendments to regulate the independent status of local ombudsmen and their subordination to the national ombudsman. In 2007 the ombudsman proposed amendments and elaboration of provisions related to access to healthcare both for prisoners and people who need specialised care, 38

some rights of prisoners, 39 amendments of the Закон за подземните богатства [Natural Resources Act] and Закон за концесиите [Concession Act] to prevent illegal actions with State territory – subject to concession,40

amendments to Закон за достъп до обществена информация [Access to Public Information Act] to provide for a clear and objective definition of ‘public information’, for introduction of the ‘principle for balance of the interests”, for liberalising the access to information when drafts of legislation, strategies, other acts of authorities are discussed; 41 amendments to Administrative Procedure Code to introduce the concept of ‘silent agreement/approval’.42 amendments to

http://www.ombudsman.bg/index.php?action=list&item=opinions&type=10.35 Bulgaria/Омбудсман на Република България/Годишен доклад за 2006 [Annual

Report of the Ombudsman of the Republic of Bulgaria 2006], p. 91-92, available in English at http://www.ombudsman.bg/index.php?action=list&item=opinions&type=10.








A.


the Закон за чужденците в България [Foreigners in Republic of Bulgaria Act] to introduce judicial review of administrative orders under Art. 46 of the Act, to introduce deadlines for placement of foreigners in the special home for temporary placement of foreigners in Busmanci, to introduce provisions for regulation of the legal status of foreigners who had stayed in Bulgaria for a long period illegally.43 In 2007 the ombudsman proposed introduction of specialised labour courts 44 and introduction of more effective protection of people under guardianship.45

[13]. In 2007 the ombudsman initiated two cases before the Constitutional Court regarding a provision introducing the privilege for central heating providers to obtain a warrant without court proceedings and provisions in Административно-процесуален кодекс [Administrative Procedure Code] violating the rights of claimants who appeal secondary legislation. In 2007 the the ombudsman questioned the compliance with the Constitution of a provision of the Закон за добавената стойност [Added Value Tax Act] which adds in the group of freelancers the notaries and judges who execute court decisions, 46

the provision requiring from candidates to mayor posts to have “bachelor” degree of the Закон за местното самоуправление и местната администрация [Local Governance and Local Administration Act] and some provisions of the Energetics Act that violate the consumers’ right to be free of non-loyal competition and monopoly and the right to effective protection of their interests and rights because the provisions shift the burden of proof to the consumer and provide for preferential conditions for several big companies.

Research[14]. In 2005 the ombudsman researched mainly the legislation and practice on

garbage collection and procession in Sofia and anti-corruption. In 2006 the research areas were policy brutality, anti-corruption, procedures for sub-contracting under Public Procurement Act, procedures for implementation of checks and replies to ombudsman’s requests, ecological issues, decentralisaion and local authorities, assessment of labour capability of people with disabilities, provision of public services by big companies. In 2007 in addition to the above-mentioned topics there were others like rights of the prisoners, rights of the children and children with disabilities, rights of people under guardianship, effective mechanisms for implementation of judgements of the European Court on Human Rights in Bulgaria, the violations of human rights by

43 Written reply No1115 to the researcher, dated 8.05.2008, p. 4.44 Written reply No1115 to the researcher, dated 8.05.2008, p. 4.45 Written reply No1115 to the researcher, dated 8.05.2008, p. 4.46 Bulgaria/Омбудсман на Република България/Годишен доклад за 2006 [Annual Report of

the Ombudsman of the Republic of Bulgaria 2006], p. 115-116, available in English at http://www.ombudsman.bg/index.php?action=list&item=opinions&type=10.

A.


the adoption on 7.01.2008 of Ordinance 40 of the Ministry of Interior and Държавна агенция за информационни технологии и съобщения [State Agency for Information Technologies and Messages] for the categories of data to be stored and used for the needs of national security and investigation of crimes, problems with financial compensation when private land is being expropriated by the State, restoration of lands, compensation of victims of the totalitarian regime, problems with issuing documents for minors and adolescents to leave the country, collection and transportation of garbage, rights of the foreigners detained in the home for temporary placement in Busmanci, low quality of the social services provided in specialised institutions for adults with disabilities.47

Cooperation with civil society[15]. The ombudsman co-operates with civil organisations for protection of

consumers’ rights, patients’ organisations, organisations of and for people with disabilities, organisations that protect children’s rights. In his first 2005 annual report 48 the ombudsman declares that he considers the civil organisations as providers for information of bad practices of administration and engines for attitude of intolerance towards it. He states that the co-operation between the civil society and his office would be formalised by establishment of consultative councils. The first such council was established in March 2006 with the five nationally represented empolyers’ organisations with the aim for creation of good climate for business development and respect for the rights of the employees. This council made an assessment of the central state administration practice of public presentation of drafts of legislation49 on which concrete recommendations were to be drafted and the council also issued a decision to remind that according to legislation till mid 2006 the State and municipal authorities were obliged to eliminate all license and permission regimes which are not provided for by law. Two other councils were established in 2006 - one about the media and one of distinguished scientists, activists and experts to support the activities of the ombudsman’s office. 50 In 2007 a protocol for co-operation was singed with the Конфедерация на независимите синдикати [Confederation of Independent Trade Unions] to contribute to protection of the rights of the people. The ombudsman signed a protocol for co-operation with



49 This is an obligation under Art.2a of the Law for Normative Acts.50 Bulgaria/Омбудсман на Република България/Годишен доклад за 2005 [Annual

Report of the Ombudsman of the Republic of Bulgaria 2005] (June 2005-March 2006), p. 42, available at http://www.ombudsman.bg/annual_report.pdf, in Bulgarian.

A.




UNICEF-Bulgaria and also formed in 2008 a consultative council on children’s rights with several organisations for child protection. 51

[16]. According to his annual reports the ombudsman worked together with various NGOs in the process of collection of information and drafting proposals to the government. They were Прозрачност без граници [Transparency without borders], Сдружение Журналисти срещу корупцията [Journalists against Corruption], Асоциация Аксес [Access Assotiaiton], Общност на гражданските организации в София [the Community of the Sofia Civil Organisations], Граждански общински съвет в София [Civil Municipal Council in Sofia] regarding the territory plan and the envisaged construction work, the Български хелзинкски комитет [Bulgarian Helsinki Committee] regarding police brutality at detention, the Център за изследване на демокрацията [Centre for the Study of Democracy], Програма ‘Достъп до информация’ [Access to Information Program], Фондация ‘Електронна граница’ [Electonic Border Foundation], Съюз на юристите в България [Union of the Jurists in Bulgaria], Асоциация за хармонизиране на правото [Association for Harmonisation of Legislation], Асоциация за европейска интеграция и права на човека [Association for European Integration and Human Rights], Федерация на потребителите в България [Federation of the Consumers in Bulgaria], Национална асоциация на потребителите в България [National Association of the Consumers in Bulgaria], Център за психологически изследвания [Center for Psychological Research], Гражданска инициатива ‘Справедливост’ [Civil Initiative ‘Justice’], European Centre for Minority Issues. 52



A.



Promotion of international treaties[17]. It is only in his 2007 annual report when the ombudsman mentions explicitly his

position on the need of ratification of Optional Protocol at the UN Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman and Degrading Treatment or Punishment, that entered into force on 22.06.2006. Other international treaties are mentioned in the reports but just occasionally and to support or explain the concepts in Bulgarian legislation. They are not even discussed in details in the reports.

Human rights education and awareness[18]. In November 2005 the ombudsman in co-operation with the European Center

for Minority Issues published a handbook ‘Международни стандарти, основополагащи принципи и добри практики за институцията на омбудсмана. Националният омбудсман на България.’ [International standards, fundamental principles and good practices for ombudsman institution. National ombudsman in Bulgaria.], which is distributed among civil organisations, state and municipal authorities.53 The ombudsman also planned to organise an information campaign in April 2006 about protection of human rights on European, national and local level by conferences, meetings, etc. 54 In March 2007 the ombudsman organised a public discussion for MPs, Constitutional Court judges, civil organisations, and government representatives on the topic ‘Между свободата и подчинението.Правото на добро управление и на добра администрация’ [Between freedom and subordination. The right to good governance and administration] to introduce the newly regulated right to good administration in Bulgaria and its meaning and protection mechanism. In May 2007 another conference was organised on the same topic but related to decentralisation, accountability and transparency of the local authorities. These ideas were further developed on an international conference on 17-18 September 2007 with the participation of the European ombudsman, Balkan countries’ ombudsmen and others. In November and December 2007 the ombudsman organised regional meetings with local authorities and population in six municipalities to discuss his recommendations for good governance and administration. He organised discussions on the rights of the patients in Stara Zagora, Varna, Sofia and Pleven during 2007 and issued 53 Bulgaria/Омбудсман на Република България/Годишен доклад за 2005 [Annual



B.




a ‘Наръчник на пациента’ [Handbook for the Patient] that is distributed with one of the most read newspapers – 24 часа [24 hours daily]. In 2007 he also focused the attention of the Bulgarian relevant institutions to the European charter on the Rights of the Patients.55


16


Individual complaints procedure[19]. Complaints and signals to the ombudsman may be submitted via different

traditional means of communication by natural persons, irrespective of their citizenship, gender, political affiliation or religious beliefs.56 The complaints and signals as well as the measures undertaken and the results of them on each case are registered. 57 The ombudsman should reply to complaints and signals within one month and for more complex cases – within three months.

[20]. In his 2005, 2006 and 2007 annual reports the ombudsman provides detailed information about the individual complaints. In 2005 the ombudsman received 1,102 complaints the majority of which regarding violations of the rightс to property, social services and assistance, public services, discrimination, civil and political rights, administrative services, security and public order, healthcare.58 In 2006, 3,064 complaints were received and the pattern of the topics was the same, the new topics being non-implementation of court decisions that entered into force, ecological issues and children and adolescents’ rights.59 In 2007 the complaints were 3,367 the majority of which against providers of public services.60 In 2007 the ombudsman analysed the reactions of state, municipal and other bodies to his requests and pointed out as “bad practice of administration” and non-compliance to his recommendations Ministry of Health, Ministry of Agriculture and Foods, Ministry of Environment and Waters, Ministry of Regional Development, Ministry of Justice and courts’ administration for lack of will and action.61

A.1. Mediation

56 Bulgaria/Закон за омбудсмана [Ombudsman Act] (1.01.2004), Art. 24.57 Bulgaria/Закон за омбудсмана [Ombudsman Act] (1.01.2004), Art. 27.58 Bulgaria/Омбудсман на Република България/Годишен доклад за 2005 [Annual

Report of the Ombudsman of the Republic of Bulgaria 2005] (June 2005-March 2006), Annex 1, p.58-60, available at http://www.ombudsman.bg/annual_report.pdf, in Bulgarian.

59 Bulgaria/Омбудсман на Република България/Годишен доклад за 2006 [Annual Report of the Ombudsman of the Republic of Bulgaria 2006], Annex 1, p. 151-154, available in English at http://www.ombudsman.bg/index.php?action=list&item=opinions&type=10.

60 Bulgaria/Омбудсман на Република България/Годишен доклад за 2007 “Доброто управление, правата на хората и органите на властта” [Annual Report of the Ombudsman of the Republic of Bulgaria ‘Good governance, rights of the people and institutions of power’ 2007], Annex 1, p.151-154, http://ombudsman.bg/annual_report_2007.pdf.


C.



[21]. At any time at considering of a complaint or signal the ombudsman may propose mediation for voluntary settling of the case between the affected person and the authority or the provider of public services.62 The ombudsman shall upon his discretion implement mediation.63 In these cases the ombudsman shall direct proposal for mediation to the sender and the body or the person against which the complaint or the signal has been submitted.64 In case both parties accept the mediation the ombudsman shall render any help for overcoming the conflict. In the progress of the meetings at each stage the ombudsman shall listen to the statements of the parties and support them in the process of overcoming the differences with all possible means, including proposal of formula for resolving the dispute.65 The ombudsman may reveal to the other party of the dispute information, which has received at individual meeting only upon existing of explicit consent by the party from which he has received the information.66 In case of successful settling of the conflict for the results of the mediation a record shall be compiled which shall be signed by the two parties and the ombudsman or an employee defined by him.67 In case of unsuccessful finishing of the mediation for implementing his function the ombudsman may use the other authorities provided by the law.68

A.2. Pre-screening role

[22]. The ombudsman can undertake actions on his initiative when he finds that the necessary conditions for protection of the rights and freedoms are not being created.69 When the ombudsman acts on his own initiative he can implement checks also about violations made before more than two years.70 The undertaking of actions of the ombudsman on his initiative shall be entered in separate section of the register of the appeals and the signals.71 When the ombudsman undertakes actions on his own initiative he can assign the check to 62 Bulgaria/ Правилник за организацията и дейността на омбудсмана [Regulation for

the Organisation and Activities of the Ombudsman] (31.05.2005), Art.2663 Bulgaria/ Правилник за организацията и дейността на омбудсмана [Regulation for

the Organisation and Activities of the Ombudsman] (31.05.2005), Art.2764 Bulgaria/ Правилник за организацията и дейността на омбудсмана [Regulation for

the Organisation and Activities of the Ombudsman] (31.05.2005), Art.28, para.1.65 Bulgaria/ Правилник за организацията и дейността на омбудсмана [Regulation for





the Organisation and Activities of the Ombudsman] (31.05.2005), Art.29,para.1.70 Bulgaria/ Правилник за организацията и дейността на омбудсмана [Regulation for

the Organisation and Activities of the Ombudsman] (31.05.2005), Art.29, para.2.

18


the deputy ombudsman or to one or more employees 72 and in this case he shall determine the term for finishing the check.73

A.3. Recommendations and proposals

[23]. In the statement with which finishes the implemented check when he finds it is appropriate the ombudsman shall make recommendations and proposals:1. for the implementing or terminating the accomplishment of defined administrative activities; 2. for restoration of violated rights and freedoms; 3. for removal the reasons and the conditions creating prerequisites for violations of the rights and freedoms; 4. for removal the acts of bad administration and for improving the work of the administration.74 In 14 days after receiving the statement and the proposals the body or the person to whom it has been sent shall be obliged to consider them and to notify the ombudsman about the undertaken measures.75 If no measures are undertaken the ombudsman can include the case in his annual report or in separate report before the National Assembly.76 Any person who hinders the оmbudsman to perform his/her official duties shall be punished by a fine of up to 600 BGN (appr. 300 Euro), if he/she is not liable to a more severe penalty.77 Any person who fails to submit data, documents or certificates, demanded by the оmbudsman, in the term, specified by him/her, shall be punished by a fine of up to 500 BGN (appr. 250 Euro), if he/she is not liable to a more severe penalty.78 Any person who fails to perform another obligation, specified by the Ombudsman Act or the relevant secondary legislation on its implementation, shall be punished by a fine of up to 300 BGN (150 Euro), if he/she is not liable to a more severe penalty. 79

[24]. In 2007 the ombudsman issued recommendations to municipalities called “Rights of the people, decentralisation and local power”.80 Their aim was to 71 Bulgaria/ Правилник за организацията и дейността на омбудсмана [Regulation for




the Organisation and Activities of the Ombudsman] (31.05.2005), Art.31.75 Bulgaria/ Правилник за организацията и дейността на омбудсмана [Regulation for

the Organisation and Activities of the Ombudsman] (31.05.2005), Art.32, para.176 Bulgaria/ Правилник за организацията и дейността на омбудсмана [Regulation for

the Organisation and Activities of the Ombudsman] (31.05.2005), Art.32, para.2.77 Bulgaria/Закон за омбудсмана [Ombudsman Act] (1.01.2004), Art.29.78 Bulgaria/Закон за омбудсмана [Ombudsman Act] (1.01.2004), Art. 30.79 Bulgaria/Закон за омбудсмана [Ombudsman Act] (1.01.2004), Art. 31.80 Bulgaria/Омбудсман на Република България/Годишен доклад за 2007 “Доброто

управление, правата на хората и органите на властта” [Annual Report of the

C.


underline all institutional, legislative, practical measures, requirements and criteria on which good governance is based. The recommendations are focused on elaboration of effective and transparent procedures for hearings, voting, setting the agenda, recording the hearing, ethic rules for conduct of municipal counsellors and servants, building capacity of the municipal administration, participation of citizens in the procedures, forming of civil consultative structures, free access to information, accountability of the local councils, etc. The recommendations were sent to all newly elected mayors and municipal councils after the local elections in October in 2007 and then he organised six local meetings to discuss them with municipal authorities, civil organisaitons, citizens. Many mayors signed protocols for agreement with the ombudsman to respect the recommendations. The ombudsman stated that he intends to monitor the compliance of the practice to the recommendations.

[25]. In 2007 the ombudsman also proposed to the National Assembly the establishment of effective mechanism for implementation of the judgements of the European Court on Human Rights and ratification of the Optional Protocol at the UN Convention for Prevention of Torture and other Forms of Inhuman and Degrading Treatment and Punishment.81 The need of ratification of the UN Convention on the Rights of People with Disabilities was discussed in the expert council on discrimination issues at the ombudsman and it is envisaged that concrete steps would be taken for the ratification.

A.4. Proposals for legislative amendments

[26]. If as result of implemented check the ombudsman establishes that defined law provision is reason or creates prerequisites for violation of the rights and freedoms he can direct proposals and recommendations for legislative changes.82 The proposals and the recommendations for legislative changes shall be sent to the National Assembly and to the Council of Ministers.83 The proposals and the recommendations for legislative changes and the actions undertaken for them shall be entered in the register of the appeals and signals and shall be included in the annual report of the ombudsman.84 For more

Ombudsman of the Republic of Bulgaria ‘Good governance, rights of the people and institutions of power’ 2007], p.15, http://ombudsman.bg/annual_report_2007.pdf.

81 Written reply No 1115 to the researcher, dated on 8.05.2008, p. 5.82 Bulgaria/ Правилник за организацията и дейността на омбудсмана [Regulation for




C.


detailed information see the Chapters above ‘Monitoring Human Rights’ and ‘Advisory and Legislative Function’.

Miscellaneous[27]. The research did not find any miscellaneous issues to report.

Good practices[28]. The research did not identify any examples of good practice.

Independent public bodies[29]. The PADA established a specialised single equality authority, the Комисията

за защита от дискриминация (КЗД) [Protection Against Discrimination Commission (PADC)], with a mandate to uniformly provide protection on all grounds, including sexual orientation. The PADC is an independent collegiate body consisting of nine members, five of whom are elected by Parliament, the others appointed by the President. Their term of office is five years and their powers include: receiving and investigating complaints by victims, as well as third parties without limitation; issuing binding rulings declaring discrimination and imposing financial sanctions; issuing binding instructions to prevent, stop or require abstention from discrimination and/or restore the status quo ante; carrying out surveys and publishing independent reports; bringing court action and joining court proceedings in an amicus curiae capacity; making recommendations to other authorities to reform legislation or practice; giving opinions on draft legislation; and providing independent assistance to victims of discrimination. The PADC has quasi-investigative powers, including accessing any testimony, documents or facilities for on-site inspections, which allow it to be proactive in gathering evidence, thus relieving the victim. Its proceedings are exempt from any fee or cost and can also be initiated ex officio.

C.


Human Rights NGO’s[30]. After the EU accession of Bulgaria on 1.01.2007 the few human rights NGOs

that always had been active continued their work but most of the newly established NGO especially those who work with Roma issues were gradually closed. The most active nationally NGOs are enlisted in Annex 1. Three of them provide mainly legal aid and work on strategic litigation in all spheres of human rights and the rest are focused on several issues like minority, gender, access to education, services, information by encouraging advocacy and self-advocacy, by maintaining the dialogue between NGOs, local informal groups, government and local authorities and researching problematic human rights areas.

C.


B. Overview [31]. The public debate about establishment of a National Human Rights Institution

in Bulgaria started in 1991 when the first democratic Constitution had been drafted. In two of all 15 drafts establishment of national ombudsman was envisaged but they were not supported by the Parliament. The introduction of different types and levels of control over the executive power by the Constitution left an impression that rights of the citizens in their relations with administration were sufficiently and effectively protected. Lack of tradition and expertise about the practice of human rights institution led to lack of its regulation in Bulgarian legislation. Later on, in 1998 a Bulgarian NGO – Център за изследване на демокрацията (ЦИД) [Center for the Study of Democracy (CSD)]85 initiated the first public discussion about the need and potential power of national and local human rights institutions. The NGO established a working group, which consisted of practicing lawyers, representatives of state authorities, municipalities, media, non-governmental organisations and university professors on constitutional law. As a result of this discussion a report was published86 and a draft Закон за обществения защитник [Law for the Public Advocate] was elaborated during the period 1998-2000. Ombudsman-type institution on a national level was considered to act as a complementary mechanism for monitoring and control over the public administration and as out-of-court means of respecting and restoring the rights of citizens violated by the state or by government officials. The draft was introduced into the Parliament by some of its members but was not reviewed by it. In 2002 there were three drafts for Закон за омбудсмана [Ombudsman Act] already that were discussed for the first time on 5 June 2002 by the Parliament. The final draft was adopted on 8 Мay 2003 and entered into force on 1 January 2004. The Ombudsman Act, although very late, was perceived as necessary new mechanism for protection of the rights of the citizens which operates together with other control, judicial and legal mechanisms and can be either their alternative or can support, intervene, initiate their activities. Another reason for the need of ombudsman was corruption, which according to different studies was perceived as one of the most serious problems along with unemployment, poverty and low income rates. Lack of effective legal protection by the judicial system also made ombudsman institution needed.

[32]. After the Ombudsman Act entered into force the election of the ombudsman was much delayed because all political parties had their nominee and none of them was supported by half of the votes in the Parliament. The ombudsman had to be elected till March 2004, the first elections took place on 14 May 2004 and 85 http://www.csd.bg.86 Center for the Study of Democracy, Ombudsman Institution: Concept Paper and Draft

Law for Bulgaria. Foreign Legislation. Sofia, 2000, available at http://www.anticorruption.bg/ombudsman/eng/readnews.php?id=2394&lang=en&t_style=tex&l_style=default only in Bulgarian.

C.

http://www.anticorruption.bg/ombudsman/eng/readnews.php?id=2394&lang=en&t_style=tex&l_style=default



the members of the parliament voted for 7 nominees. None of them was supported by half of the MPs who voted. On 8 October 2004 the second elections took place. None of the two candidates was elected. On 13 April 2005 the first Bulgarian ombudsman was elected with 141 votes out of 194 MPs voting and he was the only nominee at that time. The broad support was ensured after backstage political bargaining that included agreements on nominations for other key vacant positions in important institutions such as Protection against Discrimination Commission, National Audit Office and National Statistical Institute.87 The subcommittee for accreditation did not accredit Bulgarian ombudsman.

C. Independence and Pluralism [33]. According to Art. 3 of the Ombudsman Act he/she shall be independent and

shall obey to the Constitution, the laws, the ratified international treaties to which Republic of Bulgaria is a party. His/her personal conscience and morality shall guide him/her. The ombudsman elaborates the rules of the organisation of his/her administration him/herself. 88 The ombudsman is funded by the State budget and administrates the budget as a first-rate administrator.89 The documentation of the ombudsman cannot be subject to check or confiscation.90

The ombudsman enjoys the same immunity as a member of the Parliament.91

The office of the ombudsman and deputy-ombudsman is incompatible with any other state office, managerial position in commercial company or non-profit legal entity as well as with membership in political party or trade union. The ombudsman and the deputy ombudsman are not allowed to perform commercial activities.92 Such legal provisions were meant to ensure the independence of the ombudsman.

[34]. But the procedure for election of the ombudsman is disputable in terms of his/her independence. The nominations for ombudsman are to be submitted by parliamentary groups and members of the Parliament.93 The Parliament elects the ombudsman with half of the votes of the members who voted. The explicit provision that parliamentary groups may nominate their candidates means that these nominees would be party nominees. Besides the election of the ombudsman by a simple majority vote is dependent on a small number of MPs and consequently on the will of the parliamentary majority which contradicts 87 Center for the Study of Democracy, Ombudsman Institution in Bulgaria, Sofia, 2005,

p. 24, available in Bulgarian at http://www.anticorruption.bg/ombudsman/eng/readnews.php?id=6315&lang=en&t_style=tex&l_style=default.

88 Bulgaria/Закон за омбудсмана [Ombudsman Act] (1.01.2004), Аrt. 3, para. 2.89 Bulgaria/Закон за омбудсмана [Ombudsman Act] (1.01.2004), Art. 7.90 Bulgaria/Правилник за организацията и дейността на омбудсмана [Regulation for

the Organisation and Activities of the Ombudsman] (31.05.2005), Art 7.91 Bulgaria/Закон за омбудсмана [Ombudsman Act] (1.01.2004), Art. 16, para. 1.92 Bulgaria/Закон за омбудсмана [Ombudsman Act] (1.01.2004), Art. 14.93 Bulgaria/Закон за омбудсмана [Ombudsman Act] (1.01.2004), Art. 10.

C.


the principle of incompatibility of the ombudsman’s office with political membership and the principle of independence. Thus independence can be sought only as early as the nomination stage. The drafts of the Ombudsman Act suggested provisions entitling the president, the Висш съдебен съвет [Supreme Judicial Council], the chair of Конституционен съд [Constitutional Court] and a definite number of Bulgarian citizens at the age enabling them to make proposals for the election of ombudsman in order to ensure politically independent and truly competitive nominees. Introduction of such provisions were considered as compensation for the lack of constitutional requirements for a qualified majority for the election of the ombudsman. But the Parliament rejected these provisions on the second reading of the draft and thus made the procedure for the election strongly contingent on the will of parliamentary majority.

[35]. Besides termination of office of the ombudsman before expiry is another problematic area because such termination is possible if one fifth of the MPs initiate it 94 and the ombudsman has only the right to speak before the Parliament. The only guarantee for the ombudsman’s political independence is that his/her term of office is longer that the parliament’s one so that these mandates can only overlap. Termination of office before its expiry in case of ‘failure to carry out his/her duties and violation of the Constitution and the laws of the country or the commonly accepted ethical rules’ 95 is also a rather broad definition allowing a fairly small parliamentary majority to analyse the compliance of the ombudsman’s conduct with the law or ethical rules. Thus parliamentary majority could remove a problematic ombudsman on the grounds of subjective motives derived from its political inclinations.

[36]. Ombudsman’s remuneration is also discussed as problematic in terms of the independence of the institution. It is to be equal to three average monthly salaries of civil servants determined according to data of the National Statistical Institute. 96 Suggestions for remuneration equal to that of a constitutional judge were not accepted by the Parliament.

[37]. As stated above, the election of the ombudsman is dependent on the parliamentary majority and the practice of two unsuccessful votings in 2004 showed that. The current ombudsman was a member of the parliamentarian group led by the Bulgarian Socialist Party. The deputy-ombudsman in Bulgaria is a representative of another political party – Movement for the Rights and Freedoms. The rest of the administration is appointed by the ombudsman97 and there are no criteria in Bulgarian legislation regarding this appointment.

94 Bulgaria/Закон за омбудсмана [Ombudsman Act] (1.01.2004), Art. 15, para. 2.95 Bulgaria/Закон за омбудсмана [Ombudsman Act] (1.01.2004), Art. 15, para. 1, item

4.96 Bulgaria/Закон за омбудсмана [Ombudsman Act] (1.01.2004), Art. 18, para. 1.97 Bulgaria/ Правилник за организацията и дейността на омбудсмана [Regulation for the

Organisation and Activities of the Ombudsman] (31.05.2005), Art. 10, para. 2.

C.


[38]. The most numerous articles and reports about the ombudsman were published during the period when the Parliament failed in electing him/her. Media, mostly printed, was very active in explaining lack of independence from political parties and lack of effective power of the ombudsman after the law entered into force in 2004. The analysis of the two failed attempts for elections in the Parliament showed how much political parties try to politicise the elections underestimating the real added value of such institution. Most media coverage was criticising the political games, the lack of criteria for nominations, the delayed voting, the lack of real public discussion about the person of the ombudsman and the election of the current ombudsman as a result of a political bargain.98 The NGOs involved in the process of drafting the ombudsman act and in its implementation criticise also the lack of political independence in nomination and election of the ombudsman in legislation and in practice.99

Apparently the Bulgarian society and the Parliament did not realise fully the ombudsman’s role and functions as a needed mechanism for independent monitoring and protection of human rights and were not able to guarantee its independence and pluralistic representation.

D. Mandate and human rights areas covered

[39]. According Art. 2 of the Ombudsman Act ‘the ombudsman shall intervene by the means, envisaged in this Act, when citizens’ rights and freedoms have been violated by actions or omissions of the State and municipal authorities and their administration as well as by the persons assigned with the provision of public services’. More specifically Art. 19 of the same Act and Art.9 of the Regulation regulate that the ombudsman shall receive and consider complaints and signals regarding violations of rights and freedoms by the State and municipal authorities and their administrations as well as by persons assigned with the provision of public services; perform investigation upon the complaints and signals received; make proposals and recommendations for reinstatement of the violated rights and freedoms before the respective authorities and providers of public services; mediate between the administrative authorities and the persons concerned for overcoming the violations admitted and shall reconcile their positions; make proposals and recommendations for eliminating the reasons and

98 Коалиция 2000 [Coalition 2000], Media Coverage of the Attempted Election of Ombudsman (1 June 2003 – 31 May 2004), available at http://www.anticorruption.bg/ombudsman/eng/readnews.php?id=4043&lang=en&t_style=tex&l_style=default in English.

99 Център за изследване на демокрацията [Center for the Study of Democracy] (2005), Институцията омбудсман в България [Ombudsman Institution in Bulgaria], p.22-24, available at http://www.csd.bg/en/law/artShow.php?id=6316, only in Bulgarian.

C.

http://www.csd.bg/en/law/artShow.php?id=6316




conditions, which create prerequisites for violation of rights and freedoms. The Ombudsman may act on his/her own initiative as well when he/she has established that the necessary conditions for protecting citizens' rights and freedoms have not been created. The ombudsman can also propose to one fifth of the MPs, the president, the Council of Ministers, the Върховен касационен съд [Supreme Cassation Court], the Върховен административен съд [Supreme Administrative Court] or the chief prosecutor to approach the Constitutional Court if he decides that interpretation of the Constitution is necessary or announcement of the unconstitutionality of a law and to inform the Prosecutor’s Office about the results of his checks when there is data about committed crime. There are no other indications in the legislation of the thematic mandate of the ombudsman.

[40]. In his 2005 annual report the ombudsman declares that his activities are based on four basic policies of advocacy in favour of the citizens: before the state and municipal authorities and their administrations, in the social sphere, in the relationships of citizens with providers of public services, in closed institutions – prisons and pre-trial detention facilities.100

[41]. In 2006 he declared that the priority areas of his activities had been determined by the signals and complaints of the citizens and they are: improvement of the administrative services and access to information in public institutions, protection of the rights of people with disabilities and implementation of mechanisms for real social integration, protection of labour and insurance rights, protection of the right to protected environment, equal access to quality education, right to healthcare, protection of the rights of the comsumers/clients of public services – electricity-, heating-, water-supply, independent monitoring of the human rights of detained persons, monitoring and proposals for improvement of the judicial administration, protection of the rights to social services/welfare, encouragement of tolerance and decrease of hate speech, better cooperation with local authorities for respect of the rights of the citizens and good governance.101 The ombudsman also stated that he considers important part of his activities his proposals for legislative amendments, his anti-corruption and child protection involvement. The majority of the individual complaints the ombudsman receives (according to his reports) concern right to real estate/property, right to public services and right to social services/welfare. Some of the issues the ombudsman decided to be involed in, after he was informed by individuals or NGOs, were related to illegal, non-transparent procedure for construction work in Sofia at the stage of the legislative process, environmental problems when protected areas were selected and voted for by the Parliament, disclosure of

100 Bulgaria/Омбудсман на Република България/Годишен доклад за 2005 [Annual Report of the Ombudsman of the Republic of Bulgaria 2005] (June 2005-March 2006), p.11, available at http://www.ombudsman.bg/annual_report.pdf, in Bulgarian.

101 Bulgaria/Омбудсман на Република България/Годишен доклад за 2006 [Annual Report of the Ombudsman of the Republic of Bulgaria 2006], pp. 18-19, available in English at http://www.ombudsman.bg/index.php?action=list&item=opinions&type=10.

C.



State Secret Services archives, monopoly of the provider of central heating and the problems with the bills of the citizens who use central heating.

[42]. In 2007 the ombudsman chose several priority areas for intervention and active involvement: right to good governance and administration; right to healthcare; rights of the children to social services, family, alternatives to institutionalisation, quality care, juvenile justice; rights of prisoners to quality healthcare, education, employment, vocational training, good material conditions of detention; right to protected environment; anti-corruption, access to public information; problems with court administration; cоnsumers’ rights.102

[43]. An overview of the activities of the ombudsman show that his agenda is not set in advance but it mainly depends on the individual complaints’ topic, the current political agenda and the concerns and actions of NGOs or informal civil groups about certain issues. It is also worth mentioning that although broadly declared some of the priority areas were not implemented with the needed scope and impact. Fundamental rights of the child, access to education, right to healthcare and social services for people with mental disabilities, for example, were not even discussed as main human rights problems deserving special attention as the vulnerable citizens have the least opportunities to protect themselves.

[44]. According to Art 9, para. 2 of the Правилник за организацията и дейността на омбудсмана [Regulation for the Organisation and Activities of the Ombudsman] he has no authority to refer to:1. the National Assembly, the Constitutional Court, the Supreme Judicial Council and the Сметна палата [Audit Office]; 2. the implementing of judicial power by the court, the prosecutor’s office and the investigation; 3. the relations connected with the national security and the foreign policy. Pursuant Art. 9, para.3 of the same regulations he is not allowed to lead procedures on behalf of the persons who addressed him and cannot represent them before court and before state and municipal authorities.

E. Monitoring human rights violations

[45]. The ombudsman legislation does not provide explicitly for any monitoring activities. The concept of regular and systematic monitoring based on certain 102 Bulgaria/Омбудсман на Република България/Годишен доклад за 2007 “Доброто

управление, правата на хората и органите на властта” [Annual Report of the Ombudsman of the Republic of Bulgaria ‘Good governance, rights of the people and institutions of power’ 2007], pp-11-54, http://ombudsman.bg/annual_report_2007.pdf.

C.


methodology does not exist in legislation. Some activities related to investigation/check of violation of human rights are regulated in Art.19, para.1, item 2 of the Ombudsman Act – ‘the ombudsman can make checks in relation with the complaints and signals received’. He may also act on his own initiative when he has established that the necessary conditions for protection of the citizens’ rights and freedoms had not been created.103 In his activities so far the ombudsman performed monitoring of 5 (out of 13) prisons in 2007 (the rest are scheduled for monitoring during the first half of 2008) 104 and issued and published a 16-pages report identifying some of the main human rights violations that had been actively discussed in details for the last 10 years by several NGOs. 105 In 2007 the ombudsman also monitored children care institutions for children deprived of parental care in nine municipalities.106

[46]. The ombudsman has the right to access authorities, their administration and the providers of public services and to request and receive timely, accurate and comprehensive information from them upon request. 107 In his reports there is no evidence of whether and how he takes advantage of this right to collect data on the human rights situation of vulnerable groups in Bulgaria. He only mentions his requests to the administration of ministries and their local divisions and to the municipalities when these requests are provoked by individual signals and complaints.

[47]. Another method of monitoring could be ombudsman’s right to form consultative and regional councils. In consultative councils he, his deputy or other representatives of his administration, representatives of the academic circles, the media, the organisations of the citizens, external consultants etc. participate.108 The ombudsman may create regional councils for interaction with the public mediators, assisting their activity and equating the practice. In them the ombudsman, the deputy-ombudsman or representatives of his administration, public mediators from several municipalities and representatives of the respective municipal councils, representatives of the media, of organisations of the citizens participate.109 Again there is no mention in the

103 Bulgaria/Закон за омбудсмана [Ombudsman Act] (1.01.2004), Art. 19, para. 2.104 Bulgaria/Омбудсман на Република България/Годишен доклад за 2007 “Доброто

управление, правата на хората и органите на властта” [Annual Report of the Ombudsman of the Republic of Bulgaria ‘Good governance, rights of the people and institutions of power’ 2007], p.34, http://ombudsman.bg/annual_report_2007.pdf.

105 Bulgarian Helsinki Committee/Annual Reports Human Rights in Bulgaria 1998-2008, available in English at http://www.bghelsinki.org/index.php?module=resources&lg=en&cat_id=24.


107 Bulgaria/Закон за омбудсмана [Ombudsman Act] (1.01.2004), Art. 20.108 Bulgaria/Правилник за организацията и дейността на омбудсмана [Regulation for

the Organisation and Activities of the Ombudsman] (31.05.2005), Art. 14.109 Bulgaria/Правилник за организацията и дейността на омбудсмана [Regulation for

the Organisation and Activities of the Ombudsman] (31.05.2005), Art. 15.

C.


ombudsman’s reports about any implementation of this option for regular monitoring but rather for mediation or raising awareness.

[48]. In his 2006 annual reports the ombudsman declares he and his administration monitor the public debate and the response from authorities on the issues of protected areas under European ecological network “Natura 2000”110, the implementation of the territory arrangement plan for Sofia (which threatens to reduce radically the green areas in Sofia)111, the Decentralisation Strategy (2006-2015)112 for the implementation of which many municipalities were not prepared and are still avoiding the public discussions with citizens on issues of public importance.

[49]. In his 2006 annual report the ombudsman explains that he had elaborated a program regarding his activities in prisons and it includes also monitoring of the relevant legal framework and its compliance with international human rights standards and broadening of the civil society control over the implementation of the European Convention on Human Rights and The Convention for the Prevention of Torture, Inhuman and Degrading Treatment and Punishment as well as the Execution of Punishments Act. He also planned to visit prisons and pre-trial detention following a schedule. He claims that a methodology was drafted to ensure the independent internal control over the penitentiary system. The methodology was based on the CPT standards, ECHR standards and the Convention for the Prevention of Torture, Inhuman and Degrading Treatment standards and Association for the Prevention of Torture (APT) standards. The monitoring aimed to research the torture, inhuman and degrading treatment practices, protection measures, material conditions and health care. In 2007 the ombudsman visited only 5 of all 11 prisons and 2 juvenile correction facilities. He concluded that the material conditions (overcrowding, lack of toilets in the cells, lack of access to personal belongings) violate the rights of the prisoners, that the average employment rate is 50 %, that most of the prisoners do not have health insurance and 50 to 70 prisoners are examined daily which cannot ensure quality healthcare. 113 A specific request was sent by the researcher to the ombudsman asking for more detailed information about his monitoring activities and their methodology. It his reply 114 the ombudsman stated that he elaborated “concrete methodological instruments” regarding his monitoring





114 Written reply No1115 upon request of the researcher, dated 8.05.2008, p. 2.

C.


activities in prisons and does not mention any other monitoring activities he undertook.

[50]. Upon request and in relation to a complaint or a signal the ombudsman has the right to ask for information the state and municipal authorities or the providers of public services. They are obliged to provide timely, accurate and comprehensive information. It is not clear how the ombudsman ensures that this information is complete and comprehensive as there is no evidence that he tries to compare, analyse and critically review data and information he receives from state and municipal authorities. In his reply 115 the ombudsman informed the researcher that he collects information from state and municipal authorities, providers of public services and consults with outstanding lawyers, sociologists, politologists, and civil activists.

F. Reporting [51]. According to Art. 22 of the Ombudsman Act the ombudsman shall submit

annual report on his activities to the National Assembly by 31 March every year. The ombudsman shall also prepare reports on particular cases upon request by the National Assembly or his/her own initiative.116 The annual report shall contain information on: 1. the complaints and signals received, the examinations on which have been completed; 2. the cases when his/her intervention has led to a certain result; 3. the cases when his/her intervention has had no consequences and the reasons thereof; 4. the proposals and recommendations made and whether these have been taken into consideration; 5. the respect for the human rights and fundamental freedoms and the efficiency of the legislation in force in this area; 6. a report on the expenditures; 7. a summary.

[52]. So far the Bulgarian ombudsman has issued three annual reports for 2005, 2006 and 2007. The annual reports are very detailed and comprehensive. The annual report covering the period June 2005 –March 2006 is 90 pages long and 10 page more that are annexes, tables, statements, proposals, issued by the ombudsman during the year. The 2006 annual report is 140 pages long and 140 pages more tables, statements and proposals. The 2007 annual report is 139 pages long and 112 pages tables, statements and proposals. The annual reports contain a description of the priority areas of the ombudsman, areas where the ombudsman intervened on his own initiative, individual complaints and signals analysis, data and outcome, specific issues of concern, legislative interventions and participation in legislative process, international activities, other issues of importance and concern, capacity building of the administration of the 115 Written reply No1115 upon request of the researcher, dated 8.05.2008, p. 2.116 Bulgaria/Закон за омбудсмана [Ombudsman Act] (1.01.2004), Art. 22, para. 4 and

Bulgaria/Правилник за организацията и дейността на омбудсмана [Regulation for the Organisation and Activities of the Ombudsman] (31.05.2005), Art. 35.

C.


ombudsman’s office. In July 2007 the ombudsman issued a 16-pages report on prisons.117 It was based on monitoring during the period February-May 2007 in five prisons in Bulgaria and contains observations, conclusions and recommendations to the Ministry of Justice.

G. Advisory function [53]. The first advisory statement of the ombudsman regarding issue of serious

concern and importance about which he initiated a research and a conference on 28 July 2005 was the crisis with the garbage in Sofia.118 It was addressed to the Parliament, the Council of Ministers, the Министерство на околната среда и водите [Ministry of Environment and Waters], the Sofia municipality, the Sofia municipal council and the Chief Prosecutor. The prosecutor was advised to investigate the criminal responsibility of Sofia municipality servants who refused to act to solve the problem as to where and how the garbage would be collected and processed. The Sofia municipality was advised to immediately find new areas for collecting and processing the garbage. The rest of the authorities were advised to start a procedure for selecting a company to construct a factory for processing the garbage.119 According to the 2005 annual ombudsman’s report these statements were taken into consideration and a solution was found.

[54]. The second statement, announced on 29 March 2006, was again a result of a research and concerned the police brutality during a detention, which led to death of a man.120 The ombudsman’s opinion is that policemen used excessively physical coercion, that the police authorities did not effectively plan the operation of this detention and did not effectively investigate the death case. The statement is addressed to the Министерство на вътрешните работи [Ministry of Interior] and asks the ministry to elaborate instructions to the policemen to respect the law and international human rights standards for detention, to present publicly its plan and strategy for prevention of illegal police brutality towards citizens, to optimise the functions of the Постоянна

117 Bulgaria/Омбудсман на Република България/Годишен доклад за 2007 “Доброто управление, правата на хората и органите на властта” [Annual Report of the Ombudsman of the Republic of Bulgaria ‘Good governance, rights of the people and institutions of power’ 2007], p. 167-183, http://ombudsman.bg/annual_report_2007.pdf.




C.





комисия за права на човека и полицейска етика [Permanent Commission of Human Rights and Police Ethics], to train the staff at the ministry in human rights, ethical conduct, legal and proportionate use of coercion, non-discrimination.121 The outcome of this advisory opinion is not mentioned in the 2005, 2006 and 2007 annual reports.

[55]. The ombudsman was involved in the Комисия за превенция и борба с корупцията [Commission for Prevention and Combating against Corruption] at the Council of Ministers as an independent participant. Thus his participation was envisaged in the Програма за изпълнение на Стратегията за прозрачно управление и борба с корупцията за 2006 г. [Program for Implementation of the Strategy for Transparent Governance and Combating against Corruption for 2006] in the following areas: еlaboration of Закон за лобирането [Lobbying Activities Act]; аssessment of implementation of the Concept for Improvement of Administrative Services at State Administration following the “one desk” principle; introduction of internal administrative procedures for co-operation and compliance with the ombudsman’s recommendations; establishment of mechanism for co-operation of the national and local ombudsmen in anti-corruption field.122

[56]. In 2006 the ombudsman advised the Council of Ministers and the Агенция за финансова инспекция [State Financial Inspection Office] to review the procedure for selecting sub-contractors in provision of public services. He recommended that whenever concessions take place and sub-contractors are needed the contracts with external experts and specialists should comply with the Закон за обществените поръчки [Public Procurement Act] if the other party is using state funding. Planned audit is also recommended to be performed by the Сметна палата [National Audit Office] and the State Financial Inspection Office when expenditure of state funding and tenders by municipal companies are concerned as well as audit of the same authorities of the selection of sub-contractors.123

[57]. In 2006 the ombudsman issued statements 124 addressed to the Ministry of Environment and Waters and Министерство на земеделието и храните [Ministry of Agriculture and Foods] regarding their obligation for raising awareness campaign about the aim of the European ecological network ‘Natura 2000’. In his statement in 2007 the ombudsman recommended to the Council of





C.




Ministers to consider the selection of protected areas as a process not as an act and to present to the European Commission a list with these areas in Bulgaria. He suggested the National Assembly to review the Закон за биоразнообразието [Biological Diversity Act] to introduce provisions allowing public discussions about determination of protected areas and possibility for appeal of the orders of the Ministry of Environment and Waters declaring certain area as protected. He insisted that the Ministry of Environment and Waters take into account all scientific, economic, cultural, social, regional factors when it determines the level of protection of biodiversity and to involve all scientists in the field. He reported that although some attempts by the relevant ministries were made to inform the society about the aim of ‘Natura 2000’ they still do not comply sufficiently with current legislation at the end of 2007.125

[58]. Another issue of concern for the ombudsman in 2006 was the long procedure for medical assessment of labour capability of people with disabilities which by law should continue three months and in practice it could be as long as three years. Although the ombudsman received information in August 2006 from the Ministry of Health that this problem would be solved by legislative amendments, no further measures were undertaken for real solution of this mass violation of rights of the citizens in 2006 and 2007.126

[59]. In 2007 the ombudsman issued a statement 127 on the abuse of quarry (stone-pit) in a village and recommended measures to be taken by the Ministry of Regional Development, Ministry of Environment and Waters, Ministry of Interior, Ministry of Agriculture and Foods, Ministry of Social Policy, Ministry of Finance, the mayor of town of Pernik to stop the illegal extraction of stones and sand. He also proposed amendments in the Закон за подземните богатства [Natural Resources Act] and Закон за концесиите [Concession Act] to ensure transparent licensing regime, control and co-ordination between relevant ministries. The other ombudsman’s statement 128 for 2007 is focused on the violation of consumers’ rights by two main providers of central heating and




C.




electricity in Sofia that did not send the invoices of the clients in closed envelopes.

[60]. On 4 July 2006 the ombudsman issued Recommendations to state and municipal authorities and their administrations for elaboration of internal administrative rules for checks initiated by the ombudsman. He addressed those recommendations to the Commission for Prevention and Combating against Corruption at the Council of Ministers. It contains rules for access to information and timely and comprehensive response to his requests. Although slowly the state and regional authorities started issuing their own rules based on these recommendations. The municipal authorities are still not initiating elaboration of such rules.129 In 2007 the ombudsman issued and distributed recommendations to municipalities to advise the local authorities on effective and transparent procedures for decision making, respect for the rights of the people and active participation of citizens in solutions of problems of great significance.130 In September 2007 the ombudsman issued also recommendations for improvement of the conditions for business development in local communities derived from the Закон за ограничаване на администрсативното регулиране и административния контрол върху стопанската дейност [Restriction of the Administrative Regulation and Administrative Control on Economic Activities Act]. The Recommendations are called ‘Децентрализацията, местната власт и доброто управление. Препоръки на омбудсмана към общините’ [Decentralisation, local power and good governance. Recommendations of the ombudsman to the municipalities].131

[61]. On 16 February 2006 a Protocol for Co-operation between the ombudsman and the Commission for Combating against Corruption at the National Assembly was signed. It envisages that exchange of information about preconditions for corruption in legislation and elaboration of proposals for amendments, cooperation in investigation of concrete signals for corruption, involvement in the legislative program of the Commission of drafts for amendments, elaborated by the ombudsman, participation of the ombudsman when drafts of legislation





C.


are discussed within the Commission. 132 The ombudsman also signed a Protocol for co-operation with the Ministry of Agriculture and Foods in 2006. According to it a working group between the two authorities would be formed to review the legislation, the judicial and administrative practice regarding the problems exposed in citizens’ complaints (about irregularities in restoration of their right to property), involvement of representatives of the ombudsman’s office in elaboration of drafts for legislation, regular meetings between the ombudsman and the heads of certain departments at the ministry, joint field-checks.133 In 2007 protocols for co-operation were signed also with Ministry of Justice and National Audit Office.134

[62]. According to the 2007 annual report the ombudsman concludes that the state and municipal authorities in general comply with his recommendations and advisory opinions. Examples are the Наредбата за общите правила за организацията на административното обслужване [General Rules for Organisation of Administrative Services Ordinance] and the internal regulations of the Ministry of Social Policy, Ministry of Education, Национален съвет по етнически и демографски въпроси [National Council on Ethnic and Demographic Issues], Национален съвет по равнопоставеност между жените и мъжете [National Council for Gender Equality], Национален съвет за закрила на детето [National Council for Child Protection], Правилник за работата на Висшия съдебен съвет и неговата администрация [Regulations for Supreme Judicial Council and its Administration], etc.135

G.1. Legislative function[63]. In 2005 the ombudsman initiated a working group with civil society

representatives to be involved in the process of drafting the territory plan of Sofia municipality. He realised that civil society was not involved in its drafting, the procedures for drafting do not ensure discussions about the ecological risks, same persons participate as authors and approving authorities





C.




of the plan, which creates conditions for conflict of interests.136 The ombudsman organised broad information campaign – 13 public discussions with 2000 participants – citizens, regional mayors, MPs, municipal architects. In 2006 he issued a statement with recommendations including such for legislative amendments based on the conclusions and proposals of the working group and the council at the ombudsman’s office. It was addressed to Sofia municipality, National Assembly and Ministry of Regional Development. During the second voting of the law many of the ombudsman’s proposals for amendments were considered and adopted.137

[64]. In 2005 the ombudsman was a party in a case No11/2005 before the Constitutional court for non-compliance of a provision (Art.132g, para.3) from Execution of Punishments Act with the Constitution. The provision introduced obligatory check of the correspondence of persons on remand by the prison administration. The ombudsman’s opinion was that this provision contradicts the provision of Art. 34 of the Constitution of the secret of personal correspondence. The provision of the Execution of Punishments Act was pronounced as contradicting the Constitution.138

[65]. In his 2006 annual report the ombudsman reported that he initiated a working group on elaboration of the Закон за лобирането [Lobbying Activities Act] in which executive and legislative power representatives were involved as well as civil organisations like Прозрачност без граници [Transparency without borders], Сдружение Журналисти срещу корупцията [Journalists against Corruption], Асоциация Аксес [Access Assotiaiton]. They drafted the Act and it was submitted to the Commission for Prevention and Combating against Corruption at the Council of Ministers, Commission on the Corruption Issues at the National Assembly and the Commission for Combating against Corruption at the Supreme Judicial Council. The draft was approved by all state authorities but it still was not adopted in 2008.139

[66]. In 2006 the ombudsman proposed amendments, and many of them were adopted, in several laws – Energetics Act, Approval and Implementation of the General Territory Plan of Sofia Municipality Act, Access to Documentation of State Secret Services Act. According to the ombudsman they led to better protection of the rights of the citizens.140 The first proposed amendment concerned lack of access to information about how central heating companies





C.




calculate their clients’ bills and their exclusive right to warrant without court proceedings. The second was related again to lack of public discussion and lack of access to information and involvement of civil society when the plan was elaborated thus allowing numerous illegal acts to take place. The third proposal concerned access of citizens to the archives, which is still problematic because of lack of administrative resources. The ombudsman proposed to the Council of Ministers to review and propose amendments in legislation regarding central heating provision in the following areas: elimination of the fee for “power” for the clients who do not use central heating but their flats are among clients who use such, introduction of a specific fee for those clients who use only hot water and do not use central heating provided by the same company, elimination of the provisions in the Energetics Act, which entitle central heating providers to get a warrant without court proceedings, but only on the basis of bills, elimination of the sanction of the clients who did not install devices for measurement of consumption of central heating in their apartments. All but the proposal for elimination of the possibility to get warrant for the central heating company were accepted and adopted by the Parliament on the second voting of the amendments of the Energetics Act. Thus the ombudsman addressed his statement to the Constitutional Court. 141

[67]. Regarding the access to the State Secret Services documentation the ombudsman proposed to the Parliament provisions for the law and was involved in the discussions about it in 2006. Many of the proposals were approved and the most important – the control over the archive of the totalitarian secret services to be performed by a newly formed independent Commission as a safeguard for the complete and objective disclosure of the documents. 142

[68]. In 2006 the ombudsman drafted provisions adopted later on in the Наредба за общите правила за административно обслужване [Ordinance for the General Rules for Administrative Service] adopted by the Министество на държавната администрация и административната реформа [Ministry of State Administration and Administrative Reform] on 26 September 2006.143

[69]. In his 2006 annual report the ombudsman mentioned several proposals for legislative amendments needed to comprehensively provide for local ombudsmen.144 He proposed that they have separate, determined in advance budget (as they are currently paid by the municipal budget upon decision of the





C.


municipal council which makes them very dependent on the local authorities will). He also was of the opinion that clear legal regulation of relations between the national and local ombudsmen is needed allowing him to instruct them and to be able to refer certain cases and to assign implementation of certain measures to them. The last proposal was of a regulation of specialised ombudsmen/mediators. It has not been considered yet.

[70]. In 2007 the ombudsman proposed that:

Medical standards and rules for good practice in healthcare should be adopted as required by legislation; provisions for issuing referrals to specialised medical help be amended to ensure that patients have free access to healthcare when they are health insured; Ordinance 34 of Ministry of Health regulating the procedure for prescription of expensive medicines should be amended so that all patients who need the medicines be able to receive them regularly; 145

Ministry of Justice and Ministry of Health review Наредба 12 за здравното обслужване на лишените от свобода [Ordinance 12 for medical care of prisoners] so that it would be in compliance with the Закон за лечебните заведения [Medical Establishments Act] and Закон за здравното осигуряване [Health Insurance Act];

Ministry of Justice to consider amendments in Закон за изпълнение на наказанията [Execution of Punishments Act] and the Regulations for its implementation so that restrictions of the range of people who prisoners have the right to call on the phone to be abolished, the director of the prison for adolescents to be appointed as guardian of the prisoners so that informed consent in cases of medical treatment on their behalf be ensured, decentralisation of boarding houses for prisoners, the ombudsman to be included in the list of authorities with which prisoners have the right to correspond in closed envelopes, special places to be designated for drug addicted prisoners with respect to their specific needs; 146

Amendments of the Закон за подземните богатства [Natural Resources Act] and Закон за концесиите [Concession Act] to regulate clearly and




C.


broaden the powers and obligations of all inspecting authorities in cases of violations of legislation;147

Amendments to Закон за достъп до обществена информация [Access to Public Information Act] to provide for a clear definition of ‘public information’ on the basis of objective criteria, for introduction of the ‘principle for balance of the interests”, for liberalising the access to information when drafts of legislation, strategies, other acts of authorities are discussed; 148

Amendments to Administrative Procedure Code to introduce the concept of ‘silent agreement/approval’.149

Amendments to the Закон за чужденците в България [Foreigners in Republic of Bulgaria Act] to introduce judicial review of the orders under Art. 46 of the Act, to introduce deadlines for placement of foreigners in the special home for temporary placement of foreigners in Busmanci, to introduce provisions for regulation of the legal status of foreigners who had stayed in Bulgaria for a long period illegally. 150

Introduction of specialised labour courts.151

Introduction of more effective protection of people under guardianship.152

[71]. With the amendments of the Constitution, adopted in March 2006 the ombudsman was entitled to address the Constitutional Court with applications asking for pronunciation of legal provisions as contradictory to the Constitution. The ombudsman initiated two cases in 2006. The first is case 10/2006 about the provision of Art.154, para. 2 of the Закон за енергетиката [Energetics Act] introducing the privilege for central heating providers to obtain a warrant without court proceedings. The reasons were that this provision violates the rights and protection of the clients, the principle of equal legal conditions for commercial activities (Art.19, para. 2 of the Constitution), the right to legal aid provided for by Art.56 of the Constitution. The second case is 11/2006 about 147 Bulgaria/Омбудсман на Република България/Годишен доклад за 2007 “Доброто




150 Written reply No1115 to the researcher, dated 8.05.2008, p. 4.151 Written reply No1115 to the researcher, dated 8.05.2008, p. 4.152 Written reply No1115 to the researcher, dated 8.05.2008, p. 4.

C.


Art.143, para.4 and Art.186, para.1 of the Административно-процесуален кодекс [Administrative Procedure Code]. Art.143, para.4 provides that if the court rejects the appeal of an administrative act, the claimant should pay for all expenses including for the minimal remuneration for the lawyer of the state authority. Art.186, para. 1 provides that secondary legislation can be appealed by the citizens, organisation and authorities whose rights had been or could be violated and for whom the legislation imposes obligations. In 2007 the first case is 1/2007 about part of the provision of Art.3, para.2 of the Закон за добавената стойност [Added Value Tax Act] which adds in the group of freelancers the notaries and judges who execute court decisions. 153 In 2007 the ombudsman addressed two more applications to the Constitutional Court.154 He asks the provision of Art.41, para.2 (requiring from candidates to mayor posts to have “bachelor” degree) of the Закон за местното самоуправление и местната администрация [Local Governance and Local Administration Act] to be pronounced as not compliant with the Constitution. In his second application the ombudsman asks the Court to consider Art.107 and Art 154, para. 1 and Art. 184 of the Energetics Act as not compliant to the Constitution. Although Art. 154 was subject of Court’s review the decision of the court was not held as there were not enough votes on either side. So the ombudsman asked this article to be reviewed again. The other two articles violate the consumer’s right to be free of non-loyal competition and monopoly and the right to protect his/her interests and rights by effective mechanisms because they shift the burden of proof to the consumer and provide for preferential conditions for several big companies.

[72]. In 2005, 2006 and 2007 annual Reports of the ombudsman he mentioned several times that he initiated himself certain events, amendments etc., but he explicitly stated that he did that after he received many complaints and signals. So according to his own statements there were not completely initiated by himself actions.

H. Research[73]. The ombudsman mentions in his three annual reports that he initiates round

table discussions, consultative council meetings, research in legislation and practice on each of the topics that are declared as his main priority areas of



41


concern and intervention. In 2005 these was mainly the legislation and practice on garbage collection and procession in Sofia and anti-corruption. In 2006 these were policy brutality, anti-corruption, procedures for subcontracting under Public Procurement Act, procedures for implementation of checks and replies to ombudsman’s requests, ecological issues, decentralisaion and local authorities, assessment of labour capability of people with disabilities, provision of public services by big companies. In 2007 in addition to the above-mentioned topics there others like rights of the prisoners, rights of the children and children with disabilities, rights of people under guardianship, effective mechanisms for implementation of judgements of the European Court on Human Rights in Bulgaria, the violations of human rights by the adoption on 7.01.2008 of Ordinance 40 of the Ministry of Interior and Държавна агенция за информационни технологии и съобщения [State Agency for Information Technologies and Messages] for the categories of data to be stored and used for the needs of national security and investigation of crimes, problems with financial compensation when private land is being expropriated by the State, restoration of lands, compensation of victims of the totalitarian regime, problems with issuing documents for minors and adolescents to leave the country, collection and transportation of garbage, rights of the foreigners detained in the home for temporary placement in Busmanci, low quality of the social services provided in specialised institutions for adults with disabilities.155


42


I. Cooperation with Civil Society [74]. In 2005 annual report 156 the ombudsman declares that the civil organisations are

considered by him as providers for information of bad practices of administration and engines for attitude of intolerance towards bad administration and corruption. He states that the cooperation between the civil society and his office would be formalised by establishment of consultative councils. The first such council was established on 16 March 2006 with the representatives of the five nationally represented empolyers’ organisaitons. Its aim was to provide signals, proposals, initiatives for overcoming beaurocratic practices and obstacles for the business, for creation of good climate for business development, respect for the rights of the employees. This council decided to make an assessment of the central state administration practice of public presentation of drafts of legislation157 on which concrete recommendations were to be drafted. The other decision was Закон за ограничаване на администрсативното регулиране и административния контрол върху стопанската дейност [Restriction of the Administrative Regulation and Administrative Control on Economic Activities Act] according to which till mid 2006 the state and municipal authorities were obliged to eliminate all license and permission regimes which are not provided for by law.

[75]. Two other councils were established in 2006 - one about the media and one of distinguished scientists, activists and experts to support the activities of the ombudsman’s office. 158 In 2007 a protocol for cooperation was singed with the Конфедерация на независимите синдикати [Confederation of Independent Trade Unions] to contribute to protection of the rights of the people. The ombudsman cooperates with civil organisations for protection of consumers’ rights, patients’ organisations, organisations of and for people with disabilities, organisations that protect children’s rights. The ombudsman signed a protocol for cooperation with UNICEF-Bulgaria and also formed in 2008 a consultative council on children’s rights with several organisations for child protection. 159


157 This is an obligation under Art.2a of the Law for Normative Acts.158 Bulgaria/Омбудсман на Република България/Годишен доклад за 2005 [Annual



43




[76]. According to his annual reports the ombudsman worked together with various NGOs in the process of collection of information and drafting proposals to the government. They were Прозрачност без граници [Transparency without borders], Сдружение Журналисти срещу корупцията [Journalists against Corruption], Асоциация Аксес [Access Assotiaiton], Общност на гражданските организации в София [the Community of the Sofia Civil Organisations], Граждански общински съвет в София [Civil Municipal Council in Sofia] regarding the territory plan and the envisaged construction work, the Български хелзинкски комитет [Bulgarian Helsinki Committee] regarding police brutality at detention, the Център за изследване на демокрацията [Centre for the Study of Democracy], Програма ‘Достъп до информация’ [Access to Information Program], Фондация ‘Електронна граница’ [Electonic Border Foundation], Съюз на юристите в България [Union of the Jurists in Bulgaria], Асоциация за хармонизиране на правото [Association for Harmonisation of Legislation], Асоциация за европейска интеграция и права на човека [Association for European Integration and Human Rights], Федерация на потребителите в България [Federation of the Consumers in Bulgaria], Национална асоциация на потребителите в България [National Association of the Consumers in Bulgaria], Център за психологически изследвания [Center for Psychological Research], Гражданска инициатива ‘Справедливост’ [Civil Initiative ‘Justice’], European Centre for Minority Issues. 160


44



J. Promotion of International Treaties

[77]. It is only in his 2007 annual report when the ombudsman mentions explicitly his position on the need of ratification of Optional Protocol at the UN Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman and Degrading Treatment or Punishment, that entered into force on 22.06.2006. Other international treaties are mentioned in the reports but just occasionally and to support or explain the concepts in Bulgarian legislation. They are not even discussed in details in the reports.

K. Human Rights Education and Awareness

[78]. In November 2005 the ombudsman in co-operation with the European Center for Minority Issues published a handbook ‘Международни стандарти, основополагащи принципи и добри практики за институцията на омбудсмана. Националният омбудсман на България.’ [International standards, fundamental principles and good practices for ombudsman institution. National ombudsman in Bulgaria.], which is distributed among civil organisations, state and municipal authorities.161 The ombudsman also planned to organise an information campaign in April 2006 about protection of human rights on European, national and local level by conferences, meetings, etc. 162

[79]. On 14 March 2007 the ombudsman organised a public discussion for MPs, Constitutional Court judges, civil organisations, and government representatives on the topic ‘Между свободата и подчинението. Правото на добро управление и на добра администрация’ [Between freedom and subordination. The right to good governance and administration] to introduce the newly regulated right to good administration in Bulgaria and its meaning and protection mechanism.



D.




[80]. On 29 May 2007 another conference was organised on the same topic but related to decentralisation, accountability and transparency related to the local authorities. Problematic areas like slow decentralisation process, inefficient regional policy, insufficient transparency were discussed and served as a basis for the ombudsman’s recommendations to the municipalities regarding implementation of the right to good administration. These ideas were further developed on an international conference on 17-18 September 2007 with the participation of the European ombudsman, Balkan countries’ ombudsmen and others.

[81]. In November and December 2007 the ombudsman organised regional meetings with local authorities and population in the municipalities in Vidin, Veliko Turnovo, Ruse, Plovdiv, Pernik and Lovech to discuss his recommendations for good governance and administration. He organised discussions on the rights of the patients in Stara Zagora, Varna, Sofia and Pleven during 2007 and issued a ‘Наръчник на пациента’ [Handbook for the Patient] that is distributed with one of the most read newspapers – 24 часа [24 hours daily]. In 2007 he also focused the attention of the Bulgarian relevant institutions to the European charter on the Rights of the Patients.163


46


L. Individual Complaints Procedures [82]. Complaints and signals to the Ombudsman may be submitted by natural

persons, irrespective of their citizenship, gender, political affiliation or religious beliefs. 164 They may be written or verbal and submission may be done by post, personally or by other traditional means of communication.165 Anonymous complaints and signals and complaints for violations committed before more than two years are not considered.166 For verbal complaints a protocol is drawn up.167 The complaints and signals are entered into a register as well as the measures undertaken on each case and the results of them.168 The ombudsman should reply to complaints and signals within one month and for more complex cases – within three months.

[83]. In his 2005, 2006 and 2007 annual reports the ombudsman provides detailed information about the individual complaints. In 2005, out of 1,102 complaints received, 410 were regarding violation of the right to property (regulations of territory, restitution of lands, construction), 183 – social services and assistance (social insurance, compensation, labour rights, people with disabilities, assistance), 115 – public services (central heating, water supply, garbage transportation, electricity supply) 69 - discrimination, civil and political rights, 53-administrative services, 49- security and public order, 27 – healthcare and 196- other issues.169 In 2006, out of 3,064 complaints received, 911 were regarding rights to property, 400 – social services and assistance, 377- public services, 192 – fundamental rights and freedoms, 166- administrative services, 120 – public order and security, 85 – unimplemented court decisions entered into force, 77 – civil and political rights, 58 – healthcare, 37- environmental issues, 93 – others. In 2006 complainants started addressing signals and complaints to the ombudsman regarding children and adolescents’ rights unlike during 2005.170 In 2007, out of 3,367 complaints received by the ombudsman, 937 were regarding violated rights of the consumers of public services, 764 were related to right to property, 476 – to social assistance and services, 361 - to fundamental rights and freedoms, 181 – to administrative services, 137 – to healthcare, 119 – to public order and security, 67 – to education, 63 - to unimplemented court decisions that entered into force, 54- to environmental

164 Bulgaria/Закон за омбудсмана [Ombudsman Act] (1.01.2004), Art. 24.165 Bulgaria/Закон за омбудсмана [Ombudsman Act] (1.01.2004), Art. 25.166 Bulgaria/Закон за омбудсмана [Ombudsman Act] (1.01.2004), Art. 25, para. 3.167 Bulgaria/Закон за омбудсмана [Ombudsman Act] (1.01.2004), Art. 25, para. 4.168 Bulgaria/Закон за омбудсмана [Ombudsman Act] (1.01.2004), Art. 27.169 Bulgaria/Омбудсман на Република България/Годишен доклад за 2005 [Annual

Report of the Ombudsman of the Republic of Bulgaria 2005] (June 2005-March 2006), Annex 1, p.58-60, available at http://www.ombudsman.bg/annual_report.pdf, in Bulgarian.

170 Bulgaria/Омбудсман на Република България/Годишен доклад за 2006 [Annual Report of the Ombudsman of the Republic of Bulgaria 2006], Annex 1, p. 151-154, available in English at http://www.ombudsman.bg/index.php?action=list&item=opinions&type=10.

E.



issues. 171 In 2007 the ombudsman analysed the reactions and support of state, municipal and other bodies to his requests and pointed out the “bad practice of administration” and non-compliance to his recommendations. Ministry of Helath, Ministry of Agriculture and Foods, Ministry of Environment and Waters, Ministry of Regional Development, Ministry of Justice and courts’ administration are the ones most strongly criticised for lack of will and action to respond to ombudsman’s requests.172

L.1. Mediation

[84]. At any time at considering of a complaint or signal the ombudsman may propose mediation for voluntary settling of the case between the affected person and the authority or the provider of public services.173 The ombudsman shall upon his discretion implement mediation personally or by assigning of separate or all activities to the deputy ombudsman or employee of the administration.174

In these cases the ombudsman shall direct proposal for mediation to the sender and the body or the person against which the complaint or the signal has been submitted.175 In case both parties accept the mediation the ombudsman shall render any help for overcoming the conflict (making contact, support in the progress of eventual negotiations etc.). For this purpose he can conduct without limitation sequence of common meetings, with the two parties and also individual meetings with each of them separately.176 In the progress of the meetings at each stage the ombudsman shall listen to the statements of the parties and support them in the process of overcoming the differences with all possible means, including proposal of formula for resolving the dispute.177

171 Bulgaria/Омбудсман на Република България/Годишен доклад за 2007 “Доброто управление, правата на хората и органите на властта” [Annual Report of the Ombudsman of the Republic of Bulgaria ‘Good governance, rights of the people and institutions of power’ 2007], Annex 1, p.151-154, http://ombudsman.bg/annual_report_2007.pdf.


173 Bulgaria/ Правилник за организацията и дейността на омбудсмана [Regulation for the Organisation and Activities of the Ombudsman] (31.05.2005), Art.26

174 Bulgaria/ Правилник за организацията и дейността на омбудсмана [Regulation for the Organisation and Activities of the Ombudsman] (31.05.2005), Art.27

175 Bulgaria/ Правилник за организацията и дейността на омбудсмана [Regulation for the Organisation and Activities of the Ombudsman] (31.05.2005), Art.28, para.1.



48


[85]. The ombudsman may reveal to the other party of the dispute information, which has received at individual meeting only upon existing of explicit consent by the party from which he has received the information.178 In case of successful settling of the conflict for the results of the mediation a record shall be compiled which shall be signed by the two parties and the ombudsman or an employee defined by him.179 In case of unsuccessful finishing of the mediation for implementing his function the ombudsman may use the other authorities provided by the law.180

L.2. Pre-screening role

[86]. The ombudsman can undertake actions on his initiative when he finds that the necessary conditions for protection of the rights and freedoms are not being created.181 When the ombudsman acts on his own initiative he can implement checks also about violations made before more than two years.182 The undertaking of actions of the ombudsman on his initiative shall be entered in separate section of the register of the appeals and the signals.183 When the ombudsman undertakes actions on his own initiative he can assign the check to the deputy ombudsman or to one or more employees 184 and in this case he shall determine the term for finishing the check.185

L.3. Recommendations and proposals

[87]. In the statement with which finishes the implemented check when he finds it is appropriate the ombudsman shall make recommendations and proposals:1. for 178 Bulgaria/ Правилник за организацията и дейността на омбудсмана [Regulation for




the Organisation and Activities of the Ombudsman] (31.05.2005), Art.29,para.1.182 Bulgaria/ Правилник за организацията и дейността на омбудсмана [Regulation for





49


the implementing or terminating the accomplishment of defined administrative activities; 2. for restoration of violated rights and freedoms; 3. for removal the reasons and the conditions creating prerequisites for violations of the rights and freedoms; 4. for removal the acts of bad administration and for improving the work of the administration.186 In 14 days after receiving the statement and the proposals the body or the person to whom it has been sent shall be obliged to consider them and to notify the ombudsman about the undertaken measures.187

If no measures are undertaken the ombudsman can include the case in his annual report of in separate report before the National Assembly.188 Any person who hinders the ombudsman to perform his/her official duties shall be punished by a fine of up to 600 BGN, if he/she is not liable to a more severe penalty. 189Any person who fails to submit data, documents or certificates, demanded by the ombudsman, in the term, specified by him/her, shall be punished by a fine of up to 500 BGN, if he/she is not liable to a more severe penalty.190 Any person who fails to perform another obligation, specified by this law or the relevant secondary legislation on its implementation, shall be punished by a fine of up to 300 BGN, if he/she is not liable to a more severe penalty. 191

[88]. In 2007 the ombudsman issued recommendations to municipalities called “Rights of the people, decentralisation and local power”.192 Their aim was to underline all institutional, legislative, practical measures, requirements and criteria on which good governance is based. The recommendations are focused on elaboration of effective and transparent procedures for hearings, voting, setting the agenda, recording the hearing, ethic rules for conduct of municipal counsellors and servants, building capacity of the municipal administration, participation of citizens in the procedures, forming of civil consultative structures, free access to information, accountability of the local councils, etc. The recommendations were sent to all newly elected mayors and municipal councils after the local elections in October in 2007 and then organised six local meetings to discuss them with municipal authorities, civil organisaitons, citizens. Many mayors signed protocols for agreement with the ombudsman to respect the recommendations. The ombudsman stated that he intends to monitor the compliance of the practice to the recommendations.

[89]. In 2007 the ombudsman also proposed to the National Assembly the establishment of effective mechanism for implementation of the judgements of

186 Bulgaria/ Правилник за организацията и дейността на омбудсмана [Regulation for the Organisation and Activities of the Ombudsman] (31.05.2005), Art.31.

187 Bulgaria/ Правилник за организацията и дейността на омбудсмана [Regulation for the Organisation and Activities of the Ombudsman] (31.05.2005), Art.32, para.1


189 Bulgaria/Закон за омбудсмана [Ombudsman Act] (1.01.2004), Art.29.190 Bulgaria/Закон за омбудсмана [Ombudsman Act] (1.01.2004), Art.30.191 Bulgaria/Закон за омбудсмана [Ombudsman Act] (1.01.2004), Art.31.192 Bulgaria/Омбудсман на Република България/Годишен доклад за 2007 “Доброто


50


the European Court on Human Rights and ratification of the Optional Protocol at the UN Convention for Prevention of Torture and other Forms of Inhuman and Degrading Treatment and Punishment.193 The need of ratification of the UN Convention on the Rights of People with Disabilities was discussed in the expert council on discrimination issues at the ombudsman and it is envisaged that concrete steps would be taken for the ratification.

L.4. Proposals for legislative amendments

[90]. If as result of implemented check the ombudsman establishes that defined law provision is reason or creates prerequisites for violation of the rights and freedoms he can direct proposals and recommendations for legislative changes.194 The proposals and the recommendations for legislative changes shall be sent to the National Assembly and to the Council of Ministers.195 The proposals and the recommendations for legislative changes and the actions undertaken for them shall be entered in the register of the appeals and signals and shall be included in the annual report of the ombudsman.196 For more information see also the chapters “Monitoring human rights” and “Advisory and legislative function”.

M. Miscellaneous[91]. The research did not find any miscellaneous issues to report.

193 Written reply No 1115 to the researcher, dated on 8.05.2008, p. 5.194 Bulgaria/ Правилник за организацията и дейността на омбудсмана [Regulation for




51


N. Good practices[92]. The research did not identify any examples of good practice.

52


O. Independent Public Bodies [93]. The only other independent public body that deals with human rights in

Bulgaria is the specialised single equality authority, the Комисията за защита от дискриминация (КЗД) [Protection Against Discrimination Commission (PADC)], with a mandate to uniformly provide protection on all grounds, including sexual orientation. It has been established under the Закон за защита от дискриминация [Protection Against Discrimination Act (01.01.2004)]. The PADC is an independent collegiate body consisting of nine members, five of whom are elected by Parliament, the others appointed by the President. Their term of office is five years and their powers include: receiving and investigating complaints by victims, as well as third parties without limitation; issuing binding rulings declaring discrimination and imposing financial sanctions; issuing binding instructions to prevent, stop or require abstention from discrimination and/or restore the status quo ante; carrying out surveys and publishing independent reports; bringing court action and joining court proceedings in an amicus curiae capacity; making recommendations to other authorities to reform legislation or practice; giving opinions on draft legislation; and providing independent assistance to victims of discrimination. The PADC has quasi-investigative powers, including accessing any testimony, documents or facilities for on-site inspections, which allow it to be proactive in gathering evidence, thus relieving the victim. Its proceedings are exempt from any fee or cost and can also be initiated ex officio.

F.


P. Human Rights NGOs [94]. After the EU accession of Bulgaria on 1.01.2007 the few human rights NGOs

that always had been active continued their work but most of the newly established NGO especially those who work with Roma issues were gradually closed. The most active nationally NGOs are enlisted in Annex 1. Three of them provide mainly legal aid and work on strategic litigation in all spheres of human rights and the rest are focused on several issues like minority, gender, access to education, services, information by encouraging advocacy and self-advocacy, by maintaining the dialogue between NGOs, local informal groups, government and local authorities and researching problematic human rights areas.

G.


A. AnnexesAnnex 1 – Mapping of NHRIs and other Independent Public Human Rights BodiesName Комисия за защита от дискриминация [Protection Against Discrimination Commission]

Acronym КЗД [PADC]

Address , Tel, Fax, email, website

1125 Sofia, bld. "Dragan Tzankov" 35Telephone: 003592 /807 30 30Fax: 003592 / 870 84 48E-mail: [email protected]://www.kzd-nondiscrimination.com/

Type of Organisation(please tick, as applicable)

□ National Human Rights Institution □ Equality Body □ Data Protection Authority □ Ombudsman □ Commission □ Tribunal □ Other (please specify)

Description(max. 100 words)

The only other independent public body that deals with human rights in Bulgaria is the specialised single equality authority, the Комисията за защита от дискриминация (КЗД) [Protection Against Discrimination Commission (PADC)], with a mandate to uniformly provide protection on all grounds, including sexual orientation. It has been established under the Закон за защита от дискриминация [Protection Against Discrimination Act (01.01.2004)]. The PADC is an independent collegiate body consisting of nine members, five of whom are elected by Parliament, the others appointed by the President.

Target groups(please tick, as applicable)

□ Women □ Children□ Disabled □ LGBT □ Refugees / asylum seekers

H.

mailto:[email protected]


□ Immigrants □ Roma □ National / ethnic minorities □ Other (please specify)

Activities (please tick, as applicable)

□ Collection/recording of complaints □ Investigation and processing of complaints□ Arbitration/mediation/facilitation services, assistance in resolving cases□ Legal aid, representation in court□ Individual legal advice, legal consultation□ Strategic litigation□ General information about rights and legislation□ Documents on human rights situation (reports, opinions) (please specify □ public, □ restricted, □ available on request) Collection of statistics on human rights situation (please specify □ public, □ restricted, □ available on request)□ Monitoring of human rights violations□ Formal decision-making body197

□ Psychological/social counselling services□ Policy advice (national parliament, government)□ Awareness raising□ Human rights education□ Consultative status with international organisations (please specify □ UN, □ Council of Europe, □ other)□ Promotion of international human rights treaties□ Cooperation with civil society□ Media work□ Other practical support

197 Please tick if the organisation is legally mandated to make decision upon complaints received.

56


Current staff (number) Nine people

Annual budget

57


Annex 2 – Mapping Human Rights NGOs Name Аssociation for European Integration and Human RightsAcronym EURORIGHTSAddress 4000 Plovdiv, 2 Han Kubrat, Str, fl.3 Telephone 00 35932 62 32 44; 62 32 64; 26 40 97Fax 00 35932 62 32 44; 62 32 64; 26 40 97E-mail [email protected] www.eurorights-bg.orgBrief description – including information on staff and resources, if available(approximately 100 words)

EURORIGHTS is an independent non-governmental organisation for the protection of human rights established in 1998 with 6 people staff and 20 lawyers affiliated to it. Its mission is to provide legal aid and defence of citizens whose rights and freedoms have been violated, to raise the legal awareness of community members and cultivate their willingness to stand up for their rights and freedoms, to improve the training and education of law students in the field of human rights, to improve the professional qualification of practising lawyers and familiarise them with the functioning of international human rights jurisdictions and the procedures undertaken before these jurisdictions.

Human rights issues covered(approximately 100 words)

All spheres of human rights

Main activities(approximately 100 words)

Provision of legal aid and strategic litigation, active involvement in legislative process, trainings in human rights for lawyers.

Name Bulgarian Helsinki CommitteeAcronym BHCAddress Sofia 1504; 7 Varbitza street

58


Telephone 00 359 (0)2 9434876Fax 00 359 (0)2 9439060E-mail [email protected] www.bghelsinki.orgBrief description – including information on staff and resources, if available(approximately 100 words)

The BHC is an independent non-governmental organisation for the protection of human rights. The objectives of the committee are to promote respect for the human rights of every individual, to stimulate legislative reform to bring Bulgarian legislation in line with international human rights standards, to trigger public debate on human rights issues, to carry out advocacy for the protection of human rights, and to popularise and make widely available human rights instruments. The staff consists of 34 people, of whom 8 are administrative staff, 14 are lawyers, 5 are researchers, 2 are journalists.


The committee reports on human rights violations with a special emphasis on the rights of ethnic and religious minorities, refugees and asylum-seekers, rights of the child, protection from torture and ill-treatment, freedom of expression and association, problems of the criminal justice system. The BHC offers free legal help to the victims of human rights abuses. The committee also works in the sphere of human rights education, organises conferences, workshops, public actions and other forms of public activities aimed at bringing the concept of human rights to the attention of the general public.


The main spheres of activities of the Bulgarian Helsinki Committee are: monitoring the human rights situation in Bulgaria in several priority fields, pro bono legal assistance to victims of human rights violations, raising public awareness to human rights problems, and training in international human rights standards and protection mechanisms.

Name ACCESS-Sofia FoundationAcronym ACCESSAddress Sofia 1463, 50 Shandor Petyofi street, fl.1.Telephone 00 359 (0)2 9515432Fax 00 359 (0)2 9515682E-mail [email protected]

59



Website http://www.access-sofia.orgBrief description – including information on staff and resources, if available(approximately 100 words)

ACCESS Foundation is an independent non-profit organisation, established in May 1992 and registered in 2002 under the Non-Government Organisations Law. The staff consists of nine people and the chair of the board of directors is Valery Roussanov.


ACCESS's priority objective is to promote mutual tolerance and better understanding of the cultural diversity in Bulgaria and the Balkans. ACCESS consistently works for the development of a network facilitating free exchange of expertise and information, and establishment of contacts among Bulgarian and foreign NGOs, especially from the Balkan countries.


ACCESS – Sofia Foundation implements projects, conducts surveys and analyses, organises courses, trains interns and publishes books and periodicals in four key areas: Balkan dialogue and regional co-operation, intercultural dialogue and education, civil society building and freedom of speech and media.

Name Partnership FoundationAcronymAddress 1142 Sofia, 64 Vassil Levski bul.Telephone 00 359 (0)2 9815507;Fax 00 359 (0)2 9808373E-mail [email protected] http://partnershipfoundation.dir.bgBrief description – including information on staff and resources, if available(approximately 100 words)

Staff consists of nine trainers, experts, consultants, a lawyer and five people administrative staff.


Improvement of relations between Roma and police (110 policemen in 21 police stations trained in communication and negotiation skills), improvement of communication between NGOs and local authorities, training in conflict resolution skills of children, aged 12 -18 in and out of care, training in conflict resolution skills in the only women’s

60


prison, drug prevention programs for young people and their families.Main activities(approximately 100 words)

Training and Consulting: effective communications; negotiation; problem solving; organisational relations; project development and management; team building; meetings facilitation; stress management; alternative dispute resolution /conciliation/; mediation; system design; Mediation and Facilitation Services - assist individuals, groups, and organisations in resolving disputes. Research, Analyses and Evaluation - carry out research activities and analyses of public, non-profit and private sectors. Projects and Problems - advance the principles of partnership and cooperation in the public, non-profit and business organisations.

Name Gender Project for BulgariaAcronymAddress Sofia 1000 ; 37 Parchevich streetTelephone 00 359 (0)2 9864710; 00 359 (0)2 9815604;00 359 (0)48 988434Fax 00 359 (0)2 9864710; 00 359 (0)2 9815604;00 359 (0)48 988434E-mail [email protected] Website http://www.gender-bg.org/_en/Brief description – including information on staff and resources, if available(approximately 100 words)

The Gender Project for Bulgaria Foundation is a non-governmental organisation, founded in 1994. The staff consists of four persons. The organisation’s work focus is raising the public awareness of equal opportunities of men and women and women's rights as human rights. It lobbies the national and local authorities to implement the gender equality policy of UN and EU. The foundation is a part of: the national network of Women's Alliance for Development, the regional women's network KARAT Coalition - NGOs from 13 CEE countries, the Stability Pact Gender Task Force. Activities: advocacy campaigns, training programs, information dissemination, research programs, networking.

Human rights issues covered(approximately 100 words) Violence against women, women and the economy, women in decision-making, institutional mechanisms for

women's advancement, women and mediaMain activities(approximately 100 words)

Information and education campaigns with the media and production of a video spots, radio broadcasts and columns in the press; training seminars in Sofia and the country on domestic violence issues; hidden discrimination of women from ethnic groups; gender awareness and analyses; the media role for overcoming existing stereotypes;

61


acquiring leadership skills; gender education in school and university; starting-up small business; NGO management, designing and participating in projects for creation of National mechanism for equal opportunities of women and men and its promoting in public space; supporting the national and international women's networks that strengthen women's positions; researches of domestic violence issues, sexual harassment, globalisation effect on women and men.

Name Assistance Centre for Torture SurvivorsAcronym ACETAddress Sofia 1680, Belite Brezi, 7-9 Zvanika street; floor 1, apt. 3 Telephone tel/fax 00 359 (0)2 9584636;00 359 (0)2 8586018Fax tel/fax 00 359 (0)2 9584636;00 359 (0)2 8586018E-mail [email protected] ; [email protected] www.acet-bg.orgBrief description – including information on staff and resources, if available(approximately 100 words)

ACET is a Bulgarian non-governmental organisation, founded in 1995. Its main aims are the prevention of torture practices and the providing of rehabilitation services for victims of torture. The medical rehabilitation program is carried out in Sofia, Plovdiv, Varna and Stara Zagora. ACET follows a policy of standardisation of services for torture survivors organising regular supervision of its clinical activity and conducts seminars for the exchange of professional experience with relative organisations. ACET is affiliated to the International Rehabilitation Council for Torture Victims (IRCT, Copenhagen) and is member of the Balkan Network for the Prevention of Torture and Rehabilitation of Victims (BAN) and the SOS-Network of the World Organisation Against Torture (OMCT). Mimoza Dimitrova is the director of ACET and three physicians and three social workers are the staff.


Prevention of torture and physical and psychological rehabilitation of torture survivors.


The activities of ACET aim providing of effective assistance to people who have suffered from torture as well as working on the prevention and termination of torture.

62




Name Center for Social PracticesAcronym CSPAddress 1 000 Sofia, Bulgaria, 9B,Graf Ignatiev St.Telephone 00359 2 981 21 88, 980 89 37Fax 00 359 (0)2 9864405E-mail [email protected] http://www.csp-sofia.orgBrief description – including information on staff and resources, if available(approximately 100 words)

CSP is an independent NGO focusing on resolution of conflicts and tensions between the government and civil society, helping ongoing dialogue between government, citizens and media and concentrated on communities – the municipalities of the provinces, training citizen groups, local government and media in skills related to co-owned policy planning and development, as well as good governance and battling corruption, training and organisational support, at the municipal level, for the attainment of forms of policy-making and development that ensure the inclusion of all stakeholders, issues relating to social exclusion, minorities and vulnerable groups.


Right to education, right to social assistance, right to participate in decision making, right to freedom of expression


Debates, round tables, research, analysis, recommendations, teaching

Name Regional Office Sofia of Fridrich-Ebert-StiftungAcronym FESAddress Sofia 1000, 71 Knyaz Boris I, p.b. 958Telephone 00 359 (0)2 9808747Fax 00 359 (0)2 9802438

63


E-mail [email protected]

Website www.fes.bgBrief description – including information on staff and resources, if available(approximately 100 words)


During design and implementation of projects the Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung pays particular attention to gender issues and secures a high participation of women.


Democracy and institution building, decentralisation and local government, labour relations and social security, youth programs, EU Integration.

Name Bulgarian Lawyers for Human RightsAcronym BLHRAddress Sofia 1000, 49 Gurko street, fl.3Telephone 00 359 (0)2 9803967; 00 359 (0)2 9866623 Fax 00 359 (0)2 9803967; 00 359 (0)2 9866623 E-mail [email protected] www.blhr.orgBrief description – including information on staff and resources, if available(approximately 100 words)

BLHR is an independent NGO established in 1993 by five lawyers to promote and support effective implementation of international human rights standards in Bulgaria. Its staff consists of 25 distinguished practising lawyers.

64



All spheres of human rights


Provision of legal aid and strategic litigation in the spheres where numerous violations of human rights persist in Bulgaria and publishing, information and other educational activities regarding international treaties and standards in human rights protection addressed at lawyers.

Name Inter Ethnic Initiative for Human Rights FoundationAcronym IEIAddress Sofia 1000, 9 Graf Ignatiev street, entrance АTelephone 00 359 (0)2 9801716Fax 00 359 (0)2 9800108E-mail [email protected] description – including information on staff and resources, if available(approximately 100 words)

The Interethnic Initiative for Human Rights Foundation was established in 1996 as a not-for-profit NGO that promotes minorities’ rights and foster inter-community co-operation in all areas of public life in Bulgaria. Its mission is to: influence legislation and institutional policies in accordance with international human and minority rights protection standards; raise awareness of these standards among politicians and public servants at local and national levels; encourage citizen participation and supervision regarding the implementation of minority rights standards; enhance public sensitivity and understanding about the problems and rights of minorities, encouraging a spirit of inter-ethnic tolerance, mutual support and non-discriminative practices; enhance minorities’ knowledge about standards and mechanisms to protect their rights and increase their capacity for rights-based advocacy in institutions at all levels; encourage cooperation and solidarity among NGOs and networks at regional and national level in the promotion of minority rights.


The IEI Foundation has as its mission to promote human and minority rights and to encourage the participation of minorities in public life and intercommunity cooperation in the fields of political, economic, social and

65


cultural development.


The IEI initiates and implements local, national and international projects in three main fields: Rights-based educational integration of minorities; Ethnocultural pluralism in the media; Public participation of minorities, especially in the political arena.

Name Samaritans AssociationAcronym SAAddress Stara Zagora 6000, 1A Lyben Karavelov Street, fl. 2, apt. 69, p.b. 1149 Telephone 00 359 (0)42 621083 Fax 00 359 (0)42 621083E-mail [email protected] www.samaritansbg.comBrief description – including information on staff and resources, if available(approximately 100 words)

The mission of SAMARITANS is to work for full participation in the society of children, young people, old people and families in disadvantaged position in Stara Zagora municipality by supporting people, groups, communities through implementation of activities and services based on real needs, support capacity building and mutual help in different situations, support the process of integration and personal development, increase and recover social functioning, ensure help in coping with the consequences of segregation.


Rights of the child, right to education, right to social assistance


Provision of community-based social services to disadvantaged people – Roma, poor, children at risk, children with disabilities, single mothers, drug users, etc.

66


Name Humanitas AssociationAcronymAddress Rousse 7020, Kotovsk 1, room 505 Telephone 00 359 (0)82 845 687Fax 00 359 (0)82 453 153E-mail [email protected]; [email protected] description – including information on staff and resources, if available(approximately 100 words)

HUMANITAS is a non-governmental organisation established in 1997 in Rousse for education, culture and civil education. Its mission is to create a new model for education, reflecting the values and functions of civil society, to encourage private initiative and care for the community in education, social services and culture, to support the democratic idea for participation of citizens of different social groups in debate and initiatives solving their problems.


Rights of the Child


HUMANITAS funds projects for sustainable development by working with talanted children and children at risk to prevent their marginalisation.

Name Centre for Liberal Strategies FoundationAcronym CLSAddress 1000 Sofia, 26 Solunska Street, second floor and 135 A Rakovski Str, Second floorTelephone 00 359 (0)2 9861433; 00 359 (0)2 9818925Fax (+359 2) 9818925E-mail [email protected]

67


Website www.cls-sofia.orgBrief description – including information on staff and resources, if available(approximately 100 words)

CLS is an independent policy institute that produces policy, economic and legal studies. The staff is 16 persons and on the advisory board there are distinguished national and foreign scientists.


Among other issues CLS researches the effect of cases before the European Court on Human Rights in Strasbourg on the national level.

Main activities(approximately 100 w

Main activities are debates, round tables, reports on political, legal and economic development in Bulgaria and Europe.

Name Partners Bulgaria FoundationAcronym PBFAddress Sofia 1000, 66 Lyuben Karavelov street

Telephone 00 359 (0)2 9632677Fax 00 359 (0)2 9634799E-mail [email protected] www.partners-bg.orgBrief description – including information on staff and resources, if available(approximately 100 words)

FPB is part of an international network Partners for Democratic Change supporting the development of civil society and the culture of peaceful conflict resolution in the transition countries. The mission of FPB is to support the process of democratic change in Bulgaria by assisting of institutions, NGOs and specialists in capacity building.


Encouraging the participation of organisations, informal groups, and ethnic minorities in decision making process, elaboration of strategies for more efficient management of social and economic processes during the transition period, strengthening the dialogue between the civil society, government and business sector, distribution of the culture for

68


democratic resolution of conflicts.


Researches, analysis, evaluation and recommendations for change in policy regarding the situation of socially marginalised groups (Roma, other minorities, children in institutions, prisoners, youngsters and children at risk).

Trainings on effective communication, rights of the child, civil education, leadership, organisation development, conflict resolution for local authorities representatives, governmental and business organisatons, social workers, university teachers, students.

Mediation supporting persons, organisations, institutions for peaceful resolution of conflicts. Co-operative planning, facilitation of processes for decision making and supporting creation of initiatives for

decision making of local importance.

Name National Democratic Institute for International Affairs Acronym NDIAddress Sofia 1000, 159 Rakovski street, fl. 2, apt. 5 Telephone 00 359 (0)2 9807760Fax 00 359 (0)2 9807753E-mail [email protected] description – including information on staff and resources, if available(approximately 100 words)

The National Democratic Institute for International Affairs (NDI) is a non-profit organisation working to strengthen and expand democracy worldwide. Calling on a global network of volunteer experts, NDI provides practical assistance to civic and political leaders advancing democratic values, practices and institutions. NDI works with democrats in every region of the world to build political and civic organisations, safeguard elections, and to promote citizen participation, openness and accountability in government. Since 1990, NDI has supported Bulgarian institutions by helping political parties increase their public outreach, promoting the political participation of women and minorities, developing the constituency outreach skills of members of parliament (MPs), and supporting civic groups as they conduct advocacy initiatives and engage citizens in the electoral process through Get-Out-The-Vote (GOTV)

69


initiatives. NDI programs in Bulgaria have been funded by the National Endowment for Democracy (NED), the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), and the Westminster Foundation for Democracy.


Promoting the political participation of women and minorities.


Increasing women's political participation , bringing government closer to its citizens, enhancing voter participation

Name Romani Baht FoundationAcronymAddress Sofia 1373 zh.k.Fakulteta, 8 Nov Zhivot streetTelephone 00 359 (0)2 231303; 00 359 (0)2 9204272Fax 00 359 (0)2 231303E-mail [email protected] description – including information on staff and resources, if available(approximately 100 words)

The Romani baht Foundation is a Roma Human Rights Advocacy Organization with five people on staff. It was founded in 1995 and legally registered in May 1996 in the Sofia City Court. At the beginning, the organisation provided services for the Roma community in Fakulteta district in Sofia. In 2001 the activities were extended in the other Roma neighbourhoods in Sofia – Philipovtzi and Christo Botev. The organisation has also established Information and Communication Centre. The Center is responsible for gathering all the information from the three field offices and also is issuing a newsletter, which contains information about Romani Baht activities and publishes interesting legal cases. In most of the cases the state institutions also prefer to work with the foundation as partners, because this model of solving the problems has been proven as a successful one.


Roma-rights issues in Bulgaria

Main activities 1. Mediation between the Roma community and state and local authorities; 2. Creation of partnership and tolerance

70


(approximately 100 words) between Roma community and Bulgarian civic organizations; 3. Creation of equal status of Roma community in its dialogue with the institutions, civic organisations and media and lobby for equal access of Roma in all spheres of Bulgarian society as it is anticipated with the Framework Program for Equal Participation of Roma in the Bulgarian Public Life (signed by the Bulgarian Government in April 1999); 4. Providing of legal education for Roma youth; 5. Providing of legal aid and legal representation in cases of human rights abuses and discrimination on ethnic base and prevention of inhuman and degrading treatment of Roma.

Name Drom OrganizationAcronym DROMAddress Vidin 3700, complex Suedinenie, bl. 4, 1st floorTelephone 00 359 (0)94 606209Fax 00 359 (0)94 600713E-mail [email protected] http://www.drom.hit.bg/Brief description – including information on staff and resources, if available(approximately 100 words)

Drom organisation is an NGO in which Roma nad Bulgarian work together on monitoring of human rights situation in Northwestern Bulgaria since 1998. The most valuable implemented project is “Desegregation of Roma education” the model of which was implemented afterwards in Central and Eastern Europe. New York Times, News Week and Helard Tribune wrote articles about it. Donka Panayotova is the director of the Drom.


Equal access of Roma to quality education


Educational programs and advocacy for Roma education.

71


72


Annex 3 - Tables and StatisticsCh.C Mandate of the Human Rights Institution

Priority topics

2005 Advocacy of the citizens before the state and municipal authorities and their administrations,

Advocacy of the citizens in the social sphere – welfare and services,

Facilitation of the relationships of citizens with providers of public services,

Advocacy of the detained persons in closed institutions – prisons and pre-trial detention facilities

2006 improvement of the administrative services and access to information in public institutions,

protection of the rights of people with disabilities and implementation of mechanisms for real social integration,

protection of labour and insurance rights,

protection of the right to protected environment,

equal access to education and quality education,

I.


right to healthcare,

protection of the rights of the comsumers/clients of public services – electricity, heating, water,

independent monitoring of the human rights of detained persons,

monitoring and proposals for improvement of the judicial administration,

protection of the rights to social services/welfare,

encouragement of tolerance and decrease of hate speech,

better cooperation with local authorities for respect of the rights of the citizens and good governance

2007 right to good governance and administration;

right to healthcare;

rights of the children to social services, family, alternatives to institutionalisation, quality care, juvenile justice;

rights of prisoners to quality healthcare, education, employment, vocational training, good material conditions of detention;

right to environment;

anti-corruption,

74


access to public information;

problems with court administration;

cоnsumers’ rights

Ch.5. Key publications of NHRI

Reports (please indicate briefly topic)

2000

2001 -

2002 -

2003 -

2004 -

75


2005 Annual report

‘Международни стандарти, основополагащи принципи и добри практики за институцията на омбудсмана. Националният омбудсманд на България.’ [International standards, fundamental principles and good practices for ombudsman institution. National ombudsman in Bulgaria.]

2006 Annual report

2007 Annual report, Report on prisons in Bulgaria, Recommendations for Good Governance to Municipalities, Handbook for the Patient.

76


Ch. 6 Advisory functions of the NHRI

Advisory opinions and other advisory services given to government (briefly indicate topic)

2000 -

2001 -

2002 -

2003 -

2004 -

2005 Advisory statement regarding the scrap crisis in Sofia, addressed to Parliament, Council of Ministers, Ministry of Environment and Water, Sofia municipality, Sofia municipal council and the Chief Prosecutor.

2006 Advisory statement regarding police brutality which led to death of a man, addressed to the Ministry of Interior asking the ministry to elaborate instructions to the policemen to respect the law and international human rights standards for detention.

Advisory statement to the Council of Ministers and the State Financial Inspection Office to review the procedure for selecting sub-contractors in provision of public services so that it complies with the Public Procurement Act when state funding is allocated.

Advisory statements to the Ministry of Environment and Water and Ministry of Agriculture and Forests to raise awareness campaign about the aim of the European ecological network “Natura

J.


2000”.

Recommendations to state and municipal authorities and their administrations for elaboration of internal administrative rules for checks initiated by the ombudsman.

2007 Advisory statement to the Council of Ministers to consider the selection of protected areas and to present to the European commission a list with these areas in Bulgaria.

Advisory statement to the National Assembly to review the Biological Diversity Act to introduce provisions allowing public discussions about determination of protected areas and possibility for appeal of the orders of the Ministry of Environment and Waters declaring certain area as protected.

Recommendations to municipalities to advise the local authorities on effective and transparent procedures for decision-making, respect for rights of the people and active participation of citizens in solutions of problems of great significance.

Advisory statement on the abuse of a quarry (stone-pit) in a village and recommendations for measures to be taken by the Ministry of Regional Development, Ministry of Environment and Waters, Ministry of Interior, Ministry of Agriculture and Foods, Ministry of Social Policy, Ministry of Finance, the mayor of town of Pernik.

78


Ch. 6 Role of NHRI in legislative processes

Instances input was provided in the legislative process (briefly indicate topic)

2000 -

2001 -

2002 -

2003 -

2004 -

2005 Asking Constitutional Court to find a provision in Execution of Punushments Act (prohibiting secret correspondence of people on remand in the prisons) as not compliant with the Constitution and the Court did so.

K.


2006 Legislative amendments on adoption of the Law on Terriroty Plan of Sofia. During the second voting of the law many of the ombudsman’s proposals for amendments were considered and adopted.

Drafting the Закон за лобирането [Lobbying Activities Act]. The draft was approved by all state authorities but it still was not adopted in 2008.;

Amendments (many of them were adopted) in Energetics Act concerned lack of access to information about how central heating companies calculate their clients’ bills and their exclusive right to warrant without court proceedings. The ombudsman proposed elimination of the fee for “power” for the clients who do not use central heating but their flats are among clients who use such, introduction of a specific fee for those clients who use only hot water and do not use central heating provided by the same company, elimination of the provisions in the Energetics Act, which entitle central heating providers to get a warrant without court proceedings, but only on the basis of bills, elimination of the sanction of the clients who did not install devices for measurement of consumption of central heating in their apartments.

Amendments in Approval and Implementation of the General Territory Plan of Sofia Municipality Act were related to lack of public discussion and lack of access to information and involvement of civil society when the plan was elaborated thus allowing numerous illegal acts to take place

Amendments in Access to Documentation of State Secret Services Act concerned access of citizens to the archives, which is still problematic because of lack of administrative resources. The ombudsman proposed the control over the archive of the totalitarian secret services to be performed by a newly formed independent Commission as a safeguard for the complete and objective disclosure of the documents.

Provisions adopted later on in the Наредба за общите правила за административно

80


обслужване [Ordinance for the General Rules for Administrative Service] adopted by the Министество на държавната администрация и административната реформа [Ministry of State Administration and Administrative Reform] on 26 September 2006

Proposals for legislative amendments to provide for local ombudsmen - separate, determined in advance budget, clear legal regulation of relations between the national and local ombudsmen is needed allowing him to instruct them and to be able to refer certain cases and to assign implementation of certain measures to them.

To Constitutional Court:

To hold that the privilege of central heating providers to obtain a warrant without court proceedings contradicts the Constitution.

To hold that Art.143, para.4 and Art.186, para.1 of the Административно-процесуален кодекс [Administrative Procedure Code] contradict the Constitution. Art.143, para.4 provides that if the court rejects the appeal of an administrative act, the claimant should pay for all expenses including for the minimal remuneration for the lawyer of the state authority. Art.186, para. 1 provides that secondary legislation can be appealed by the citizens, organisation and authorities whose rights had been or could be violated and for whom the legislation imposes obligations.

2007 Proposals to the Ministry of Health:

To elaborate medical standards and rules for good practice in healthcare to be adopted as required by legislation;

To provide for issuing referrals to specialised medical help be amended to ensure

81


that patients have free access to healthcare when they are health insured;

To amend Ordinance 34 of Ministry of Health regulating the procedure for prescription of expensive medicines so that all patients who need the medicines be able to receive them regularly;

Proposal to the Ministry of Justice and the Ministry of Health:

to review Наредба 12 за здравното обслужване на лишените от свобода [Ordinance 12 for medical care of prisoners] so that it would be in compliance with the Закон за лечебните заведения [Medical Establishments Act] and Закон за здравното осигуряване [Health Insurance Act];

To the Ministry of Justice:

to consider amendments in Закон за изпълнение на наказанията [Execution of Punishments Act] and the Regulations for its implementation so that restrictions of the range of people who prisoners have the right to call on the phone to be abolished, the director of the prison for adolescents to be appointed as guardian of the prisoners so that informed consent in cases of medical treatment on their behalf be ensured, decentralisation of boarding houses for prisoners, the ombudsman to be included in the list of authorities with which prisoners have the right to correspond in closed envelopes, special places to be designated for drug addicted prisoners with respect to their specific needs;

To the Council of Ministers:

To amend of the Закон за подземните богатства [Natural Resources Act] and Закон за концесиите [Concession Act] to regulate clearly and broaden the powers and obligations of all inspecting authorities in cases of violations of

82


legislation;

To the National Assembly:

To amend Закон за достъп до обществена информация [Access to Public Information Act] to provide for a clear definition of ‘public information’ on the basis of objective criteria, for introduction of the ‘principle for balance of the interests”, for liberalising the access to information when drafts of legislation, strategies, other acts of authorities are discussed;

To amend Administrative Procedure Code to introduce the concept of ‘silent agreement/approval’.

To amend the Закон за чужденците в България [Foreigners in Republic of Bulgaria Act] to introduce judicial review of the orders under Art. 46 of the Act, to introduce deadlines for placement of foreigners in the special home for temporary placement of foreigners in Busmanci, to introduce provisions for regulation of the legal status of foreigners who had stayed in Bulgaria for a long period illegally.

To introduce of specialised labour courts.

To introduce more effective protection of people under guardianship.

To Constitutional Court:

To hold that Art.3, para.2 of the Закон за добавената стойност [Added Value Tax Act] contradicts Constitution. The provision adds in the group of freelancers the notaries

83


and judges who execute court decisions.

To hold that Art.41, para.2 (requiring from candidates to mayor posts to have “bachelor” degree) of the Закон за местното самоуправление и местната администрация [Local Governance and Local Administration Act] contradicts Constitution.

To hold that Art.107 and Art 154, para. 1 and Art. 184 of the Energetics Act as not compliant to the Constitution. Art.107 and Art 184 violate the consumer’s right to be free of non-loyal competition and monopoly and the right to protect his/her interests and rights by effective mechanisms because they shift the burden of proof to the consumer and provide for preferential conditions for several big companies.

84


Ch 11 Competence of NHRI to deal with complaints

Please provide number, if available 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005198 2006199 2007200

Complaints received 1102 3064 3367

Complaints followed up 359, in process of checks - 686

2065, in process of checks 999

3530, in process of checks 1875

Follow up activities (please provide disaggregated figures per type of follow up activity: eg. advice, consultation, representation, litigation initiated etc.)

106 – problem solved by , 122 – advice, 17 – mediation, 61 – unreasoned complaints, 53 – lack of legal ground for the complaint

550 were found inadmissible, 1515 – problem solved or advice addressed

1026 – inadmissible, 3530 – problem solved or advice addressed

198 Bulgaria/Омбудсман на Република България/Годишен доклад за 2005 [Annual Report of the Ombudsman of the Republic of Bulgaria 2005] (June 2005-March 2006), Annex 1, p.57, 61, available at http://www.ombudsman.bg/annual_report.pdf, in Bulgarian.

199 Bulgaria/Омбудсман на Република България/Годишен доклад за 2006 [Annual Report of the Ombudsman of the Republic of Bulgaria 2006], Annex 1, p. 151, available in English at http://www.ombudsman.bg/index.php?action=list&item=opinions&type=10.

200 Bulgaria/Омбудсман на Република България/Годишен доклад за 2007 “Доброто управление, правата на хората и органите на властта” [Annual Report of the Ombudsman of the Republic of Bulgaria ‘Good governance, rights of the people and institutions of power’ 2007], p. 57 and Annex 1, p. 150, http://ombudsman.bg/annual_report_2007.pdf.

L.



Outcomes of these activities (please disaggregate per type of outcome: settlement reached, court decision, sanction, litigation unsuccessful etc)

123 – settlement reached

1515 – settlement reached, permissions issued, court decisions implemented, certificates issued.

3530 – problem solved or advice addressed

86

Thematic Legal Study on National Human Rights Institutions and Human Rights Organisations

Documents

Transcript of Thematic Legal Study on National Human Rights Institutions and Human Rights Organisations