A precedent with signs of institutional arbitrariness is shaking the Bulgarian judicial system. Anna Adamova - a young lawyer and doctor of constitutional law, becomes a target of deliberate harassment after reporting drunk driving.
The chronology of the case begins in the summer of 2022, when Adamova and another witness report a driver operating a vehicle in an intoxicated state near the Sofia village of Bistritsa. Two weeks later, Judge Velizar Kostadinov from the Sofia District Court makes an unexpected decision - returning the driver's license to the offender.
The magistrate accepts the testimony of the driver's wife as credible, completely disregarding the eyewitness testimony. As a professional lawyer, Adamova is shocked by such a procedural decision and files a complaint with the Inspectorate of the Supreme Judicial Council.
Subsequently, systematic harassment begins. Four months after the case closure, Judge Kostadinov sends an official signal to Adamova's employer - the Ministry of Youth and Sports, questioning her professional and moral qualities.
The escalation of harassment reaches dramatic dimensions when the lawyer's personal data - photos and phone number - are published in a closed Telegram group for paid intimate services. A wave of threatening calls and messages followed.
The GDBOP investigation conclusively establishes that the information was distributed from Judge Kostadinov's phone. Despite this, the Sofia City Prosecutor's Office refuses to initiate a pre-trial proceeding, raising serious questions about the independence of the judicial system.
Judge Kostadinov himself denies authorship, claiming that his phone was often left unattended and unprotected. The only action taken is a disciplinary proceeding initiated by the administrative head of the Sofia City Court.
Anna Adamova defines what is happening as an institutional failure and lack of elementary legal protection. At the moment, there is no official investigation, despite evidence collected by law enforcement.
This case raises fundamental questions about professional ethics in the judicial system, witness protection, and mechanisms for preventing institutional harassment.