Experts: Arrogance and personnel purges by the new government, judicial reform is lagging

The replacement of leaders in key state structures continues at high speed. In just one day, it became clear that the entire Board of Directors of the "Bulgarian Energy Holding" was dismissed by the Minister of Energy due to delayed reforms and the risk of the country losing over one billion euros. The head of the "Bulgarian Food Safety Agency" also parted ways with his post, and the management of the "State Fund Agriculture" was also replaced.

Against this backdrop, the pace in the judicial system is significantly slower. At a meeting between the Minister of Justice and members of the Supreme Judicial Council, a realistic timeline was outlined: elections for the professional quota in the SJC to be completed only in the second half of October, and the election of a new Prosecutor General to take place no earlier than March next year. Thus, ambitions for "rapid judicial reform" seem increasingly difficult to implement.

Kolarova: Changing people is not a reform

Political scientist Prof. "Rumyana Kolarova" emphasizes that the focus on personnel changes in the judiciary is wrong. "It has already been stated and established repeatedly that change, personal change in the judicial system, will solve absolutely nothing. So that is not the reform," she stated.

According to her, even if personnel changes happen later, this does not mean that "significant changes" to procedures and legislation cannot be made in the meantime. "Institutional change does not happen by changing the rules. Institutional change happens by changing the successful strategy," added Prof. Kolarova.

As an illustration, she points to the success of the singer "DARA", which according to her shows that it is possible to reach the top "without having a sponsor," but through "a lot of hard work." "What is interesting to me and what I will watch very carefully are the successful strategies in the judicial system. Up to this moment, the successful strategy in the judicial system is clear – you have to be connected to the network of power brokers and you have to report to them, or stay on the sidelines and not step on their toes," she also said.

Aslanov: Arrogance, haughtiness, and the risk of self-delusion

Sociologist "Yuri Aslanov" warned that with every new government, its true characteristics are revealed gradually, but the symptoms are already visible. "There are some worrying symptoms already. Like arrogance, like haughtiness. They often grow into self-delusion. And from there, it is a very fine line to abuse of power," he commented.

According to his words, the new rules for the work of the parliament are "the fruit of great confusion, a misunderstanding of which management areas should be rushed and which should not." Aslanov emphasized that "Parliament is not a place for rushing. There, everything should be leisurely, slow, after a lot of empty talk and meaningless discussions. They decided to rush there, instead of in the other place where people expect quick solutions – the government, the executive branch."

According to him, those in power are trying "to materialize as a government faster than people expect solutions." "For a while, the packaging can hide the lack of content. That is, PR can compensate for the absence of results. But that lasts for a while," added Aslanov. He warned that people can "quickly become disappointed" and public support can "grow into mass negation." "I don't expect miracles. I hope it doesn't turn out that an old oligarchy has been replaced by a new one, or perhaps the same one, but with a new master," he stated.

Slavev: The "not our person" model kills professionalism

Political scientist "Teodor Slavev" commented that in Bulgaria, the model for appointments in the administration is mixed. "In Bulgaria, the model by which appointments in the administration are made is mixed. In some countries, that of so-called ministerial trust is dominant, meaning the minister can completely and unlimitedly change the management in executive agencies. Bulgaria is a mixed model because there is a competitive principle," he explained.

According to his words, it is not professional to change leaders without a clear analysis of their work, referring to the shake-up in the "Bulgarian Food Safety Agency." According to him, the logic of "not our person" is often at play. "This logic over the years has always been applied in Bulgaria in the same way. And it has not led us to having a professional and independent administration," emphasized Slavev.

Judicial reform: long procedure and risk of "appointed" candidates

On the topic of judicial reform, Slavev reminded that the long procedure for electing a new composition of the SJC and a Prosecutor General was known even during the election campaign. "I would distinguish things into two parts. On one hand, it is the way in which the people will be chosen by the National Assembly. If we see that we have as many candidates as there are positions to be filled, it means that there is no choice and that they have been appointed," he warned.

According to him, it will be just as important how the elections among magistrates are organized – whether there will be real competition and trust in the process, or if the old practices will be repeated.

"Talking" vs. "working" parliament and the inevitable confrontation with "Vazrazhdane"

The tension surrounding the new rules for the work of the 52nd National Assembly was also a subject of commentary. "At the moment, without knowing it, those in power are choosing between two models of parliamentarism," said Prof. Kolarova. She defined one as a "talking parliament," in which there is strong confrontation, and the other – as a "working parliament," where compromises are reached mainly in committees.

"What they are doing with the procedures right now, they risk leading to a principled confrontation. If they think that in some way they can avoid confrontation with "Vazrazhdane" through the rules, they are deeply mistaken. Even in the most consensual parliament, "Vazrazhdane" will be a radical "no"," she warned.