PART III. LOCAL CIVIL SOCIETY
3. CONSTITUTIONAL LOCAL GOVERNMENT
3.1 Civil and Political Rights
From the earliest stages of the post-communist democratization of Bulgaria, the issue of minority rights and especially of the rights of Bulgarian Turks has been considered of primary importance. The last years of the communist regime were marked by severe infringement of the rights of Bulgarian Muslims. All persons having traditional Muslim names—Turkish and Roma Bulgarians—were forced to change them. The 1991 Constitution provides for sufficient protection of the civil rights of all Bulgarian citizens, and offers effective guarantees against any type of discrimination. Special attention has been paid to article 11 of the Constitution, which bans the formation of “political parties on ethnic, racial, or religious lines.” The text was initially considered restrictive and an infringement on the equal right to participate in politics. The established practices are in line with the 1992 decision of the Constitutional Court, which interprets article 11 in relation to the provisions of article 44, paragraph 2: “No organization shall act to
…. incite racial, national, ethnic, or religious enmity or an encroachment on the rights and freedoms of citizens.” This affirmed the constitutionality of the Turkish minority party—the Movement for Rights and Freedoms (MRF). It should be emphasized, however, that the MRF has never explicitly stated (in its name or its statute) that the party is organized along ethnic lines. Currently the MRF is a member of the European Liberal Democratic Reform Party and has observer status in the Liberal International.
There are adequate constitutional provisions for the protection of human rights in Bulgaria.
The Bulgarian Constitution guarantees freedom of expression (article 39), of religious belief (article 37), of association (article 44), as well as the right to privacy (articles 32, 33, and 34), property, inheritance (article 17), and economic initiative and enterprise (article 19). Article 19 also bans the abuse of monopoly power. In practice, the protection of these rights by the state is generally effective.
The two major ethnic groups, the Turks and the Roma, tend to live in separate communities; since 1990, they have been gradually and consistently integrated into the social and political life of the country. The constitutional concept of local citizenship is inclusive—no individual can be denied his or her rights on the grounds of any cultural, ethnic, or religious identification. Manifestations of extreme forms of ethnic and religious intolerance are rare in Bulgaria, mostly because of the recognized national tradition of
T H E S T A T E O F L O C A L D E M O C R A C Y I N C E N T R A L E U R O P E
tolerance. At the same time, there has been a considerable delay in the establishment of both representative and administrative bodies performing and coordinating policies aimed at the integration of minorities (especially at the level of local government). The establishment of a National Council for Ethnic and Demographic Issues was the first step towards promotion of national minority strategies and administrative assistance for ethnic and religious pluralism. This specialized body was formally set up in June 1995, but did not function effectively until December 1997. Since the beginning of 1998, the central government has started to establish regional minority councils as part of the regional administration. The establishment of a specialized administration is now complete, with the appointment of municipal experts on minority policies in most of the municipalities with a mixed population. A representative of the largest minority group in the community usually holds the position of municipal expert. As of May 2002, twelve out of 28 districts have adopted district programs at the local level on the integration of minorities, and five of these have planned concrete activities. Currently, the development of administrative capacity in the area of minority integration is considered complete.
At the local level, municipalities can, and sometimes do, enact ordinances prohibiting discrimination. For example, the municipality of Stara Zagora has passed an ordinance prohibiting discrimination in the provision of public services, subject to administrative fines (Annual Report, Human Rights Project 1999). However, until recently there were no successful court challenges to discrimination in access to public accommodation. Since the new anti-discrimination legislation came into force on January, 2004, the European Roma Rights Center (ERRC), acting along with the Romani Baht Foundation (RBF) and the Bulgarian Helsinki Committee (BHC), has filed a number of civil actions alleging discrimination against Roma citizens. Following this course of action, as of September 30, 2004, five landmark judgments have been obtained from Bulgarian courts that sanction perpetrators of discrimination. Key factors in this success have been not only the new piece of legislation, but also the increased public awareness and the courts’
willingness to be involved in these matters.
Since the early 1990s, a considerable number of NGOs have been working primarily in the field of protection of minority rights. The issue of minority integration became the focus of NGO projects later, starting in 1995–96. Most of the NGO programs are implemented in cooperation with local authorities. In an effort to facilitate partnerships with a variety of donors supporting minority integration, municipal authorities have also developed programs aimed at coordination of different projects within the municipality.
The efforts of Roma organizations to develop the common platform articulated in the 1999 Framework Program, and to negotiate with the government to have it adopted (OSCE report 2000), exemplify the success of Roma political participation. Moreover, as part of the government’s efforts to fulfill its commitments under the Framework Program, a total of 24 Roma were employed as experts in District Government Offices
R E P O R T O N T H E S T A T E O F L O C A L D E M O C R A C Y I N B U L G A R I A
by September 2000. The effectiveness of these and similar actions is somewhat limited by the fact that responsibilities and functions have not been defined, and most of the Roma participating in the programs have not even had appropriate job descriptions. In the light of the gross underrepresentation of Roma in the public employment sector, particular success stories remain sporadic. A more systematic approach and consistency within the government units are needed.
The Bulgarian Constitution protects cultural diversity and guarantees everyone the right to “develop his own culture in accordance with his ethnic self-identification”
(article 54, paragraph 1). The official language is Bulgarian, but all Bulgarian citizens have “the right to study and use their own language alongside the compulsory study of the Bulgarian language” (article 36, paragraph 2). Compulsory education (from the first to the eighth grade) is provided only in Bulgarian, but on the initiative of any ethnic community optional courses in the mother tongue may be organized. The most common is Turkish language courses, offered in areas with a high Turkish population.
There are several schools where Hebrew and Armenian are taught and a few where basic courses in Roma are being piloted.
The freedom to disseminate information in their mother tongue is guaranteed to all minorities by law. There are printed media in Turkish, and public television and radio deliver daily short news in Turkish. There are several private Turkish and Roma radio and television stations operating at the local level. Several Roma media—newspapers, magazines, radio, and television—rely on NGO support or have the status of NGOs.
The 1990 Bulgarian constitution provides for equal and free health care for all citizens (article 52). Since the introduction of the Health Insurance System, the health insurance of the socially vulnerable and unemployed (the Roma minority is predominantly in this group) is to be provided by the state budget, but administered by the municipalities. As a rule, the healthcare system now provides for the minimum required health services.
Some vital health services are offered only in the bigger cities and some only in Sofia;
furthermore, the access to them is extremely limited. Since the minorities tend to live in the peripheral municipalities, they are are disadvantaged with respect to public health care services.
3.2 Rule of Law
The local government institutions must observe legal regulations, and control over the administrative and governmental acts is exercised on several levels. The mayor may appeal any act of the municipal council to the courts. One of the main competencies of the regional governor is to control the legality of all local government acts: he or she may overrule acts of the mayor on the basis of their illegality and may appeal acts of the municipal councils to the court, arguing that they violate the law.
T H E S T A T E O F L O C A L D E M O C R A C Y I N C E N T R A L E U R O P E
The Audit Court and the Public Internal Financial Control Agency check the legality of all privatization deals (including those involving municipal property). Public expenses, including the management of municipal budgets, are also controlled. The annual reports of the Audit Court provide information to the public. According to the 2001 annual report, in 52 municipalities the audit resulted in the sanctioning of fourteen violations of legal procedures for the renting of municipal property.
The lack of administrative capacity and the practices of direct interaction between local business and local government still serve as a basis for legal violations, which are ineffectively sanctioned because of the slow and unproductive judicial procedures.
The activities of the public officials are regulated both by the general laws and by the rules and regulations passed by the municipal council. These rules, regulations, and statutes are promulgated in a variety of ways—the sessions of the municipal council and its committees are public, and the media and individual citizens may actively debate all issues and organize actions to influence local government decisions. Even the closed discussions within party fractions are subject to public scrutiny, and deals struck between councilors and business interests are often revealed by the local media, thus becoming a public issue. With respect to effective implementation of these rules, however, relevant examples show considerable diversity across the country, depending on the level of public and media involvement in specific cases.
The right to fair trail is guaranteed to every Bulgarian citizen and since 1992, when Bulgaria ratified the European Convention of Human Rights, it is explicitly required by law. The public provision of legal defense is limited: the state guarantees it to those who cannot afford a private lawyer only in penal law cases and when the prosecution brings charges that would result in more than five years’ imprisonment (a detailed definition of these rights is given by Decision No. 479, January 8, 1996, of the First Division of the Supreme Courts on penal case No. 67). The existing system of separation of powers in Bulgaria leaves no role in this process for local government. The Bulgarian judiciary is highly autonomous and organized in a centralized manner. The funds for public defense are provided by the budget of the judiciary (passed by the parliament as part of the state budget). The courts are authorized to administer the provision of free legal defense, but the funding is so limited that the lawyers are only paid a symbolic honorarium.
Financial restrictions are considered to be the major impediment for the introduction of public defense in civil law cases. To mitigate these barriers, NGOs have organized the provision of free legal services by law clinics. Also, some municipalities have introduced the institution of Ombudsman. In certain cases of conflict of competencies, the courts, including the Constitutional Court, play the role of umpire in disputes between institutions of central and local government and between citizens and institutions.
The major problem, however, stems from the serious inefficiency of the judicial system (investigation, prosecution, and the courts) and the diminishing public trust in their law enforcement capacity. Adjudication by Bulgarian courts is unanimously assessed as
R E P O R T O N T H E S T A T E O F L O C A L D E M O C R A C Y I N B U L G A R I A
slow and inconsistent. Imbalances in the power structure allow for abuse of rules and procedures (Nations in Transit 2004). The extent to which such abuse actually occurs is unknown, but public trust in the judicial branch is low. Surveys of public opinion, such as those conducted by Gallup International, have found that Bulgarian citizens do not believe the law applies equally to all. More specifically, respondents feel that wealthy people, politically connected people, and the state get better treatment than the average citizen.
Annual reports of the European Commission on Bulgarian accession have regularly acknowledged the need for reform of the judiciary, but actions so far have produced unsatisfactory results.
As seen in Table 2.19, the local representatives who were interviewed assess municipal administrative staff as slightly biased along party lines. The mean score varies in the different size groups, but shows no coherent correlation with the size or the party affiliation of the local representatives.
Table 2.19
Partiality of Local Administration (7-Point Scale*)
Type of Municipality by Population Size Mean N Standard Deviation
Less than 4,999 3.00 25 2.10
5,000–9,999 3.95 205 2.00
10,000–49,999 3.46 364 1.73
50,000–99,999 3.30 145 1.58
Over 100,000 3.31 229 1.60
Total 3.49 968 1.77
Note: * 1—very biased; 7—not biased.
Source: LRS 2002.
Despite their low trust in the judiciary, the citizens have a relatively high level of respect for the law. Even though legal norms are considered to be ineffective and in permanent flux, the citizens show general respect towards legal norms. As can be seen in Table 2.20, which presents data from a general survey on political culture (administered in October 2000 with a sample of 1,024 respondents), the attitudes of “ordinary people”
are characterized by a basic respect for the law.
The lack of effective law enforcement, low administrative capacity, and mostly the slow and inefficient judicial procedures have led to low levels of compliance with legal regulations (traffic and tax regulations). Local representatives tend to think that most of the citizens consider the violation of the legal regulations as a “normal practice”;
22% of the respondents say that their fellow citizens don’t obey the legal regulations at
T H E S T A T E O F L O C A L D E M O C R A C Y I N C E N T R A L E U R O P E
all or hardly at all. The mean scores by type of municipality are shown in Table 2.21;
obedience to legal norms is slightly higher in small municipalities, where traditional culture and norms of solidarity are dominant.
Table 2.20
Index of Respect for the Law [%]
Survey Statements Agree Disagree Do Not Know
It is not unjust to “go around” the law 10.4 66.9 22.7
The government should have the possibility of “going around”
the law when solving important social and political problems
16.3 64.6 19.1
One can violate a law that one views as unjust 21.0 56.8 22.2 Source: Alfa Research, Political Culture Survey, October 2000.
Table 2.21
Respect for Legal Regulations by Type of Municipality (7-Point Scale*)
Type of municipality Mean
Less than 4,999 3.80
5,000–9,999 3.89
10,000–49,999 3.50
50,000–99,999 3.43
Over 100,000 3.31
Total 3.53
Note: * 1—not at all; 7—completely.
Source: LRS 2002.
3.3 Conclusion
Effective enforcement of the new legislation is a condition sine qua non for the success of the public sector reforms. Weaknesses in this respect are numerous and have been continuously addressed at all levels. Annual reports of the European Commission on the Bulgarian accession emphasize the need for reform of the judiciary. Actions so far have produced unsatisfactory results. Law enforcement remains inefficient, slow, and vulnerable to corruption, so that it generates low trust in the judiciary. In spite of this, however, the citizens demonstrate a generally high respect for the law. The lack of sufficient administrative capacity and some practices of direct interaction between local business and local government still serve as a basis for legal violations, which are
R E P O R T O N T H E S T A T E O F L O C A L D E M O C R A C Y I N B U L G A R I A
ineffectively sanctioned because of the slow and unproductive judicial procedures.
Relevant examples show considerable diversity across the country, depending on the level of public and media involvement in specific cases.
Within the transition period, Bulgaria has introduced adequate constitutional provisions for the protection of civil and political rights. Currently, the development of administrative capacity to specialize in minority integration is considered completed.
There are also local efforts to rule against discrimination by issuing municipal ordinances.
Recently, some landmark judgments have been obtained from Bulgarian courts that sanction perpetrators of discrimination. Key factors in this success have been not only the new Anti-Discrimination Act, but also the increased public awareness and the courts’
concern about these matters.