site.btaThe 1991 Constitution: Time for Changes

On July 12, 1991 the 7th Grand National Assembly of Bulgaria adopted the current Constitution of the Republic of Bulgaria. It substituted the communist era Constitution (commonly known as Zhivkov Constitution, named after communist leader Todor Zhivkov) which was in force between 1971 and 1991. Despite criticism about some provisions, that have been coming for years from all quarters, the 1991 Constitution has been a cornerstone of democratic development, institution building, and public life.

The 1991 Constitution enshrines the principles of separation of powers, as well as the rights and freedoms of citizens. It provides the framework for the intricate steps of Bulgarian modernization – years of changes in economy, international re-positioning and inner political transformation that are now commonly known as “transition period”. This was partly due to two facts: firstly, the key elements were agreed beforehand during the Roundtable talks held in 1990 between the Communist party and the opposition. Secondly, the model established after 1991 had its roots in Bulgarian statehood: the Constitution defines Bulgaria as a unitary parliamentary republic, the prime minister being elected by the majority party (or coalition of parties) represented in the National Assembly. The executive power is vested on the Government, legislative power on Parliament and judicial power on the courts, prosecution and the investigative service. 

Unlike the preceding fundamental laws, the 1991 Constitution states that the National Assembly is a standing body.

Also, the new constitution introduced the institutions of President and of the Constitutional Court. For decades the position of the President was generally believed to be mainly ceremonial. (The president schedules national referenda and elections for the National Assembly, serves diplomatic and other functions, and promulgates and vetoes laws.) 

However, the power to appoint a caretaker government has led some experts and politicians to reconsider the institution of caretaker government as “a source generating a quasi-presidential regime”, to quote a proposal by Continue the Change-Democratic Bulgaria (CC-DB) for constitutional amendments.

The Constitutional Court, composed of 12 justices (each of whom serves a nine-year term), is charged with interpreting the Constitution and ruling on the legality of measures passed by the Assembly. (The parliament, the president, and the supreme courts each appoint four justices.)

Voices calling for amending the Constitution have been getting louder in the past few years. Street protests that started in 2020 called for changes in the judicial system. 

Also in 2020, the GERB party tabled a proposal for convoking a Grand National Assembly in order to discuss constitutional changes (among them was a text scrapping the institution of the Grand National Assembly altogether, reducing the terms of office of judges and prosecutors and cutting back the number of elected representatives in the ordinary National Assembly from 240 to 120). 

At that time (September 2020), President Radev declared that he had a draft of a new Constitution prepared to be made public soon. No details of this draft were made public, however.

Political parties have ideas of their own. The main proponent of constitutional changes seems to be the CC-DB coalition but the first to unveil specific ideas, a year and a half ago, were the Movement for Rights and Freedoms (MRF). MRF propose, among other things, restructuring the Supreme Judicial Council, introducing an opportunity for an individual constitution complaint and abolishing existing constitutional restrictions on dual citizenship for the prime minister position.

The nationalist Vazrazhdane party openly favours dramatic changes whereby the prosecution service moves from the judiciary to the executive, and broader access for people to constitutional justice. 

There Is Such a People said they would wait to see the others’ proposals and then comment on them.

Only the Socialist party (BSP) declared itself against participating in any talks regarding constitutional amendments.

The prolonged period of ideas-sharing is about to end, however. In mid-May, CC-DB launched talks with all parliamentary forces on four revisions to the Constitution: restructuring the Supreme Judicial Council (SJC); curtailing the Prosecutor General's powers; introducing a direct constitutional appeal; and revision of the status of the caretaker government.

The exact legal formulas for the amendments are yet unknown, for parameters and the very wording will be subject to political consultations. And going through procedures for amending the Constitution requests time, dedication, and broader political agreement. 

Amendments to most parts of the constitution may be adopted by an ordinary National Assembly, and the basic law has been already amended several times (in 2003, 2005, 2006, 2007, and 2015). Adopting an entirely new constitution or amending key articles - such as those pertaining to the form of government – require convoking a Grand National Assembly. 

The Grand National Assembly is practically an extended National Assembly composed of 400 elected representatives, instead of the 240 in the ordinary National Assembly. It is tasked specifically with making major revisions to the nation's Constitution. 

In either case, constitutional amendments may only be proposed either by 25% of the elected representatives in Parliament or by the President. Adoption of the amendments requires a 66% supermajority of elected representatives.

These complicated and time-consuming procedures guarantee that constitutional changes are adopted after careful consideration and by broader political agreement, if not consensus. 

The summer months are expected to be filled with debate on reasoning, expectations, justifications for contemplated constitutional changes. This debate will likely be tense because of the interests at stake. 

The very agreement on amending the Constitution would be an important indicator of the existing political trends and of whether Bulgarian political life is shifting towards greater predictability, broader political agreements and largely accepted societal priorities.