34 OBEKTIV

Administrative case no. 7897/2004 is scheduled for hearing at 9:00

a.m. on 4 November 2004 by a three-member panel of the Supreme

Administrative Court. The proceedings were instituted upon the com-

plaint of Vassil Chobanov (a journalist with the New Europe Radio)

against the tacit refusal of the Supreme Judicial Council of the request

(ref. no. 94-00-266/04.05.2004) of journalists to obtain access to 10 ses-

sions of the Council.

Why did the journalists request access to precisely ten sessions?

The explanation is in the task, which the new panel of the Judicial

Council had to fulfil within that time. The task was to appoint administra-

tive managers with a five-year term: the chairpersons of courts,

prosecutor’s offices and the investigation. They are to decide how to

distribute the cases, so that there is no doubt of magistrate depen-

dency. They are to determine the conditions of work for the Bulgarian

magistrates locally, and are to finally ·open” (figuratively speaking) the

departments of the judiciary, so that the public would be clear as to

whether the ·closed doors” of justice administration are only in the

public interest or they play a role in the interest of someone else. All of

that was decided by the Supreme Judicial Council (SJC) ·behind closed

doors” (outside the scope of public control) with the excuse that the

current venue of the Judicial Council could not accommodate jour-

nalists and citizens.

The petitioner maintains that the tacit refusal of the SJC is unlawful.

The petition says that: ·Pursuant to Article 41 of the Constitution, every-

one is entitled to seek, receive and disseminate information. The same

right is provided by Article 10 of the European Convention on Human

Rights and Fundamental Freedoms and Article 19 of the International

Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. According to Decision no. 7/1996

of the Constitutional Court on constitutional case no. 1 from 1996, this

right shall also apply to the sessions of the various state authorities.”

The petitioner maintains that the adoption of the new para. 3 to

Article 27 of the Judiciary Act in April 2004, created an obligation for the

SJC to ensure access to its sessions to everyone. This right can only be

restricted for the protection of the rights and interests specified in the

Act and only in the hypotheses, stated in the Judiciary Act. These are

the cases when proposals are made to the President of the Republic of

Bulgaria to appoint or dismiss the chairs of the Supreme Court of Cassa-

tion, the Supreme Administrative Court, or the Prosecutor General. In

the second place, when a permission is given to bring charges against

or for the detention of judges, prosecutors and investigators, as well as

for their temporary removal from office.

By law, the Judicial Council can meet ·off the record” when adopt-

ing decisions on disciplinary cases against judges, prosecutors and in-

vestigators, as well as against administrative managers and their depu-

ties.

Everything else it does has to be transparent for the public. ·Yes, but

not really”, one could say. All we have to hear now is: ·Stand up for the

court!”�

Administration of justice

behind closed doors

By Vassil CHOBANOV

AA