Republic of Bulgaria
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
Bulgaria Political Briefing: Bulgarian President Rumen Radev Will Run for a Second Term Evgeniy Kandilarov
ISSN: 2560-1601 Vol. 37, No. 1 (BG) February 2021 Bulgaria political briefing: Bulgarian President Rumen Radev will run for a Second Term Evgeniy Kandilarov 1052 Budapest Petőfi Sándor utca 11. +36 1 5858 690 Kiadó: Kína-KKE Intézet Nonprofit Kft. [email protected] Szerkesztésért felelős személy: CHen Xin Kiadásért felelős személy: Huang Ping china-cee.eu 2017/01 Bulgarian President Rumen Radev will run for a Second Term One of the most significant political events in the last few weeks in Bulgaria was the announcement of the President Roumen Radev, on Februaty 1st, that he and the Vice President Iliana Yotova will run for a second term in office at the presidential elections scheduled for this fall. This became clear during a press conference at which the head of state reported on what had been done over the past four years. “Our candidacy at this time is an honest move for citizens and political figures,” he said in an hour-long speech, hailing his own presidency as a voice of reason during the last few years. President Rumen Radev took the office after winning a second round of voting in 2016 – against GERB candidate Tsetska Tsacheva. Radev and Iliana Yotova took the oath as president and vice president in the parliament on January 19, 2017.Three days later, on January 22, they officially took the office. Under the constitution, the presidential couple's term expires in January 2022. Elections for a new head of state will be in the fall but it is not yet clear whether they will be in October or November. -
Bulgaria – the Difficult “Return to Europe”
European Democracy in Action BULGARIA – THE DIFFICULT “RETURN TO EUROPE” TAMARA BUSCHEK Against the background of the EU accession of Bulgaria on 1st January 2007 and the first Bulgarian elections for the European Parliament on 20th May 2007, Tamara Buschek takes a closer look at Bulgaria’s uneven political and economic transition – at its difficult “return to Europe”. Graduated from Graz University (Austria) in 2003 with a Masters in Law [magistra juris] after finishing her studies in European and international law. After gaining a grant from the Chamber of Commerce in 2000 to complete an internship at the Austrian Embassy in London, she carried out research for her dissertation in criminal law – “The Prevention of Sexual Child Abuse – Austria/Great Britain” - in 2001 at the London School of Economics. She studied European and administrative law in Paris from 2001 to 2002 as part of an Erasmus year. She is quadrilingual (German, Bulgarian, English and French). « BULGARIA – THE DIFFICULT RETURN TO EUROPE » MAY 2007 Table of Contents Introduction P. 1 2.3 The current governmental coalition, 2005-2007 and the P. 21 presidential election in 2006 I – Background Information P. 3 III - The first European Parliament elections, 20 May 2007 P. 25 1.1 Hopes and Fears P. 3 Conclusion P. 30 1.2 Ethnic Minorities P. 5 1.3 Economic Facts P. 7 Annex P. 32 II – Political Situation- a difficult path towards stability P. 9 Annex 1: Key facts P. 32 2.1 The transition from 1989 till 2001 P. 9 Annex 2: Economic Profile P. 33 2.1.1 The legislative elections of 1990 and the first P. -
The Magnitsky Law and the Rico
SSRG International Journal of Economics and Management Studies Volume 8 Issue 7, 6-20, July, 2021 ISSN: 2393 – 9125 /doi:10.14445/23939125/IJEMS-V8I7P102 © 2021 Seventh Sense Research Group® The Magnitsky Law and The Rico Law - The Guarantee For The Fight Against Corruption And The Mafia In Bulgaria And The European Union - The Example of The Attempts To Steal Private Land Through Concession, Theft of Land And Theft of Land Through State Structures Lord Prof. PhD PhD Momtchil Dobrev-Halachev Scientific Research Institute Dobrev & Halachev.JSC., Sofia.Bulgaria Received Date: 17 May 2021 Revised Date: 22 June 2021 Accepted Date: 05 July 2021 Abstract - Lord prof PhD PhD Momtchil Dobrev- The fight against the mafia and corruption in Bulgaria Halachev and Prof. Mariola Garibova-DObreva and in the European Commission and the European Union developed 2006 “Theory of degree of democracy” and does not yield results because the mafia is at the highest “Theory of degree of justice / injustice /” based on their state and European level and does what it wants. This practice in court, prosecutor's office, state. Prof. Momchil mafia holds courts, prosecutors and all kinds of state Dobrev has been creating Theory of Corruption, "Theory institutions and the latter carry out its orders. of the Mafia," Theory of Mafia "," Financial Banking Resource Technological Mafia Materialism "since 2003" 1.1 Introduce the Problem The problem with the mafia and corruption in Bulgaria Keywords - Crise, mafia, corruption, Magnitsky law, and in the European Union and the European Commission RICO law, finance. is huge. We have repeatedly applied evidence of the scale . -
Between Peace and Conflict in the East and the West
Anja Mihr Editor Between Peace and Conflict in the East and the West Studies on Transformation and Development in the OSCE Region Between Peace and Conflict in the East and the West Anja Mihr Editor Between Peace and Conflict in the East and the West Studies on Transformation and Development in the OSCE Region Editor Anja Mihr OSCE Academy in Bishkek Bishkek, Kyrgyzstan ISBN 978-3-030-77488-2 ISBN 978-3-030-77489-9 (eBook) https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-77489-9 © The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s) 2021. This book is an open access publication. Open Access This book is licensed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribu- tion and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this book are included in the book’s Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the book’s Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this publication does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are exempt from the relevant protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use. -
Joint Opinion on Amendments to the Electoral Code of Bulgaria
Strasbourg, Warsaw, 19 June 2017 CDL-AD(2017)016 Opinion no. 867/2016 Or. Engl. ODIHR Opinion-Nr.: ELE-BGR/307/2017 EUROPEAN COMMISSION FOR DEMOCRACY THROUGH LAW (VENICE COMMISSION) OSCE OFFICE FOR DEMOCRATIC INSTITUTIONS AND HUMAN RIGHTS (OSCE/ODIHR) BULGARIA JOINT OPINION ON AMENDMENTS TO THE ELECTORAL CODE Adopted by the Council of Democratic Elections at its 59th meeting (Venice, 15 June 2017) and by the Venice Commission at its 111th Plenary Session (Venice, 16-17 June 2017) on the basis of comments by Mr Oliver KASK (Member, Estonia) Mr Eirik HOLMØYVIK (Substitute Member, Norway) Ms Christina BINDER (Expert, OSCE/ODIHR) This document will not be distributed at the meeting. Please bring this copy. www.venice.coe.int CDL-AD(2017)016 - 2 - Contents I. Introduction ................................................................................................................ 3 II. Executive summary ................................................................................................... 4 III. General comments .................................................................................................... 5 IV. Electoral system ........................................................................................................ 7 V. Election administration ............................................................................................... 8 VI. Voter lists, voter registration and candidate registration ........................................... 10 VII. Campaigning .......................................................................................................... -
Codebook Indiveu – Party Preferences
Codebook InDivEU – party preferences European University Institute, Robert Schuman Centre for Advanced Studies December 2020 Introduction The “InDivEU – party preferences” dataset provides data on the positions of more than 400 parties from 28 countries1 on questions of (differentiated) European integration. The dataset comprises a selection of party positions taken from two existing datasets: (1) The EU Profiler/euandi Trend File The EU Profiler/euandi Trend File contains party positions for three rounds of European Parliament elections (2009, 2014, and 2019). Party positions were determined in an iterative process of party self-placement and expert judgement. For more information: https://cadmus.eui.eu/handle/1814/65944 (2) The Chapel Hill Expert Survey The Chapel Hill Expert Survey contains party positions for the national elections most closely corresponding the European Parliament elections of 2009, 2014, 2019. Party positions were determined by expert judgement. For more information: https://www.chesdata.eu/ Three additional party positions, related to DI-specific questions, are included in the dataset. These positions were determined by experts involved in the 2019 edition of euandi after the elections took place. The inclusion of party positions in the “InDivEU – party preferences” is limited to the following issues: - General questions about the EU - Questions about EU policy - Questions about differentiated integration - Questions about party ideology 1 This includes all 27 member states of the European Union in 2020, plus the United Kingdom. How to Cite When using the ‘InDivEU – Party Preferences’ dataset, please cite all of the following three articles: 1. Reiljan, Andres, Frederico Ferreira da Silva, Lorenzo Cicchi, Diego Garzia, Alexander H. -
ESS9 Appendix A3 Political Parties Ed
APPENDIX A3 POLITICAL PARTIES, ESS9 - 2018 ed. 3.0 Austria 2 Belgium 4 Bulgaria 7 Croatia 8 Cyprus 10 Czechia 12 Denmark 14 Estonia 15 Finland 17 France 19 Germany 20 Hungary 21 Iceland 23 Ireland 25 Italy 26 Latvia 28 Lithuania 31 Montenegro 34 Netherlands 36 Norway 38 Poland 40 Portugal 44 Serbia 47 Slovakia 52 Slovenia 53 Spain 54 Sweden 57 Switzerland 58 United Kingdom 61 Version Notes, ESS9 Appendix A3 POLITICAL PARTIES ESS9 edition 3.0 (published 10.12.20): Changes from previous edition: Additional countries: Denmark, Iceland. ESS9 edition 2.0 (published 15.06.20): Changes from previous edition: Additional countries: Croatia, Latvia, Lithuania, Montenegro, Portugal, Slovakia, Spain, Sweden. Austria 1. Political parties Language used in data file: German Year of last election: 2017 Official party names, English 1. Sozialdemokratische Partei Österreichs (SPÖ) - Social Democratic Party of Austria - 26.9 % names/translation, and size in last 2. Österreichische Volkspartei (ÖVP) - Austrian People's Party - 31.5 % election: 3. Freiheitliche Partei Österreichs (FPÖ) - Freedom Party of Austria - 26.0 % 4. Liste Peter Pilz (PILZ) - PILZ - 4.4 % 5. Die Grünen – Die Grüne Alternative (Grüne) - The Greens – The Green Alternative - 3.8 % 6. Kommunistische Partei Österreichs (KPÖ) - Communist Party of Austria - 0.8 % 7. NEOS – Das Neue Österreich und Liberales Forum (NEOS) - NEOS – The New Austria and Liberal Forum - 5.3 % 8. G!LT - Verein zur Förderung der Offenen Demokratie (GILT) - My Vote Counts! - 1.0 % Description of political parties listed 1. The Social Democratic Party (Sozialdemokratische Partei Österreichs, or SPÖ) is a social above democratic/center-left political party that was founded in 1888 as the Social Democratic Worker's Party (Sozialdemokratische Arbeiterpartei, or SDAP), when Victor Adler managed to unite the various opposing factions. -
Joint Opinion on the Election Code of Bulgaria
Strasbourg, 21 June 2011 CDL-AD(2011)013 Opinion No. 607 / 2011 Or. Engl. EUROPEAN COMMISSION FOR DEMOCRACY THROUGH LAW (VENICE COMMISSION) AND OSCE OFFICE FOR DEMOCRATIC INSTITUTIONS AND HUMAN RIGHTS (OSCE/ODIHR) JOINT OPINION ON THE ELECTION CODE OF BULGARIA Adopted by the Council for Democratic Elections at its 37 th meeting (Venice, 16 June 2011) and by the Venice Commission at its 87 th plenary session (Venice, 17-18 June 2011) based on comments by Mr Oliver KASK (Member, Estonia) Mr Ugo MIFSUD BONNICI (Member, Malta) Mr Kåre VOLLAN (Expert, Norway) Mr Denis PETIT (Expert, OSCE/ODIHR) This document will not be distributed at the meeting. Please bring this copy. www.venice.coe.int CDL-AD(2011)013 - 2 - Table of contents I. Introduction................................................................................................................ - 3 - II. General Comments.................................................................................................... - 6 - III. Right to Vote and be Elected ................................................................................. - 6 - IV. Election Administration .......................................................................................... - 9 - V. Political Party Registration....................................................................................... - 10 - A. Signatures and deposits ...................................................................................... - 10 - B. Registration ........................................................................................................ -
The European Parliament Elections in Bulgaria Are Likely to Reinforce the Country's Political Stalemate Between Left and Right
The European Parliament elections in Bulgaria are likely to reinforce the country’s political stalemate between left and right blogs.lse.ac.uk/europpblog/2014/04/14/the-european-parliament-elections-in-bulgaria-are-likely-to-reinforce- the-countrys-political-stalemate-between-left-and-right/ 14/04/2014 The Bulgarian government currently lacks a majority in the country’s national parliament, with the governing coalition counting on support from 120 out of 240 MPs. Kyril Drezov writes that the upcoming European elections will likely be fought on the basis of this domestic situation, with European issues playing only a minor role, and the majority of seats being distributed between the two largest parties: the Bulgarian Socialist Party and the Citizens for European Development of Bulgaria (GERB). European Parliament Elections are still fairly new for Bulgaria – the 2014 elections will be only the third since accession. Like previous EP elections in 2007 and 2009, their function is purely as a test for changes in national politics. The present election campaign is overwhelmingly dominated by domestic concerns and is notable for the absence of EU-related issues. As a leftover from the accession days, the European Union is still considered ‘a good thing’ in Bulgaria and does not generate much passion. There is consensus amongst Bulgarians that key European policies are shaped somewhere else, and that Sofia’s role is to adapt to these policies whatever shape they may take. The big traditional players in Bulgarian politics gravitate towards particular European party families – Socialist, Christian Democratic and Liberal – and in their election manifestoes mostly parrot whatever line these party families take on the big European issues. -
THE ELECTIONS for the EU PARLIAMENT in BULGARIA CONFIRMED the POLITIAL SATUS QUO Evgeniy Kandilarov
ISSN: 2560-1601 Vol. 18, No. 4 (BG) May 2019 Bulgaria external relations briefing: THE ELECTIONS FOR THE EU PARLIAMENT IN BULGARIA CONFIRMED THE POLITIAL SATUS QUO Evgeniy Kandilarov 1052 Budapest Petőfi Sándor utca 11. +36 1 5858 690 Kiadó: Kína-KKE Intézet Nonprofit Kft. [email protected] Szerkesztésért felelős személy: Chen Xin Kiadásért felelős személy: Huang Ping china-cee.eu 2017/01 THE ELECTIONS FOR THE EU PARLIAMENT IN BULGARIA CONFIRMED THE POLITIAL SATUS QUO What does it show the just finished elections for the European Parliament in Bulgaria? Traditionally the Interest of Bulgarian population towards such kind of elections is very low. That’s why usually most of the Bulgarians basically don’t vote for anyone. Those who vote usually are doing it not because of the rational reason of choice reflecting on some kind of platform or vision regarding the future development of the European Union, its policies, further Institutional development of future legislation process in the European Parliament which has a direct influence on the National development of every member state of the Union. The Bulgarians are feeling all this issues quite abstract and distant from their real life and current problems related with a concrete living conditions, economic difficulties and shortages as well as series of social issues which most of the Bulgarians connect rather with the domestic political agenda than with the Brussels administration. In the mind of many Bulgarians the members of the European Parliament are just clerks who live far away from Bulgaria and its real problems and just take extraordinarily high salaries for doing work that is hardly noticeable and understandable inside the country. -
Zornitsa Markova the KTB STATE
Zornitsa Markova THE KTB STATE Sofia, 2017 All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced or express written consent from Iztok-Zapad Publishing House. transmitted in any form or by any means without first obtaining © Zornitsa Markova, 2017 © Iztok-Zapad Publishing House, 2017 ISBN 978-619-01-0094-2 zornitsa markova THE KTB STATE CHRONICLE OF THE LARGEST BANK FAILURE IN BULGARIA — THE WORKINGS OF A CAPTURED STATE THAT SOLD OUT THE PUBLIC INTEREST FOR PRIVATE EXPEDIENCY CONTENTS LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS / 12 EDITOR’S FOREWORD / 13 SUMMARY / 15 READER’S GUIDE TO THE INVESTIGATION / 21 1. HISTORICAL BACKGROUND / 23 DEVELOPMENTS IN THE BULGARIAN BANKING SECTOR THAT PRE-DATE KTB ..........................................................25 Headed for a Banking Crisis .................................................................................................. 26 Scores of Banks Close Their Doors................................................................................... 29 First Private Bank — Backed by the Powerful, Favoured by the Government ......................................................... 33 Criminal Syndicates and Their Banks — the Birth of a State within the State ...........................................................................35 A Post-Crisis Change of Players ..........................................................................................37 A FRESH START FOR THE FLEDGLING KTB ..................................................... 40 KTB SALE ..........................................................................................................................................42 -
Schoenman FDI Paper EUSA
What Happens When the Party is Over? The Impact of New Introduction Right Parties in Government on FDI regulation Roger Schoenman “Currently, 95 percent of wholesale and retail trade belongs to foreign capital, until recently [email protected] over 70 percent of the banking sector belonged to foreign banks. Repolonization is, thus, necessary.” Then Polish Deputy PM, now PM Matuesz Morawiecki, May 17, 2017. (Redakcja Word Count without bibliography: 10,128 2017). Version date: 4/30/19 “We need foreign investment, and we must never underrate the jobs which have been created, but we must recognize that they will no longer be the source of competitiveness.” Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban November 10, 2016 speech in Budapest. “I believe there is no national sovereignty without a national financial system.” Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban in a November 2014 radio interview. “I appreciate the process of Polonization of banks sponsored by prominent persons. In the 1990s people who said that banks should be largely in Polish hands were regarded as deviants. A few years ago we learned that capital, however, has nationality and I understand that these processes, which are starting in Poland now, are a derivative of understanding this new situation. It is a pity that it is so late, but better late than never.” Zbigniew Kuźmiuk of Law and Justice (PiS) told newseria.pl in July 29, 2015. “Foreign Investors will be welcomed with open arms, however they must expect to no longer be treated in a privileged way as was the case until now, but will compete with Polish firms under fairer regulation,” -Jaroslaw Gowin, one of the Poland’s deputy prime ministers.