Case study in real time: Corruption Practices at Bulgarian Judiciary System (Administrative and Court)

EUCoins3Today I start an observation of the proceedings, related to a real court case, that is allocated to an infringement with EU funds in Bulgaria.

The case was to be resolved administratively. Such decision would lead to lower financial impact to the EU funded project and Beneficiary. However Bulgarian Ministry of Justice’s subsidiary (that is Beneficiary to Corrupted EU funded Project) choose not to resolve the problem that way. The MoJ Subsidiary choose not to react. The deny for act is a case of postponing procedure administratively, for elapsing due terms and thus – hiding corruption practices.

Further to Ministry of Justice (MoJ) deny for administrative solution, the parties, affected from corruption acts send the case to the court in January 2013.

The case was registered at court around January, 20th and here I will comment further all courts actions for the case, and thus – analyzing whether corruption practices evidences could be detected through court’s action.

I assume for the case study analysis that corruption practices at court could be detected through:

– slow procedures

– deny of all claims review

– strange and partial judge’s decisions

-elapses, lack of documents, partial files, etc

If such cases are detected in that case I will make whistle-blow.

Now – first step is waiting for a month from the Accused Side to provide their written defense against claim.




Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s