Неспазването на принципите на законодателния процес при изменения в законодателството и евентуалната им противоконституционност в контекста на уредбата на правовата държава и законността
Non-Compliance with the Principles of the Legislative Process in the Context of Amendments to the Legislation and Their Potential Unconstitutionality within the Framework of the Rule of Law and Legality

Summary/Abstract: The Constitution of the Republic of Bulgaria provides that Bulgaria is a state governed by the Rule of Law and is administered in accordance with the Constitution and the laws of the country. A state governed by the Rule of Law is one in which each of the three powers—legislative, executive, and judicial—is subject to the law. In the field of law-making, this means that, in order for acts adopted by the National Assembly to be constitutional, they must comply both with the Constitution and with the other applicable legislation in force. Accordingly, review of the conformity of such acts not only with the Constitution but also with statutory law forms part of the constitutional review exercised by the Constitutional Court. The Court’s jurisprudence on this matter has evolved, albeit unevenly, from a complete denial to a more or less explicit recognition in recent years of its competence to review the conformity of acts of the National Assembly not only with the Constitution but also with the laws in force. A significant development in this regard is found in Decision No. 1 of 4 February 2020 in Constitutional Case No. 17/2018, in which six of the justices endorsed the view that unconstitutionality may arise from a breach of fundamental principles of the legislative process. This article examines that decision and the relevant case law in the context of Article 4(1) of the Constitution, the pertinent provisions of the Law on Normative Acts, and Decree No. 883, as well as the regulation of the legislative process in the Rules of Procedure of the National Assembly. It offers a critical analysis of the impermissible “double standard” that has emerged in recent legislatures with respect to draft laws prepared and submitted by the Council of Ministers, as compared to those initiated by Members of Parliament, and of the inadmissible derogations from the principles of the legislative process applied to certain bills, particularly with regard to the conduct of public consultations and the ex ante impact assessment, and the consequences thereof. The article also reviews relevant case law of the Supreme Administrative Court concerning judicial review of subordinate legislation and the legal consequences of violations of the principles of the legislative process. On the basis of the critical analysis undertaken, conclusions are drawn and recommendations are made for improving oversight of the legislative process, which in turn would enhance the quality of legislation adopted by the National Assembly.

• Details
• Contents