Commercial Legal And Institutional Reform (CLIR) - Economic Growth

COMMERCIAL LEGAL AND INSTITUTIONAL REFORM
Diagnostic Assessment Report for the Republic of Bulgaria March 2002
Often the law is interpreted differently in different courts in the country. The Supreme
Court of Cassations is entrusted with the obligation to ensure strict and equal application
of the legislation by all courts (Judiciary Power Act). For this purpose the Supreme Court
of Cassation issues and publishes interpreting decisions on matters that have caused
incorrect or contradicting court practice. These interpreting decisions are mandatory for
all courts and the executive power. A Bulletin of the Supreme Court of Cassation is
published monthly and distributed to all courts in Bulgaria.
Judges’ lack of specialization is another problem. In the countryside, where courts are
smaller, specialization is nearly impossible. The same judge must hear criminal,
administrative, civil, and commercial cases. The creation of specialized commercial
courts is currently under discussion, and the Ministry of Justice is considering eventual
amendments in this respect, as stated in its Strategy for Reform of the Judiciary in
Bulgaria.
Several interviewees expressed the opinion that before the changes, the court system was
functioning better. Cases were decided faster, the quality of decisions was higher, and
judges were professionals. Consenting opinion cites the major reasons for problems in the
courts are lack of education and training for judges and low criteria for admission. The
programs of the Magistrate Training Center, an NGO sponsored by foreign donors,
should be expanded, and the center’s status with the Ministry of Justice needs
clarification.
Poor facilities, insufficient funding of the judiciary, and low salaries for both judges and
court administrative staff make it difficult to attract or retain well-qualified professionals
in the judicial branch, contributing to lack of efficiency. The European Commission’s
Annual Report for the Year 2000 cited under funding of the judiciary as the major reason
for the system’s malfunctioning. Discussion in Parliament (December 14, 2001) on the
2002 budget called for a 21 percent increase in funding for the judiciary. Total funding
would reach 121,9 million levs, but the Supreme Judicial Council, the authority
responsible for the judiciary, has requested 180 million levs as the minimum necessary
for guaranteeing proper functioning. Donor funding and involvement will be required
during 2002 to increase court efficiency.
Interviewees also cited the low level of legal education as a major factor in court
inefficiency. Law graduates are generally poorly prepared. The graduates, practicing
lawyers, and judges lack a basic understanding of the market economy. Courses in
economics, accountancy, and finance could help remedy this.
Lawyers are essential players in court disputes and invaluable in assisting the court.
However, they are the least assisted segment of the legal profession. Efforts have been
organized on behalf of the bar association for training of young lawyers only. No
provisions exist for continuing legal education (CLE) for senior attorneys and others.
CLE remains an area requiring donor focus.
Booz Allen Hamilton
Page 61