Sofia Court Refuses to Sanction CFIAP for Refusal to Disclose Forfeiture Decisions

The Sofia City Administrative Court has issued a judicial order refusing to impose sanctions on the Commission for the Forfeiture of Illegally Acquired Property (CFIAP) for failing to obey a final court decision and disclose information about its decisions to forfeit illegally acquired properties. The order was issued at the end of September.

CFIAP had been ordered to disclose its decisions following the court’s decision in 2022. The proceedings were initiated by the Anti-Corruption Fund Foundation (ACF) on the grounds that CFIAP’s decisions constitute public information under the Access to Public Information Act. For two years, CFIAP used various procedural tricks to avoid disclosure.

In July 2024, the Supreme Administrative Court rejected the last of several CFIAP appeals, leaving no more space for the commission to manoeuvre and obfuscate.

Instead of finally obeying the order of the highest administrative court, on 18 July, CFIAP issued a decision with yet another refusal to provide the required information, claiming that its decisions contained personal information. In early August ACF requested that the court declare that decision void and impose sanctions on several CFIAP officials.  

The judicial order issued by the Sofia City Administrative Court at the end of September means CFIAP is again not facing any consequences for its failure to respect the rule of law. According to Judge Irina Kuyrteva, the court’s decision from 2022 does not force CFIAP to provide access to the requested information but only to review ACF’s request for access to public information again.

“Just one look at the court’s decision from 2022 is enough to challenge Judge Kuyrteva’s claims,” said Lora Georgieva, a legal expert with the ACF. “That decision clearly and unequivocally orders CFIAP to provide the requested information per the court’s binding instructions, namely that the public has the right to the requested information and no grounds exist for denying access. Furthermore, there is a violation of Art. 12 (3) of the Access to Public Information Act.”

The order issued by Judge Kuyrteva last week is a concerning sign of how the law is applied in the sphere of administrative justice. Accepting that the administrative body has complied with the court’s instructions just because it has issued a decision contradicts the law. Another contradiction is accepting that, despite the clear instructions of the court on how the law should be applied, the administrative body has the right to interpret those instructions, no less on grounds that had already been reviewed and deemed unfounded by the court. Orders such as the one issued by Judge Kuyrteva on 25 September threaten the rule of law and legitimize arbitrary actions by administrative bodies to the detriment of the rights of citizens.

The order is the latest episode in a two-year-long legal battle which the ACF initiated, seeking to obtain and disclose to the public CFIAP’s asset forfeiture decisions.

The proceedings were initiated in April 2022 when the ACF challenged CFIAP’s refusal to provide information about the decisions. During the proceedings, it was established that the commission, in violation of the law, had declared that all its decisions to initiate confiscation proceedings were confidential.

The decision to do so was taken in 2018 by Plamen Georgiev, the then-director of the CFIAP. Georgiev resigned in 2019 following the Apartmentgate scandal, which began with revelations by the ACF and Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty. Georgiev’s order sealed decisions about the largest share of CFIAP’s activity, employing the highest number of its staff and accounting for most of its BGN 30 million annual budget.

The decisions are important because they provide information about the inquiries held by CAFIAP, the facts established in the course of the inquiries, the criteria applied by officials, and the legal conclusions which have led to proceedings by the Commission.

In November 2022, the Sofia City Administrative Court ruled that CFIAP’s decisions constitute public information and there is an overriding public interest in disclosing them. The court ordered the commission to provide full access to the decisions within 14 days. The decision was final and was not supposed to be subject to appeal.

This is precisely why, in early August 2024, ACF requested that CFIAP’s decision from July 2024, which constituted a refusal to provide access to public information, be declared void.

“We believe CFIAP’s decision should be declared void since it represents an administrative act that contravenes a final court decision which does not require interpretation but implementation, namely full disclosure of CFIAP’s asset forfeiture decisions,” said Georgieva.

“The more CFIAP delays publishing these decisions, the more the suspicions are growing that its leadership is afraid of the public reaction that will follow their disclosure”, said Boyko Stankushev, director of the ACF. “We will use all the available legal means to make sure this information of high public interest is indeed disclosed.”