Overview
The September 25, 2026 proposal to amend Bulgaria’s Criminal Procedure Code sets out connected safeguards for effective defense, reliable evidence, and judicial review throughout the principal stages of criminal proceedings. It focuses on timely, reasoned decisions, access to case materials, remedies for inaction, and decisions that can be meaningfully reviewed, while preserving the presumption of innocence and the powers of the competent authorities.
Key areas of proposed reform
Early access to counsel and protection of liberty
The proposal would provide express safeguards when a concrete suspicion arises, before formal charges: notice, the right to remain silent, confidential legal advice, interpretation, and legal aid. It would require periodic judicial review of detention every 30 days during the pretrial phase and every 60 days during the court phase, with specific reasons addressing necessity and the inadequacy of less restrictive measures.
Judicial review of refusals, suspensions, and inaction
The proposal would introduce traceable registration and decision deadlines for reports of crimes, broaden judicial review of refusals to open an investigation, and allow direct recourse to a court where no decision is issued. It would require reports on compliance with court directions, periodic review of suspended proceedings, and earlier remedies for unjustified delay. Expiry of a deadline would not automatically open or terminate a case.
Access to reliable and admissible evidence
The proposal would require an inventory and preservation of all relevant materials, including evidence favorable to the defense, enforceable access rights, a documented chain of custody for physical and digital evidence, and verifiable expert methods. It also addresses exclusion of unlawfully obtained statements, mandatory audiovisual recording of specified interviews, and protection of rights in seized property, including third-party rights.
Impartial courts, accurate records, and reasoned decisions
Contested recusal requests would be decided by a different randomly assigned judge or panel. Mandatory audio recording of hearings, access to recordings, and review of corrections to the written record would support scrutiny of procedural compliance. The proposal would strengthen requirements for independent analysis of evidence, responses to material arguments, and meaningful appellate and cassation review.
Safeguards against institutional conflicts and improper influence
The proposal would introduce judicial review when a prosecutor’s recusal is refused, require reasons for removing an investigating officer, and provide a procedure for objecting to unlawful directions. It also includes automatic judicial review of the termination or suspension of specified cases involving offenses against justice, traceable case assignment, and rules for official disclosure of case materials. The special procedures for the European Public Prosecutor’s Office and investigations of the Prosecutor General or a deputy would be preserved and coordinated.
Reopening proceedings and protecting finality
The proposal would establish a specific procedure to examine grounds for reopening proceedings in a convicted person’s favor and limited rights for affected persons to apply directly to a court under the stated conditions. At the same time, setting aside a final termination or reopening proceedings to a person’s detriment would be subject to strict conditions and judicial review consistent with the prohibition on repeated prosecution.