After the local elections in 2023, one of the parties that participated in them in Burgas filed a complaint. As a result, the court ordered the ballots to be recounted. 11 people took part in the process, which lasted 20 days. As a result of what happened, GERB was not satisfied and their lawyers launched a complaint to the District Prosecutor’s Office in Burgas in connection with Art. 291, para. 2 of the Criminal Code, namely:
„Whoever, as an expert witness before a court or before any other duly authorized authority, knowingly gives a false opinion orally or in writing, shall be punished by imprisonment from one to five years and by deprivation of the right under Art. 7.“
The Prosecutor’s Office refused to initiate pre-trial proceedings. On this occasion, one of the expert witnesses – public figure Stefan Petrov – shared a Facebook post. Under it, lawyer Georgi Stoyanov wrote the following comment:
„Stefan, claiming that the ballot paper was not a document and refusing to initiate pre-trial proceedings for pre-trial proceedings is not like carrying out an investigation and initiating one for a crime against the electoral rights of the citizens (enshrined in the Constitution, the Criminal Code and several international acts), for fraud for financial gain and so on. Because if we continue your logic we should let the oligophrenics scribble the election papers and destroy a valid vote /surprisingly it was all for one party and with the same pen in each of the polling stations with such scribbles/ and it will all be ok, as there was no signature and it was not a document. Your opinion on the act of the prosecution is irrelevant as long as you do not have the necessary legal education to assess it. As for the fact that you secretly like it, we must not forget that we live in a world with rules and order and when a handful of freaks want to turn a city of 300,000 inhabitants into a city of idiots while scribbling the pen on the ballots this cannot go unnoticed and be supported. Even if the issue had been referred to a qadi (Muslim judge), it would not have produced the result sought…“
Lawyer Georgi Stoyanov is one of the famous lawyers and recognizable faces in Burgas. His attempted dispute with the public figure and his subsequent comments reflect the broader situation in the legal sphere and society as a whole. The lawyer’s criticism of the experts involved in the election process is overly harsh and even inappropriate. Moreover, some of the 11 expert witnesses he describes as „freaks“ are close to GERB and thus he is attacking his own because some of his clients are GERB councilors. The use of such emotive language and offensive terms undermines the credibility of the system and creates tension in society, and is indicative of the level of GERB if they rely on such lawyers.
His subsequent reaction in the comments highlighted not only his personal communication style, but also his possible inability to consider criticism as constructive feedback. I wonder if Stoyanov’s clients expect such treatment from their lawyer?
Another question that arises is whether the Bar Association in Burgas will take its own initiative after this definition? Some Facebook users may perceive from his reaction that lawyers act in the interests of certain political or ideological groups, rather than striving for objectivity and fairness. However, in order to have confidence in the legal system, it must be made clear whether such comments are compatible with professional ethical standards. The reaction of the Bar Association is important not only for strengthening the faith, but also for preserving the integrity of the legal profession as a whole.
It is important to emphasize that lawyers, as representatives of the legal profession, have a responsibility not only to their clients but also to society as a whole. This is why it is important to respect ethical standards and avoid unnecessary attacks and provocations that could worsen the situation and undermine the credibility of institutions.
