|
|
 |
|
|
| |
|
|
| |
| Constitutional strengthening of the ombudsman institution
|
| |
On March 20, 2006 the Parliament adopted the third constitutional amendments (promulgated in issue No 27 of the State Gazette, March 31, 2006). Among those amendments is the incorporation of the ombudsman institution in the Constitution. The newly adopted art. 91a states:
“…(1) The National Assembly shall elect an ombudsman to protect the rights and freedoms of the citizens.
(2) The powers and activities of the ombudsman are set by law”.
The constitutional amendments entitle the ombudsman to seize the Constitutional Court when he/se is of the opinion it is necessary to declare a law, concerning the rights and freedoms of the citizens anti-constitutional. (art. 150, para. 3). These constitutional requirements shall be further developed in the Law on the Ombudsman and the Law on the Constitutional Court.
This is undoubtedly a positive development in the process of refining the legal framework of the ombudsman institution. The explicit constitutional provisions on the institution will reinforce its authority and strengthen the guarantees for its independence.
Although being a positive step forward, the amendments are scanty. The proposals of the Center for the Study of Democracy developed early in the beginning of the discussion in the first stage of the constitutional reforms encompass a far wider range of issues to be included in the constitutional amendments:
-
provisions to specify the criteria a person should meet to become an ombudsman and the positions and activities that are incompatible;
-
rules to envisage greater parliamentary majority for election and removal from office of the ombudsman;
wider range of persons to approach the ombudsman, including legal persons;
-
right for the ombudsman to submit draft laws to the parliament on issues related to the protection of human rights and freedoms;
-
introduction of a legal framework for the possibility for election of local civil mediators, who work in cooperation and with the support of the national ombudsman.
Proposals for such amendments were also made by certain MPs, but the National Assembly did not adopt them and merely wrote the institution into the Constitution. During the discussions at the sessions of the Ad-Hoc Committee on Amendments to the Constitution and the parliamentary sessions, the debates were limited to insignificant issues such as the name of the institution and did not concern the issues, which would provide more efficiency and stability of the institution.
| |
|
| |
|
CSD.bg |
|
|
|
 |
|
|
| ©
Center for the Study of Democracy. |
 |
|
The web page you are trying to reach is no longer updated and has been archived. To visit us, please click here. |
|
