In brief
Yes, Bulgaria announced an appeal against the Central Election Commission’s decision that Prime Minister Rumen Radev’s press release did not breach the election code, citing the commission’s refusal to address over 105 complaints about the use of official government channels. The CEC had rejected the complaint by a narrow 8‑to‑7 vote, arguing the remarks were made before the campaign period. The party argues that the Commission’s inaction shields officials and violates equitable application of the law.
The political group Yes, Bulgaria announced it will appeal the Central Election Commission’s (CEC) ruling that Prime Minister Rumen Radev’s comment about the first‑round presidential results did not breach the election code.
The appeal follows the CEC’s narrow 8‑to‑7 vote, which rejected a complaint filed by the Gurov‑Kandev nomination committee and registered election‑observer NGOs. The CEC concluded the PM’s remarks—made before the official campaign period and after the announcement of the first‑round results—were not campaign material and therefore did not violate Article 183 of the Election Code.
The party said the commission’s “refusal to decide on the merits of more than 105 complaints” about the use of the Government Information Service and the Council of Ministers’ official channels to disseminate the PM’s statement amounts to a shield protecting officials.
"The majority in the CEC, formed by the votes of representatives from Progressive Bulgaria and Vazrazhdane, did everything possible to avoid answering the question of whether it is permissible for the official website and press service of the Council of Ministers to disseminate Prime Minister Rumen Radev’s call to support a specific presidential candidate," the party’s statement said.
Another part of the statement warned that the commission “must not become an institutional shield that protects those in power from scrutiny” and that the CEC’s independence does not allow it to avoid making difficult decisions.
Yes, Bulgaria’s appeal will be filed immediately, the statement added, arguing that the CEC’s inaction “violates equal application of the law.”
This development follows the CEC’s earlier decision to dismiss the complaint, which was based on the timing of the statement and the fact that it was issued from a state institution where the government does not hold a majority of shares.
