“Bulgaria has violated the right to free expression and the right to a fair trial of journalist Rossen Bossev by allowing him to be convicted for defamation in a private criminal case filed by the former head of the Financial Supervision Commission and the Bulgarian Development Bank (BDB), Stefan Mavrodiev. This was stated in a position by the Association of European Journalists (AEJ) – Bulgaria, referring to a ruling by the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg announced on Tuesday, June 4.
Rossen Bossev, who was working for the newspaper ‘Capital’ at the time and was part of the board of AEJ-Bulgaria, filed a complaint against Bulgaria in Strasbourg due to concerns about the impartiality of Judge Petya Krancheva when pronouncing on the charges brought against him. Judge Krancheva refused to recuse herself from Bossev’s case, despite the fact that the journalist had previously published critical articles questioning her professional ethics.
The decision by Judge Krancheva in 2017, which was upheld by the Sofia City Court in 2019, sparked international outrage as an example of how state officials in Bulgaria can misuse institutions to punish a critical journalist. It marked the culmination of a series of demonstrations of administrative and judicial pressure from Stoyan Mavrodiev and the Financial Supervision Commission he led against journalists and media performing their professional duties.”
“In this context, the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) established that Bulgaria violated Rossen Bosev’s right to a fair trial under Article 6, § 1 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), as well as his freedom of expression under Article 10 of the Convention.
Regarding the fairness of the trial, the Court stated that the applicant had the right to have objective and reasonable doubts about the impartiality with which the judge would exercise her functions when considering his appeal against the sentence handed down by the first-instance court, the Bulgarian Helsinki Committee reports.
The ECHR noted that it was Judge Krancheva herself who ruled on Bosedov’s request for her recusal. ‘This confusion of the roles of the judge and the party can clearly give rise to objectively justified concerns as to whether the procedure complies with the principle that no one can be a judge in their own case and, consequently, regarding the impartiality of the court,’ the Court pointed out.
Concerning freedom of expression, the ECHR found that the state’s interference was not necessary in a democratic society. The Court emphasized that the restriction imposed on his right to free expression, protected by Article 10 of the Convention, was not accompanied by effective and adequate safeguards against arbitrariness. It referred to two key rulings – Kudeshkina v. Russia and Baka v. Hungary (both judgments establishing violations of the freedom of expression of judges who had been removed from office for their expressed opinions), the human rights organization further commented.”
“Rossen Bosedov was represented by attorneys Alexander Kashamov and Stoyan Madin in the proceedings before the ECHR. The Court awarded the journalist compensation amounting to 511 euros to cover the fine imposed on him by Stoyan Mavrodiev, as well as an additional 3,000 euros for moral damages. Bulgaria was also ordered to pay legal costs amounting to 3,013 euros.
Comment from attorney Alexander Kashamov:”
“This ruling is crucial for Bulgaria because, firstly, it confirms the problem of so-called ‘SLAPP’ lawsuits against journalists exercising freedom of speech in the public interest, who are left without the necessary level of judicial protection in such cases. The second part of the ruling is also interesting because it relates to the fact that Rosen (Bosev) was denied a fair trial.
It is very rare for the Court in Strasbourg, in any case from any country, to find violations of both rights – the right to free expression and the right to a fair trial. Here, in my opinion, it is deliberately emphasized that there has been a violation of the right to a fair trial, which includes the right to be judged by an impartial judge.
Thus, the Court in Strasbourg combines two major issues facing Bulgarian society – the protection of freedom of expression and the judicial system as it currently stands.
According to attorney Kashamov, although the court rulings against Rosen Bosev date back to 2017 and 2019, and the case for which he was convicted goes back to 2013, the ECHR took into account ‘a much larger and comprehensive context,’ as there had been exchanges of views with the Bulgarian state until very recently.
‘The changes are not grandiose. Neither are the problems in the judicial system resolved to the extent that we are facing a new situation with an entirely new and unblemished judicial system, nor do we see significant progress in the protection against defamation and slander lawsuits against journalists. Rather, we can say that we have new challenges, new threats, and factors such as civil slander, which is much more closely related to SLAPP.’
According to Kashamov, this ruling of the Court in Strasbourg is a standard to be followed by the Bulgarian government and the Ministry of Justice in its efforts to address the systemic issues identified by the Court.
‘Anti-SLAPP legislation may not fully resolve these problems, but it would be a significant step in the right direction. Because what we observe from the cases is the need for a swift and relatively impartial process, in which the journalist and the media, when put in the dock, so to speak, have a higher level of protection. This is not only their protection but also that of society, which needs to hear the facts, criticisms, and messages that journalists and media disseminate,’ commented attorney Alexander Kashamov.”
“In the context of this key ruling by the ECHR, the Association of European Journalists (AEJ) recalls the joint call with the Access to Information Foundation to the Bulgarian Ministry of Justice to continue and finalize work on legislative proposals aimed at curtailing SLAPP (Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation) lawsuits against journalists and civil activists. This initiative seeks to strengthen the protection of freedom of expression and ensure that journalists can operate without the fear of frivolous legal actions designed to intimidate and silence them.”
