The Good Strategist Makes
a Victory Out of Any Loss

Yulian Cholakov, a chairperson of the Association for Optimization of
Justice and Administration, gives examples of the APIA efficiency in exercising
control over the work of the authorities

Diana Bancheva

What was the reason you started using the Access to Public Information Act (APIA)?

On July 5, 2001, close to the seaside resort Sunny Beach, I was sanctioned by traffic police for driving with 56 km/h over the limit. I am an experienced driver and realized that they had registered my speed before the road sign for limitation. After all my educational background is radiolocation and my work is to produce radars.

After much troubles, in October 2002, the Regional Court – Nessabar repealed the penal act. The case was heard in camera since the data about the Traffic Police radars turned to be state secret. In December 2002, responding to an inquiry at the National Assembly, the Minister of Interior admitted that those type of radars could not register speed over the limit. The media mad a lot of fuss about that. Nevertheless, the data about the parameters of those radars remained secret.

In the meanwhile, I learned about the Access to Public Information Act and in August 2002, I filed my first access to information request about the technical characteristics of those secret radars. In January 2003, I filed a second request with the same questions as due to inexperience I had missed the period for appealing the silent refusal on the first request.

This is how, after winning the court case at the Supreme Administrative Court, the National Police Service at the Ministry of Interior was presented with the “Tied Key” anti-award by the Access to Information Programme for an absurd refusal under the APIA, as it had turned out the technical parameters of the “secret” radars were published by the producers in the Internet.

Why did you establish the Association? Who is in the team?

On July 2003, in my capacity of citizen of the Republic of Bulgaria, I tried to submit a statement to the Temporary Commission for Drafting Proposals for Amendments to the Constitution at the National Assembly. It turned out that I had no right. Regardless of the unambiguous Art. 45 of the Constitution, the Commission had adopted its own rules for working, according to which proposals could be submitted by members of parliament, state institutions, academia, nongovernmental and professional organizations,but not by citizens.

This was the first serious obstacle I faced as a citizen. Later, friends and partners encouraged the establishment of the association. The founders and the collaborators are people with different background – lawyers, journalists, doctors, physicists, IT specialists, engineers, military, architects, economists, artists, etc.

What is the reason for your active use of the APIA in your work, including litigation?

The scope of our work is wide. The APIA is only one of our instruments to support the rule of law, the establishment of an active civil society in Bulgaria and a better place of living.

How is the APIA helping to achieve your goals?

The good strategist makes victory out of any loss. Out of the silence, ignoring, and the refusals on absurd grounds, we figure out the weaknesses of the authorities and the places where we should attack with the highest prospects for success.
When we requested the documents for the sale of 122 decare of seaside coast and part of the Sea Garden in the city of Varna, it turned out that the most difficult  document to obtain was the 2007 investment plan on the base of which a certificate for a first class investment was issued. The latter was necessary for a transaction without a tender procedure for the sale of those 122 decare which according to the Constitution should be absolute state property.

What type of institutions do you approach? What kind of information do you request?

We file requests to all types of institutions for any type of information. Besides the obtaining of the information, we are trying to educate the officials by filing the requests. We are trying to hint to what knowledge and skills are necessary to implement efficiently the law and respect the rights and interests of the citizens.

Which is the most significant access to information case of the Association according to your experience?

Every case is important. Unfortunately, the institutions often mistake our activities as hostile and become defensive. I will mention again the sale of those 122 decare of the seaside coast and the Sea Garden in the city of Varna because the case shows what is going on in the state. After several requests for the transaction documents, the regional governor of Varna complained that we were exercising psychological harassment over the regional governor’s officials. That we were threatening them with court proceedings and fines. Tat resulted in stress and deficiency of work. I would say this is a compliment and proof of the results of our work.

What are the current projects of the Association?

They are a lot: protection of the natural parks “Rila” and “Vitosha,” the Sea and Botanical Garden in the city of Varna; the master city plan of Varna; the sanctions of officials under Art. 307 of the Administrative Procedure Code after the closing of the Ministry of State Administration and Administrative Reform; the high bank fees for payments of state taxes, etc.

We are dealing with the violation of the Law on Sate Fees in its part providing for payment of such fees in cash or by revenue stamps. The administrative court justices are obligating the parties to pay state fees that are not actually due or to pay two times, fees of arbitrary amounts or corresponding to the number of complainants. They require state fees for second instance court appeals in case that such are not due. The behavior of some justices from the Supreme Administrative Court is also inexplicable. They are slowing down the proceedings by multiplying bad practices. For example, the chair of the Fifth Division, Andrey Ikonomov, turned back two of our appeals on the ground of unpaid fees, regardless of the fact that the fees had been paid and copies of the bank payments had been presented to the court.

September 2009

This case is part of the book "Civil Participation and Access to Information (15 Years of the APIA, 37 stories of NGOs)" published by AIP within the implementation of the project “Enhancing the Capacity of Nongovernmental Organizations to Seek Public Information” supported with a grant under the NGO Programme in Bulgaria under the Financial Mechanism of the European Economic Area 2009 – 2014 (www.ngogrants.bg).

The whole responsibility for the content shall be taken by the Access to Information Programme Foundaiton and it cannot be assumed under any circumstances that the document reflects the official stance of the  Financial Mechanism of the European Economic Area and the Operator of the Programme for NGO support in Bulgaria.