Chapter 10
Liberta:
Legal Analysis of Arbitrary Detentions in Bulgaria and Violated Democratic Principles
The practice of arbitrary detentions carried out by the Bulgarian police represents a systemic violation of the fundamental principles of the rule of law, legality, predictability, and the prohibition of abuse of rights. This phenomenon erodes the foundations of democracy, as it transforms law enforcement authorities into an instrument for repression rather than for the protection of citizens.
The detention of persons for a period of 24 hours without specific and current factual grounds, but solely on the basis of past criminal registrations, is deeply incompatible with international and European standards.
Violated Legal Principles
* Principle of the rule of law and legality: This principle, fundamental to any democracy, requires that the actions of the state be predictable and strictly regulated by law. Arbitrary detentions that are not based on a reasonable suspicion of having committed an offense (as required by Article 5, § 1, sub-paragraph c of the ECHR) violate this principle. They also conflict with Article 2 of the Treaty on European Union, which establishes the rule of law as one of the core values of the Union.
* Right to liberty and security: Guaranteed by Article 5 of the ECHR, Article 9 of the ICCPR, and Article 6 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EU. Detention that is not supported by concrete facts constitutes an arbitrary deprivation of liberty, which is categorically prohibited.
* Prohibition of abuse of rights: Enshrined in Article 17 of the ECHR, it prevents state authorities from using their powers for purposes other than those for which they were granted. In this case, the police use detention not to prevent crimes, but to exercise control and induce fear.
Relevant Case Law of the ECtHR and the Human Rights Committee
European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR):
* Fox, Campbell and Hartley v. the United Kingdom, applications nos. 12244/86, 12245/86, 12383/86: The ECtHR categorically states that the existence of a criminal record in itself does not constitute sufficient grounds for a reasonable suspicion and therefore does not justify detention. It is mandatory to have concrete, objective, and current facts related to the commission of an offense.
* Brogan and Others v. the United Kingdom, application no. 11209/84: In this case, the Court established a violation of Article 5, § 3 of the ECHR, emphasizing that prolonged detention without immediate judicial review is impermissible. This also applies to the 24-hour detention in Bulgaria, given the lack of an effective mechanism for judicial review of its lawfulness.
UN Human Rights Committee:
* B. v. Australia, communication no. 216/1986: The Committee established a violation of Article 9, § 1 of the ICCPR, ruling that even short-term detention without a legal basis is arbitrary.
* A. v. Australia, communication no. 560/1993: In this case, the Committee also found a violation of Article 9, § 1 of the ICCPR, emphasizing that the detention of a person who is not suspected of a specific crime is impermissible. These decisions clearly show that deprivation of liberty must be based on concrete legal and factual grounds, not on assumptions.
Consequences and Effective Remedies
Arbitrary detentions are a legal aberration that erodes citizens trust in the state and leads to severe consequences. Victims of these violations have the right to compensation by virtue of Article 5, § 5 of the ECHR and Article 9, § 5 of the ICCPR. The protection of their rights can be achieved through:
* Filing a complaint with the prosecution office.
* A lawsuit for compensation against the state.
* A complaint to the European Court of Human Rights after exhausting national remedies.
In order to put an end to this practice, a decisive reform within the Ministry of Interior is required, including the training of officers and the introduction of effective mechanisms for control and accountability.
Only in this way can it be guaranteed that the police will act as a guardian of the legal order and not as an instrument for arbitrariness.
30th
RIGHT TO LIBERTY
Author: Hey Dgo
The right to liberty is one of the most fundamental and inalienable human rights. Every person has the right to liberty and no one has the right to arbitrarily deprive them of it. This right is protected by a number of national and international acts:
Article 5, §1 of the European Convention on Human Rights;
Article 9, §1 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights;
Article 6 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union;
Article 30 and Article 31 of the Constitution of the Republic of Bulgaria;
The principles of the rule of law, enshrined in Article 2 of the Treaty on European Union and Article 67 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, where it is stipulated that the Union constitutes an area of freedom, security and justice.
Liberty is also reaffirmed by divine laws and human moral principles - "Do not take away the life and liberty of your neighbor", as well as by the fundamental principles of law:
Principle of legality (principium legalitatis) - Nullum crimen, nulla poena sine lege;
Principle of predictability (principium praedicibilitatis) - lex certa;
Principle of legal certainty (principium securitatis iuridicae) - lex certa, lex stricta, lex praevia;
Principle of liberty (principium libertatis) - Ubi jus, ibi libertas; Libertas est naturalis facultas eius quod cuique facere libet, nisi si quid vi aut jure prohibetur (Digests 1.5.4).
In Bulgaria, unfortunately, the right to liberty is frequently violated by the police and the prosecution authorities. It is a mass practice to detain individuals for up to 24 hours under the Ministry of Interior Act and for 72 hours by order of a prosecutor - without the presence of factual and legal grounds, without initiated criminal proceedings, and without real data regarding a committed crime. Annually, between 30,000 and 40,000 people are detained in Bulgaria, being deprived of liberty not as an exceptional measure, but as a means of pressure, repression, and personal retaliation. These practices are incompatible with the principles of the rule of law and constitute a violation of Article 5 of the European Convention.
The European Court of Human Rights has delivered a number of foundational judgments related to arbitrary detention:
Brogan and Others v. the United Kingdom (1988) - The Court rules that detention for more than 4 days and 6 hours without judicial control violates Article 5, §3 of the Convention. This case is pivotal for limiting excessive police detention.
Campbell and Fell v. the United Kingdom (1984) - emphasizes the importance of a fair procedure and judicial control as guarantees against arbitrariness.
Fox, Campbell and Hartley v. the United Kingdom (1990) - The Court accepts that for a detention to be lawful, there must be a "reasonable suspicion", rather than abstract or presumptive grounds.
These decisions clearly establish that every detention must be:
1. Statutorily regulated;
2. Necessary and proportional;
3. Subject to swift and effective judicial control.
The contrary constitutes an arbitrary deprivation of liberty, incompatible with Article 5 of the Convention, international standards, and the fundamental principles of the rule of law.
Consequently, the 24-hour and 72-hour detentions in Bulgaria, applied massively and without sufficient justification, are an example of a violation of the right to liberty. They undermine trust in justice, create an atmosphere of fear, and are more reminiscent of the practices of repressive regimes than of a European democracy based on the rule of law.
THE RIGHT TO LIBERTY IS AN INALIENABLE RIGHT. NO ONE - NEITHER STATE NOR AUTHORITY - CAN ARBITRARILY IMPAIR IT.
THE RIGHT TO LIBERTY: LEGAL BASIS AND HUMAN VALUE
Liberty is one of the most fundamental and inalienable human rights. It is not only a legal norm but also a supreme human virtue that forms the foundation of any democratic society. It is enshrined in a number of national and international acts that protect it from arbitrariness and infringements.
LEGAL FOUNDATIONS OF LIBERTY
Liberty in a legal sense is based on clear and fundamental principles aimed at protecting the individual from state arbitrariness. These include:
* Principle of legality (principium legalitatis): Nullum crimen, nulla poena sine lege. (No crime, no punishment without law.) This principle guarantees that no one can be punished unless their act was explicitly declared a crime by law prior to its commission.
* Principle of predictability (principium praedicibilitatis): Lex certa. (The law is clear.) Legal norms restricting liberty must be formulated clearly enough to be comprehensible to everyone. Vague laws allow for arbitrary interpretation by the authorities, which is a direct threat to liberty.
* Principle of legal certainty (principium securitatis iuridicae): This principle combines lex certa, lex stricta (strict law), and lex praevia (prior law). It ensures stability and predictability in the legal system, guaranteeing that citizens rights are protected from sudden and obscure changes in legislation.
DIMENSIONS OF LIBERTY AND THE CHALLENGES IN BULGARIA
Despite legal guarantees, liberty is often infringed upon, not only through physical deprivation but also through violations of its other aspects. In Bulgaria, these violations manifest in various spheres:
* Personal liberty: The mass practice of detentions for 24 and 72 hours, often without sufficient justification, is an example of impairing the fundamental principles of the rule of law. These actions violate Article 5 of the European Convention on Human Rights and undermine trust in justice.
* Political liberty: Violations of the right to free and fair elections, such as vote-buying, represent a direct infringement upon democracy. They deprive citizens of their right to choose their representatives by free will.
* Freedom of speech and the media: Bulgaria ranks among the last places in freedom of speech in the European Union. This limits citizens access to pluralistic information and hinders their ability to hold those in power accountable.
* Economic freedom: Inadequate income and rising prices can turn citizens into economic slaves who cannot afford basic needs such as housing. This situation restricts their ability to live with dignity and to develop.
* Environmental freedom: The right to live in a healthy environment is a fundamental human right. Air pollution and other environmental problems directly affect peoples health and quality of life.
* Freedom of movement: Poor road infrastructure and other obstacles to free movement within the country can indirectly restrict personal freedom of movement.
CONCLUSION
The right to liberty is inalienable and no one, neither state nor authority, can impair it arbitrarily. Liberty is at the core of every democratic society and is the sole means of protection against tyranny and dictatorship. In order to flourish, it must be valued and defended by every single citizen.
THE RIGHT TO LIBERTY: A SACRED TESTAMENT, LEGAL VALUE AND A BITTER REALITY
Author: Hey Dgo
LIBERTY - A LEGAL, MORAL AND CHRISTIAN RIGHT
The right to liberty is more than a fundamental human right - it is a sacred testament, affirmed both by human laws and divine teachings. Christianity teaches us that man is created in the image and likeness of God, endowed with reason and free will. This liberty is a gift and a responsibility, and depriving someone of it is an infringement upon the deepest essence of human being. This is why "Do not take away the life and liberty of your neighbor" is not only a moral but also a divine law.
European values are built upon this foundation. The European Convention on Human Rights, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, and the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EU are contemporary manifestations of this eternal truth, guaranteeing everyone the right to liberty and security.
FUNDAMENTAL LEGAL PRINCIPLES AND THEIR GUARANTEES
For liberty to be real, rather than a mere declaration, it is protected by the fundamental principles of law:
* Principle of legality (Principium legalitatis): Nullum crimen, nulla poena sine lege. (No crime, no punishment without law.) This is the key guarantee against arbitrariness. No one can be detained or deprived of liberty unless their actions are explicitly and clearly defined as a crime by law.
* Principle of predictability (Principium praedicibilitatis): Lex certa. (The law is clear.) Legal norms must be precisely formulated so that every citizen can foresee the consequences of their actions. Vague laws are an instrument for abuse and oppression.
* Rule of law (Suprematia iuris): This principle requires all state authorities to act within the framework of the law. When the police or the prosecution place themselves above the law, they violate the rule of law, which is the heart of the constitutional state.
* Constitutional State (Status iuris): Respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms is the primary goal of a constitutional state. Any action by state authorities that impairs these rights contradicts the principles enshrined in Article 2 of the Treaty on European Union.
THE RIGHT TO LIBERTY: NEGATIVE AND POSITIVE OBLIGATIONS
The protection of liberty is expressed in both negative and positive obligations of the state:
* Negative obligations: The state has no right to arbitrarily deprive a person of liberty. This means that every detention must have a legal basis, be necessary and proportional, and be subject to swift and effective judicial control.
* Positive obligations: The state is obliged to create mechanisms to protect citizens from infringements on their liberty, including from the actions of its own authorities.
TURNING LIBERTY INTO A DEVALUED COIN: THE REALITY IN BULGARIA
Unfortunately, in Bulgaria and specifically in Sofia, we frequently witness gross infringements upon the right to liberty. The mass practice of 24-hour police detentions without the presence of factual and legal grounds, without initiated criminal proceedings, is an act of arbitrariness and an impairment of fundamental legal principles. Police officers who allow themselves to abduct people without a committed crime, presenting this as "police work", must bear criminal and civil liability for their actions. Such a practice is equivalent to kidnapping, not law enforcement. The analogy with the abduction of people by terrorist organizations like ISIS is strong and shocking, but unfortunately, it is not entirely groundless when state authorities act outside the law.
LEGAL MECHANISM FOR PROTECTION AND LIABILITY
No one can be arbitrarily deprived of liberty. Therefore, the law provides clear mechanisms for the protection of citizens and for seeking accountability from violators:
* Article 5, §5 of the European Convention on Human Rights: Guarantees a right to compensation to everyone who has been the victim of unlawful arrest or detention.
* Article 9, §5 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights: Reaffirms the right to compensation for anyone who is a victim of unlawful arrest or detention.
* Article 2 of the State and Municipal Liability for Damages Act (SMLDA): Provides a legal mechanism to seek compensation for damages caused by unlawful detention on the part of state authorities.
Those who allow themselves to deprive people of liberty without a legal basis must know that they violate not only the law but also fundamental human rights. They must bear civil and criminal liability for their arbitrary deprivation of liberty.
Only through strict compliance with the rule of law and the protection of fundamental rights can we distinguish ourselves from repressive regimes and build a true constitutional state.
Liberty is an inalienable right for which the Bulgarian people have fought with blood and ideals through the centuries. From the national liberation struggles to todays legal frameworks, it remains a fundamental value protected by historical, legal, and moral principles. In the following lines, we will examine the development and protection of this right in the Bulgarian and international context.
The right to liberty: from historical struggles to contemporary challenges
Introduction: Liberty as a sacred testament
Liberty is a fundamental value embedded in the foundation of Bulgarian statehood and national identity. It is not merely a legal category but a sacred testament for which generations of Bulgarians have sacrificed their lives. From the national liberation struggles with the motto "Liberty or Death" to contemporary legal frameworks protecting human rights, liberty remains an unalterable ideal and goal.
1. Historical roots: The struggle for freedom in the Bulgarian tradition
1.1. The motto "Liberty or Death" and its significance
* The motto "Liberty or Death" was adopted by Bulgarian revolutionaries as a symbol of absolute dedication to the cause of national liberation. It originally originated from the American revolutionary Patrick Henry in 1775, but was adapted and adopted by Greek and Bulgarian revolutionaries.
* During the April Uprising (1876) and the activities of the Internal Macedonian-Adrianople Revolutionary Organization (IMARO), this motto was inscribed on banners, seals, and weapons, symbolizing the readiness for self-sacrifice.
* Georgi Rakovski ordered a banner and a seal with the inscription "Liberty or Death" for the First Bulgarian Legion, which emphasizes the universality of the ideal of liberty in the national liberation struggles in the Balkans.
1.2. The Bulgarian Revolutionary Central Committee (BRCC) and its statutes
* The statute of the BRCC is a historical document that defines the organization and strategy of the revolutionary struggle. It provides for the creation of a secret revolutionary network to prepare an uprising against the Ottoman rule.
* The statute emphasizes:
* Secrecy and hierarchy: Members of the central and local committees remain undisclosed to ensure the security of the organization.
* Equality among members: All participants in the committee meetings have equal rights.
* Financial and organizational mechanisms: The collection of funds, weapons, and men is strictly regulated.
* The statute of the BRCC is not only an organizational document but also an ideological manifesto that embodies the aspiration for liberty and justice.
1.3. The role of the "apostles of liberty"
* Vasil Levski is the brightest example of dedication to the ideal of liberty. He developed the theory of an internal revolutionary organization to prepare the people for an uprising without relying on foreign aid.
* Levski stated: "If we win, we win for the whole people; if we lose, we lose only ourselves."
* Hristo Botev, Georgi Benkovski, Panayot Volov, and other revolutionaries accepted their death as the price for liberty, which consolidated the motto "Liberty or Death" as a leading principle in Bulgarian history.
Table 1: Main principles of revolutionary committees in Bulgarian history
Principle: Secrecy
Description: The members and activities of the committees remain strictly secret
Example from history: BRCC functions without disclosing its location
Principle: Equality
Description: All members have equal rights in decision-making
Example from history: All members of the committee are equal in meetings
Principle: Self-sacrifice
Description: Readiness to sacrifice in the name of liberty
Example from history: The motto "Liberty or Death" on the banners of the insurgents
Principle: Popular support
Description: Relying on wide popular participation
Example from history: Collection of money, weapons, and men from the population
2. Legal and moral guarantees of liberty
2.1. Philosophical and religious foundations
* Christian values s
