In brief
During the General Assembly of Judges in Sofia, Maria Terziyska urged the next council to overhaul the Supreme Judicial Council’s secondary legislation, while Krasimira Doneva called for a broader restoration of public trust through transparent staffing and competition rules. The two candidates, though covered by the same outlet, framed their proposals from distinct angles: procedural refinement versus systemic accountability.
On 31 October 2026, the General Assembly of Judges in Sofia convened to elect the next composition of the Supreme Judicial Council (SJC). Two leading candidates, Maria Terziyska, a judge from Varna Regional Court, and Krasimira Doneva, from Burgas District Court, expressed their reform agendas in separate statements broadcast by BTA.
Terziyska highlighted the need for the council to prioritise updating its secondary legislation, especially the statutes governing court staff status and administration. She argued that clearer rules on judicial ethical conduct would improve the SJC’s effectiveness and help restore public trust in the judiciary. According to BTA, the candidate explained, "As a judge, I always strive to apply the law correctly and fairly and to observe the principles of ethical conduct for magistrates. I maintain that professional integrity is an essential and necessary part of quality justice," a statement that underlined her focus on procedural and ethical clarity.
The same BTA outlet covered Doneva’s priority of restoring public confidence in Bulgaria’s judiciary by demanding transparent personnel decisions and measurable competition criteria. She called for reforms to the SJC’s appointment procedures, stressing a stronger focus on the quality of judicial work and safeguards against undue pressure on magistrates. Doneva’s proposals included abolishing external competitions for initial appointments at regional courts and creating a mechanism for recalling an administrative head at the initiative of the general assembly of judges.
BTA’s broader coverage of the assembly framed both candidates’ approaches as complementary yet distinct. Terziyska’s emphasis on secondary legislation and ethical standards represented a structural, procedural approach, while Doneva’s call for transparency and accountability represented a more outward‑looking, trust‑building perspective.
The contrasting narratives offered by these candidates reflect varying interpretations of what “reform” means for the SJC. Terziyska’s focus on codifying staff status: administration and ethical guidelines, points to a desire for a more internally coherent regulatory framework. Doneva’s proposal for uniform, measurable criteria and protected career advancement highlights an attempt to align the SJC’s functions with the public’s expectations of fairness and openness.
Both BTA reports agree that the next composition of the SJC is pivotal for the Bulgarian judiciary’s future. Whether the council will choose to prioritise procedural refinement or to introduce broader systemic transparency measures remains to be seen, but the coverage has set the stage for a debate that will shape the next round of judicial governance in Bulgaria.
