In brief
The Central Election Commission has dismissed a complaint against Prime Minister Rumen Radev’s October 26 statements supporting candidate Iliana Iotova with an 8‑to‑7 vote, ruling no violation of the Election Code. Yes, Bulgaria, part of the Democratic Bulgaria parliamentary group, will appeal the decision, arguing that the commission’s refusal to examine the merits of 105 complaints breaches equal‑law application.
In Sofia, the Central Election Commission (CEC) on October 28 announced a narrow 8‑to‑7 vote that found no administrative violation of the Election Code in Prime Minister Rumen Radev’s post‑first‑round remarks urging voters to back presidential candidate Iliana Iotova. The decision, issued after the Gurov‑Kandev nomination committee referred a case of alleged electioneering to the commission, sparked an immediate legal response from the Yes, Bulgaria coalition, which is part of the Democratic Bulgaria parliamentary bloc.
The basis for the commission’s ruling was that Radev’s statement was made outside any state or municipal agency where the state holds a majority stake, and it was issued before the official start of the election campaign. The CEC justified its position by noting that the Prime Minister is not an incumbent participant in the contest, and therefore the dissemination of his remarks did not amount to campaign material. The commission also forwarded any relevant reports lying within its jurisdiction to the Bulgarian National Audit Office, although it maintained that the publication of the remarks failed to meet the technical threshold of article 183 of the Election Code.
The statement was later reproduced by the Council of Ministers' Government Information Service, which issued a press release containing the Prime Minister’s comments. Although the CEC found no violation, the claim that the official government channels were used for political persuasion was raised by several NGOs and political parties
Bozhidar Bozhanov, co‑chair of the Yes, Bulgaria party, said:
“The CEC, and more specifically the members representing Progressive Bulgaria and Vazrazhdane, owe the public their resignations. The CEC is not simply a directorate of the Council of Ministers; it is not an extension of the executive branch and must not do exactly what Radev and Iotova tell it to do.”The spokesperson emphasized that the commission’s independence obligates it to apply the law equally, not to shield those in power.
In early February, Yes, Bulgaria announced that it would file an appeal against the commission’s ruling. The party’s statement stresses that the CEC’s majority, consisting 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 group argues that the commission’s failure to rule on the merits of more than 105 complaints deprived voters of a transparent adjudication process. They characterized the CEC’s action as an institutional shield protecting those in power from scrutiny.
While the commission’s decision has been upheld, the Gurov‑Kandev nomination committee has escalated the dispute by filing an appeal with the Supreme Administrative Court (SAC) and launching a new complaint. The committee insists that the Prime Minister’s call to support Iotova constitutes genuine election campaigning, regardless of the speaker’s status. They also demand the removal of the relevant posts from the Council of Ministers’ website during the 48‑hour blackout period that precedes the final round of the presidential runoff on November 1.
Meanwhile, the Government Information Service announced on October 30 that it would delete posts relating to Radev’s briefing from the Council of Ministers’ website and the institution’s Meta profile. The service justified the action as compliance with the Gurov‑Kandev team’s request, stating that the removal would assist the opposition campaign. Although the CEC had found no violation, the government proceeded with the removal, indicating the influence of the ongoing political dispute on the handling of official communications.
Participants in the dispute emphasize the technical distinction between a statement made by a head of government and the propagation of that statement through official channels. The Election Code specifies that election campaigning by the state requires the state to refrain from using public resources for partisan purposes, yet the CEC’s ruling deemed the Prime Minister’s remarks insufficient to meet this threshold. Critics point out that the letter of the law prohibiting state‑run propaganda during election periods may apply to any public information service, regardless of the individual’s identity.
Responding to the CEC’s decision, the Yes, Bulgaria coalition and allied parties have called for a full review of the commission’s procedures to prevent future apparent conflicts of interest. The party’s appeal seeks not only to overturn the ruling but also to compel the commission to provide an independent assessment of the 105 complaints and the role of government communication channels in the upcoming November 1 runoff.
The outcome of the appeal will be closely watched by observers, as it could set a precedent for how the state’s official media is regulated during electoral campaigns. The Supreme Administrative Court will review the appeal within the statutory 24‑hour deadline, given the impending start of the election silence period.
