Rule of Law Clinic at the CEU Democracy Institute and Stichting Rechters voor Rechters (“Judges for Judges”) submitted third-party intervention in Nedelchev and Tsarigradska v. Bulgaria case concerning a covert surveillance of a civil society activist who participated in public protests related to the functioning of the Bulgarian judicial system, and of a judge who publicly expressed her views about various issues relating to the functioning of the Bulgarian judicial system in her capacity as member of the managing board of the Bulgarian Judges Association.
The common thread of this case is the existence and arbitrary use of covert surveillance targeting critics of the Bulgarian judicial system whose functioning – or lack thereof – has been undermined by persistent systemic rule of law issues.
In our submission, we argue that legal deficiencies and the abusive reliance on “national security” have led to the covert surveillance of critics—including judges—for ulterior, political purposes in Bulgaria. This is happening in a country recently labelled a rule of law “dismantler”, i.e., a country whose authorities “are actively eroding rule of law institutions” and characterised by long-standing, systemic rule of law deficiencies which have transformed Bulgaria into a “captured state” where institutions are incapable of conducting independent investigations into inter alia serious corruption or human rights violations. Key governing and investigative bodies – such as the centralised Prosecutor’s Office and the Supreme Judicial Council (SJC) – are highly politicised, captured, and operating under long-expired mandates, which undermines the constitutional order and invalidates the legal basis of surveillance authorisations. As regards the surveillance of Bulgarian magistrates (judges, prosecutors, and investigators) specifically, there is now extensive evidence of large-scale wiretapping on overly broad or abusive grounds, with the vast majority of cases never resulting in criminal charges or indictments. The information gathered through surveillance is instead used to blackmail, pressure, or trade favours with judges, creating a severe chilling effect and a “self-recusal phenomenon” that deeply undermines judicial independence and impartiality. The legality of the SJC decisions, including those for the promotion and appointment of magistrates, is questionable following a preliminary ruling issued by the CJEU on 30 April 2025 concerning a situation in which the members of a judicial inspection body have de facto remained in office indefinitely. It is furthermore submitted that the pro forma requests for wiretapping and the pro forma authorisations for wiretapping granted by Bulgarian courts are incompatible with EU law.
Our key conclusion is that Bulgaria is experiencing systematic, large-scale, and abusive covert surveillance targeting critical voices – specifically judges – motivated by ulterior purposes. This widespread wiretapping creates a severe chilling effect that directly undermines judicial independence and impartiality. Furthermore, this practice is greatly exacerbated by broader state capture and systemic rule of law deficiencies. This specific rule of law context must inform the review of individual applications relating to the system of covert surveillance in Bulgaria.
The Rule of Law Clinic does not represent the institutional position of Central European University (CEU PU GmbH)
