Криминална хроника

By decision of 9 June 2005. The Supreme Administrative Court declared the garbage disposal contract concluded in August 2004 unlawful. between the then temporary mayor of the municipality of Velingrad Stoyan Dulev and Beev and Beev Ltd. The scandalous contract in question was first cancelled by the Pazardzhik District Court, Beev and Beev challenged this decision, but the SAC confirmed it. The motives of the supreme judges are that Beev and Beev did not meet the conditions of the public procurement announced by the municipality as early as 2000: the company does not have as its main subject of activity garbage collection, waste disposal and landscaping and has not carried out such kind of orders in the last five years. In addition, Beev and Beev to submit references for commercial reputation from companies in which Krasimir and Fidel Beevi are partners.
Although Beev and Beev Ltd. clearly did not meet the requirements, the company was not only allowed to re-enter the competition, but was also ranked first by a committee chaired by then Deputy Mayor Recep Hodzhov. The competition was held by the vrid mayor Stoyan Dulev in the dark and lightning - just 5 days after the decision of the SAC, and a day later a contract was signed with Beev and Beev for 640 000 leva per year. Because of the gross violation of the law, the court suspended the contract with a definition, but Beev and Beev continued to clean. Only the prompt intervention of the Municipal Council saved from liquidation the municipal company Stroycom and from dismissal its 130 workers. Stoyan Dulev continued to pay municipal money to Beev and Beev until his removal from office at the end of 2004. The company of the excme and current candidate-deputy Fidel Beev throughout the period and so far has also illegally used the Bober garbage vessels, which are municipal property. According to the lawyers of the municipality, the decision of the SAC that the contract concluded by Stoyan Dulev with Beev and Beev is unlawful will help the municipality to recover the about 240,000 levs paid to the private company. The municipality is currently pursuing a civil suit for the return of the money. It is interesting whether the final decision of the SAC on the illegality of the contract will finally provoke the prosecution to seek criminal responsibility from the guilty.
According to the decision, the municipality must continue the procurement procedure. The rest to compete companies "Stroikom" and "Shele" will be invited to submit new offers, as the previous ones are from 2000. and are obsolete.
Elena Baeva