Криминална хроника

The choice of F. Beev cassated, he appealed to a Tri-member panel of the Pazardzhik District Court (POS) overturned the decision of the Municipal Election Commission (OIC), by which Fidel Beev was declared to have won the partial elections for mayor of the municipality of Velingrad. The judgment is appealed by Mr. Beev to the Supreme Administrative Court (SAC), which will settle the dispute definitively. The presiding judge Penka Yaneva met the promised deadline and the decision was issued at the end of the working day on March 30. A day before, news of cassation of the elections was swirling in Velingrad, but the POS registry denied that there was already a decision in case 45/2005. The ten pages of the judgment list violations of more than 15 articles of the Local Elections Act. The final conclusion is: "The Court accepts that each of these violations alone cannot lead to vitiation of the final result, but considered in aggregate, give reason to make a definite conclusion that the electoral process has been vitiated entirely." The main facts on which the court bases its decision are the following:
* 6 electoral lists lack the signature of a mayor (these are the sections in Draginovo, Pashovo and Cvetino, where the lists by law are signed not by the mayor of the municipality, but by the mayor of the village). The section in Bozevo lacks the signature of a secretary of the municipality. Due to the lack of signatures, the lists have no evidentiary value and the court accepts that the 3018 votes reported in these sections for Fidel Beev are invalid.
* the court considers as particularly significant violations of the law the facts that 4 electoral lists (in Rohlevo, Birkovo, Yundola and Honey meadows) are without data on the permanent address of the voters. Thus, control over the vote could not be established because it was not clear whether voters were listed on only one electoral list. In violation of the law on the election day itself, amendments were made to the lists and persons with no data for address registration were added. Voting is allowed on persons under 70 years of age with an old personal passport instead of the required by law identity card. This violation also renders the votes invalid. * as a violation, it is indicated that 7 members of the SIC have been replaced with persons who have not been approved by a decision of the OIC. The court ruled that there were violations of the electoral agitation legal provisions by F. Beev: publication of campaign materials in his favor in v. "Chepinets" on the day of reflection 11 February 2005 and broadcasts on Velingrad radio on a frequency for which there is no license.
The court also takes into account the conclusions of the two experts who carried out expert reports on the ballots. According to polygraph specialist N. A total of 42 F ballots were opened. Beev, who is a xerocopia. According to the conclusion of the specialist mathematician Tsrunchev, when counting, 1235 envelopes less than the ballots were found. Under the law, ballots without envelopes were supposed to be counted as invalid, but were reported by the OIC as valid. The expert has annulled 388 ballots of F. Beev and has found a number of violations of sectional election commissions in the reporting of unused envelopes and ballots. The court accepted that with a reported total of 22,029 votes in the first round of the mayoral election, the declared winner Fidel Beev should have received 50%+1 or 11,016 votes. The officially reported votes for it are 12,839, but of them should be deducted as invalid 3018 votes in the seven sections without a signature on the electoral lists and the recalculated 228 annulled ballots found in the manual census. In this situation, the votes received by candidate Fidel Beev in the first round were 9,593, which means that he received less than 50% of the actual vote of the voters. By declaring Fidel Beev to have won the mayoral election, the OIC-Velingrad ruled an unlawful decision because the candidate did not receive in the first round more than half of the actual votes, the court believes, and overturns the OIC's decision.
The litigation continues in YOU. By law, the time limit for Supreme Court judges to rule is 14 days after the complaint is received by F. Beev.
Elena Baeva