Bulgaria: Expert Warns New Euro Referendum Push Is 'Unconstitutional and Hopeless'

A new attempt to call a referendum aimed at delaying Bulgaria’s transition to the euro would once again be unconstitutional and ultimately futile, constitutional law expert Assoc. Prof. Borislav Tsekov said on NOVA NEWS. He was commenting on the announcement by “Revival” leader Kostadin Kostadinov that he plans to file a fresh petition for such a vote, made shortly after the Constitutional Court issued an interpretative ruling regarding the actions of former parliamentary legal adviser Natalia Kiselova.

Tsekov noted that the situation surrounding Kiselova is straightforward: the initial rejection of the referendum was “a politically correct decision delivered through an improper procedural step”. He stressed that the Speaker of Parliament cannot assume the institutional role of the National Assembly or speak formally in its name. While he sees no grounds for sanctions against Kiselova, he believes her choice will remain on the record as an instance of acting outside constitutional limits at a specific moment.

Regarding “Revival's” plan to renew its referendum request, Tsekov was firm that such an initiative has no legal standing. He recalled that, following Bulgaria’s 2005 EU Accession Treaty and the subsequent constitutional amendments, a nationwide vote on abandoning or postponing euro adoption is prohibited. The issue, he said, is not related to timing but to constitutional constraints that cannot be bypassed.

He pointed to earlier Constitutional Court rulings that already outlined the legal framework. Bulgaria’s commitment to EU membership, Tsekov argued, represents a collective, long-term decision of the state, supported by its institutions and endorsed by the National Assembly on behalf of the people.

According to him, no group of citizens, whether numbering 4,000, 40,000 or 400,000, can claim sovereign authority or present itself as speaking for the entire nation. National referendums fall entirely within the prerogatives of Parliament, which must judge both the legal compatibility and the strategic implications of any such proposal.