Only 80% of a Fine is Payable if Said Fine is Paid within the Deadline for Appeals

Individuals, sole proprietors, and corporate entities who are subject to fines or property penalties will be able to pay only 80 percent of the amounts listed in their penal ordinances if they make the payment prior to the deadline for appeals. This is one of the amendments to the Administrative Violations and Penalties Act that was approved at today’s meeting of the Council of Ministers.

The package of amendments was proposed by Deputy Prime Minister Ekaterina Zaharieva after broad consultations with representatives of the executive, the judiciary, the prosecution service, lawyers’ associations, academia, the National Association of Municipalities in the Republic of Bulgaria, citizens, companies, employer organizations and foreign chambers of commerce and industry.

The provision of the option of reduced payment of fines aims at facilitating collection, making sanctions timely and relieving courts of large numbers of cases, as reduced payments make it impossible to appeal the amount of a penalty. Appeals of penal decrees are limited to sections therein containing administrative penalties of other kinds and appeals may be filed with reference to the severity of such penalties, if these are imposed together with the fines, or if property is forfeited in favor of the state. Offenders will be able to choose whether to avail themselves of the opportunity to pay the fine or the property penalty in a reduced size or to appeal the entire penal ordinance in court.

The so-called “agreement” is introduced. It is set to allow the completion of administrative penal procedures within a short timeframe. The controlling authorities must explain to the relevant person their legal options and the consequences of agreements. Agreements are concluded between parties in writing and are issued in place of penal decrees. Where an agreement is concluded, fines and property penalties are subject to reduction to up to 70 percent of the minimum or the absolute amount of the fine or property penalty under the law applicable to the violation, or if the law does not provide for a minimum value, this minimum is determined by the authority imposing the penalty, but it may not amount to more than 70 percent of one-half of the maximum value. Agreements may not be concluded in the following four cases: in case of a repeat violation; where the violation does not meet the definition of repeat violation under a dedicated act: an violation committed within one year of the entry into force of a statement of findings by virtue of which an administrative penalty or a citation had been imposed on the offender for an violation of the same kind; where the violation is a criminal offense; where the offender’s guilty plea is not supported by evidence in the case. The agreement shall have the legal effect of an effective penal decree. Amounts must be paid within 14 days of the conclusion of an agreement and, where a payment is not made, the penal authority must announce that an agreement had not been reached and must therefore issue a penal ordinance.

The draft act creates effective legal guarantees in support of the citizens in the out-of-court phase of proceedings by making it possible for them to appeal all effective documents that could affect their rights and legal interests. It would now be possible to appeal citations issued under Article 28 of the Administrative Violations and Penalties Act if these are issued for minor violations and a decision had been adopted on ending the respective administrative procedure, unless the authority imposing the penalty had ended the procedure and sent the evidence collected to a prosecutor upon discovering indications that a crime may have been committed. Where the authority imposing the penalty has disposed of material evidence or has confiscated property in favor of the state, its decree may also be appealed by the owners of the respective properties. These amendments are in compliance with Article 120(2) of the Constitution of the Republic of Bulgaria, which makes it possible for citizens to appeal administrative decrees concerning them. it further complies with Article 6(1) of the European Convention on Human Rights, which states that, in the determination of his civil rights and obligations, everyone is entitled to a fair and public hearing within a reasonable time by an independent and impartial tribunal established by law. Article 1 of Protocol 1 of the European Convention on Human Rights concerning the right to peaceful enjoyment of possessions is also complied with.

Extending of the timeframe of the procedure provides an additional guarantee for the exercise of individuals’ right of protection. The timeframe for presenting objections to a statement of findings regarding an administrative violation has been extended from three to seven days, while the timeframe for appealing penal decrees and other orders by the authority imposing penalties has been extended from seven to fourteen days. This will give individuals and businesses more time to organize the defense of their rights and legal interests.

The draft act contains more preventive anti-corruption measures in respect of the controlling and sanctioning activities of the administration in that it provides for the issuance of citations in writing only, rather than oral warnings in cases of minor violations, and there is a limitation of the discretion exercised by the authority imposing the penalty as to whether a case is a minor violation since now the term will be enshrined in the law. The scope of persons who may request resumption of the proceedings is being expanded. The discretion exercised by the authority imposing the penalty is being limited as to the amount of the penalty. If an agreement is reached on closing an administrative-penal procedure, clear rules are introduced on: when a person authorized to issue statements of findings should not issue a statement of findings, ascertaining an administrative violation, or when there are grounds for the authority imposing the penalty to recuse itself from the case, the grounds, timeframe and procedure for said recusal are being limited. The grounds for closing administrative proceedings and the key information of the respective decision are being limited. There is a provision requiring the authority that imposes the penalty to lay out supporting arguments in the penal decree as regards the kind and amount of the imposed administrative penalty.

An update of the notion of resumption of an administrative penalty proceedings is proposed. Provisions regarding the documents subject to resumption and the timeframes for such actions are proposed. The grounds for resumptions are being expanded through the addition of more grounds: when by decision of the European Court of Human Rights a violation of the European Convention on Human Rights is found to be of substantial importance for the case: when, as a result of a significant violation of the rules of procedure entitled persons had been deprived of the ability to participate in the administrative penalty proceedings or had not been properly represented; when a ruling by a court enters into effect repealing an administrative decree or the findings on which the authority issuing the penalty had based said penalty, etc.

In cases of contradictory or incorrect practices in the application of the Administrative Violations and Penalties Act, joint rulings by the respective colleges of the Supreme Administrative Court and the Supreme Court of Cassation, depending on the specifics of the administrative procedure in question, are provided for. The set of authorities that may request interpretation from the supreme judicial bodies is expanded through the inclusion of the Council of Ministers, all ministers and collective governance authorities established by law and responsible for the implementation of the document in question.

In pursuit of the government’s goals for the development of e-governance, an option for penal decrees to be delivered to violators by a message sent to their personal profiles registered in the information system for secure electronic delivery is provided for. This functionality is conceived as a module of the Universal Portal for Access to Electronic Administrative Services under the Electronic Governance Act.

With a view to the development of digital society and to do away with loopholes in legislation, provisions are being created to determine the jurisdiction of authorities imposing penalties for violations committed in cyberspace.