News

The Ombudsman Institution sent an opinion to the Minister of Justice, the Chairperson of the State Agency for Child Protection, the Regional Governor of Sofia City, the Mayor of the Capital City and the Mayor of the District of Ilinden [in Sofia] in response to the demolition of illegal buildings in Zaharna Fabrika Quarter.

In the letter to the competent authorities, the Secretary General of the Ombudsman Institution Dr. Aysun Avdjiev recommends to the authorities to adhere to the principle of proportionality as provided by Art. 6 of the Code of Administrative Procedure (CAP), especially when the demolition cracks down the only home and to respect the interests of the individuals dislodged within the scope of Art. 8 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (CPHRFF).

“It is of particular importance to apply the principle of proportionality in the enforcement of Art. 272 CAP in the work of the administrative authorities that control construction work, consistent with the Convention,” the Secretary General writes.

In his letter, he insists on urgent action to ensure the interaction of all authorities in charge of child protection in order to prevent from a state of disaster children and their parents who are a vulnerable group of citizens as this conflicts with Art. 3 CPHRFF about the prevention of inhuman and degrading treatment.

Dr. Avdjiev emphasizes that over the years the Ombudsman has repeatedly brought forward the issues of citizens’ rights if violated when their one and only home is demolished and of drafted bills to be proposed to consolidate the matter of proportionality of the orders for the demolition of illegal buildings when such orders deprive the person dislodged of a home which is his/her only one home.

Further, Dr. Avdjiev points out that in order to prevent public criticism again and given the subsequent court decision against the State of 2023, for a violation of Art. 8 of the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) in the case “Simonova and Others v. Bulgaria”, the Ombudsman strongly maintains his recommendation for public consultations and priority enactment of the bill, which provides for amendments to Art. 225 and Art. 225а of the Spatial Development Act (SDA), Art. 80 and Art. 80а of the State Property Act (SPA), Art. 65 of the Municipal Property Act (MPA) and other relevant provisions.

“Forced demolition should not leave people homeless or violate human rights. The central government and local authorities must ensure alternative accommodation for the people dislodged. In the case in question where it was found that the structures are dangerous to the life and health of the lodgers, the demolition must abide by the international human rights standards and comply with the principles of reasonableness and proportionality,” Dr. Avdjiev emphasizes.

Therefore, he insists on most urgent action to verify, within the scope of power of the authorities, and to provide him with update information whether the Social Assistance Directorate and the Child Protection Division had taken social polls about the provision of social services and the accommodation of the individuals dislodged in order to prevent any violation of the rights of children and of people with disabilities.

The Secretary General draws attention to the fact that the Ombudsman Institution was approached as dozens of families, including families with babies and young children, were evicted.

He is firm that the demolition of the structures on 15 April 2025 went without accommodation offered to all dislodged individuals and despite the interim measures imposed by the ECHR under the request for an interim measure filed on 11 April 2025 in the case of Ilieva and Others al v. Bulgaria No. 11201/25, which reads:

The Court decides, under Rule 39 of the Rules of Court, in the interest of the parties and the proper conduct of the proceedings before it, to indicate to the Government of Bulgaria to offer to the applicants alternative options for accommodation until further notice.

Having regard for the information provided by the parties, the Court decides to request the Government, under Rule 54 § 2 (a) of the Rules of Court, to submit information and documents on the proposed alternative accommodation for each individual applicant:

- Have measures been considered to find solutions for the accommodation of the applicants and their families, in particular young people, children and vulnerable people for reasons of health?

- Are the applicants in a position to arrange their alternative accommodation?

The Court ruled that in keeping with Rule 41 of the Rules of Court the application will be given priority.