Decision No. 16 of 6 November 2018 on Constitutional Case No. 4/2018
Referring Authority and Subject Matter of the Case
The case was initiated upon a request submitted by sixty Members of Parliament from the 44th National Assembly. The subject of the case was the constitutionality of the Resolution of the National Assembly of 21 February 2018 (promulgated in State Gazette, issue No. 17 of 23 February 2018), by which, on the ground of Article 5, paragraph 1, item 2, second limb of the Rules of Procedure of the National Assembly (RPNA), Valeri Mirchev Zhablyanov was removed from the office of Deputy Chairperson of the National Assembly.
The request alleges that the resolution was unconstitutional as being contrary to the constitutional provisions establishing the principle of the rule of law (Article 4 of the Constitution), political pluralism (Article 11, paragraph 1), the right of everyone freely to form opinions and to act according to their conscience (Article 37, paragraph 1), the right to hold and express opinions (Article 38), the right freely to express and disseminate opinions through speech (Article 39), the free parliamentary mandate (Article 67), as well as Article 73 of the Constitution concerning the organisation and activities of the National Assembly.
Summary of the Court’s Reasoning
The National Assembly, as the supreme constitutionally established state authority and the representative body of the people (the Parliament of the Republic), enjoys institutional autonomy. This autonomy is guaranteed through the constitutional power granted to Parliament to adopt rules governing its organisation and activities and to decide matters concerning its internal governance - Article 73 of the Constitution.
In accordance with the established case law of the Constitutional Court, the Rules of Procedure of the National Assembly are adopted directly on the basis of the Constitution, occupy a place in the hierarchy of normative acts parallel to that of statutes (Decision No. 7/2010 of the Constitutional Court), and are binding on all legal subjects.
The constitutional legislator uses the term “mandate” solely in relation to state bodies - in this case the National Assembly (e.g. Article 64, paragraph 2) - as well as to Members of Parliament (Article 67, paragraph 1). In certain instances, the term denotes either the term for which Parliament is elected (Article 64, paragraph 1) or the duration of the powers of Parliament (Article 64, paragraph 3, Article 160, paragraph 3) and of Members of Parliament (Article 72, paragraph 1). The RPNA, in turn, use the term “powers” in relation to Members of Parliament (Article 138, paragraph 7 and Article 140, paragraph 2). The Constitutional Court nevertheless considers it necessary to emphasise that the Chairperson and Deputy Chairpersons of the National Assembly are not state bodies within the constitutional framework, but rather internal organs of Parliament, the state authority being the representative institution itself. Accordingly, the Court finds that arguments related to the constitutional concept of a “mandate” of a state body cannot support the notion of tenure stability with regard to these parliamentary offices. It is therefore not coincidental that the RPNA use the term “early removal” rather than “early termination of mandate” in relation to the Chairperson and Deputy Chairpersons of the National Assembly.
By the contested resolution, Valeri Zhablyanov was prematurely removed from the office of Deputy Chairperson of the National Assembly pursuant to Article 5, paragraph 1, item 2, second limb of the RPNA, on the ground of systematic violations of rights, as stated in the draft resolution.
The Constitutional Court considers that, in the present case, the notion of “systematic” conduct cannot be reduced solely to a quantitative criterion. The offices of Chairperson and Deputy Chairperson of the National Assembly are held from the moment of election until the termination of tenure, and regardless of whether the office-holder makes statements in a personal capacity or performs specific acts related to directing the activities of Parliament, this does not alter his or her status within the internal organisation of the National Assembly. Consequently, it also does not diminish the responsibility borne by the office-holder to demonstrate conduct that is measured, prudent, and conducive to maintaining the authority of the national representative institution. There can be no doubt that a Deputy Chairperson of the National Assembly, who bears heightened responsibilities for safeguarding the authority and dignity of Parliament, must likewise bear enhanced responsibility in this regard.
Grounds for the Ruling and Disposition
Pursuant to Article 149, paragraph 1, item 2 of the Constitution (the competence to rule on requests for a declaration of unconstitutionality of laws and other acts of the National Assembly), the Constitutional Court rejects the request submitted by sixty Members of the 44th National Assembly seeking a declaration of unconstitutionality of the Resolution of the National Assembly of 21 February 2018 (promulgated in State Gazette, issue No. 17 of 23 February 2018), by which Valeri Mirchev Zhablyanov was removed from the office of Deputy Chairperson of the National Assembly.
The decision was adopted with dissenting opinions by five judges.