Decision No. 4 of 6 June 2023 in constitutional case No. 3/2021
Referring entity and subject matter of the case
The case has been initiated upon a request of the President of the Republic of Bulgaria. It concerns binding interpretation of the provisions of Article 84, item 1 (‘The National Assembly shall pass, amend, supplement, and repeal the laws’); Article 88, para 3 (‘Each passed act shall be promulgated in the State Gazette within 15 days of being passed’); and Article 101, para 1 (‘Within the term under Article 88 para 3, the President shall be free to return a bill together with his motives to the National Assembly for further debate, which shall not be refused’) of the Constitution in relation to the question, ‘Is it admissible to amend, supplement, or repeal an act adopted by the National Assembly before it has been promulgated, or in the event it has been returned for fresh review within the term set forth in Article 88, para 3 of the Constitution of the Republic of Bulgaria?’.
Summary of the reasons
For a bill to become part of the national legal order, it has to undergo two votes preceded by debates both in the standing parliamentary commissions and the plenary of the National Assembly, provided the constitutionally required quorum and majority have been reached, and then to be promulgated in the State Gazette (Article 88, para 3 of the Constitution) in order to enter into force in line with Article 5, para 5 of the Basic Law (three days after the date of its publication unless otherwise envisaged by the act itself).
The bill adopted by the National Assembly is then submitted to the President to whom Article 98, item 4 of the Basic Law grants the power to promulgate it. Thus, the act of the President exercising his power to promulgate laws is the final one of a series of required acts whereby a bill becomes a legal act binding on all citizens, legal persons, and public authorities.
The Constitution does not grant the President the right to legislative initiative unless for amendments and supplements of the Constitution, neither is there any opportunity for his direct involvement in the review or vote on bills. The President enjoys powers solely as regards bills already adopted by the National Assembly and submitted to him – to be either promulgated in the way they have been adopted, or to be returned to Parliament for fresh review, which may not be refused (Article 101, para 1 of the Constitution).
When exercising his right to a veto, the head of State produces a certain effect for Parliament, namely a duty to review the bill and put it to a second vote. The purpose of the veto is to prevent the coming into being of a legal regulation which the President believes is incompatible with the Constitution, international law, EU law, legislation in force, or is simply inappropriate. Parliament is required to debate once again on the returned bill – either in whole or in part, without blocking the legislative work. The veto postpones entry of the bill in force unless the National Assembly readopts it or amends it following the prescribed terms and procedure.
When the head of State vetoes a law in part or in whole, and the veto has not been overcome by the required majority under Article 101, para 2 of the Constitution (a majority of more than half of all Members of the National Assembly), the returned law remains just a bill. It may be amended, supplemented, or repealed but only in the framework of the procedures laid down in the Rules of Organisation and Procedure of the National Assembly.
The National Assembly may not review a fresh legislative initiative regarding the issues that have been challenged by the President and related legal provisions unless the procedure on the imposed veto has been finalised. It is inadmissible to confuse these two separate procedures – adopting a law and reviewing a veto imposed by the President – and thus circumvent the procedure laid down in the Constitution and the Rules of Organisation and Procedure of the National Assembly for adopting laws, including amendments in a law returned by the President for fresh review.
The Constitutional Court underscores that the entry of a law into force is not a condition for the law being amended, supplemented, or repealed. Instead, a required condition is that the law be promulgated in the State Gazette.
Grounds for the ruling and decision
Pursuant to Article 149, para 1, item 1 of the Constitution (power to provide binding interpretations of the Constitution), the Constitutional Court holds that it is inadmissible for a law adopted by the National Assembly to be amended, supplemented, or repealed before being promulgated in the State Gazette.
Председател: Павлина Панова