Background: The Banevi Complaint

The Sofia City Court is facing criticism for repeatedly neglecting the instructions of the Supreme‍ Court of Cassation and refusing to examine the complaint of Nikolai and Evgeni Banevi against former Attorney General Ivan Geshev and five of his former deputies, including Borislav Sarafov, who currently serves as attorney General. The complaint centers around a letter sent ⁤by geshev and his deputies to 67 European institutions, alleging pressure and highlighting cases involving the Banevi brothers.

The Banevi family argues that this letter constituted ‍an arrogant abuse of rights and a violation of their presumption of innocence. They claim the prosecution leadership effectively presented their case ‍to a court favorable to Geshev and his team, ⁤seeking moral damages caused⁤ by the aforementioned letter.

Timeline of the Legal Battle

The initial claim was filed in january 2022, nearly four⁢ years ago. Despite this, the case has not been substantively reviewed. The Sofia City⁣ Court and the sofia Court of Appeal initially dismissed the claim, citing functional immunity for Geshev and his deputies.

However, the Supreme Court of Cassation overturned these decisions, ruling that functional immunity should not supersede the rights of individuals to the presumption of innocence. The Supreme Court emphasized that immunity is intended to ensure the proper functioning of ⁢the judiciary, not solely to protect ⁣those who invoke ⁣it.

Despite this⁤ ruling, the Sofia City Court again refused to⁢ hear the case on ⁤its merits, arguing that the letter was legitimate business correspondence and that its dissemination to the media was justified.

arguments and Allegations of Bias

The banevi brothers are now appealing this ‍latest decision⁣ to the Sofia court of Appeal. Their complaint raises several key arguments:

• Illegal Panel: They⁤ allege that the decisions to dismiss the case ⁢or terminate proceedings were consistently made by judges who appear biased ⁣in favor of Geshev and his deputies.
• Seconded Judges: The Banevi brothers claim that⁤ all judges involved in the case at both the City Court and Court of Appeal levels are seconded, raising concerns about impartiality.
• Abuse of Power: They argue that assigning ⁤the case, involving the Prosecutor General and his deputies, to‍ seconded judges violates the principle ⁢of random case distribution and constitutes an abuse of power.

Functional Immunity: A Closer Look

Functional immunity, as applied in this case, is a legal principle designed to protect public officials from frivolous lawsuits ‍that could hinder their ability to perform their duties.Though, the supreme Court of Cassation’s ⁣ruling clarifies that this immunity is not absolute and should not infringe upon fundamental rights like the presumption of ‍innocence.

The core of the dispute lies in whether the letter sent by‍ Geshev and his deputies was ⁤a legitimate exercise of their official duties or an improper attempt to prejudice the Banevi brothers’ case. The Banevi family contends that the letter was a deliberate effort to damage their reputation and influence ongoing legal proceedings.