A judge in the Eurolab 2011 case has not declared construction. He complained about media pressure.

Judge Vanina Koleva, who became famous because of the case with Kapitan Andreevo’s “Golden Laboratory”, has not declared upgrading and reconstruction of a property, as required by the Judiciary Act (JSA) and the Anti-Corruption Act (ZPKONPI). Approached by our media for comment, she complained of pressure and accused us of hindering her career development.

We recall that Judge Koleva stopped as a first-instance judge (in practice second instance after the administratively punishing authority), the preliminary execution of the order of the then Director of the Bulgarian Food Safety Agency Professor Hristo Daskalov for the removal of the “Golden Laboratory

” from Kapitan Andreevo.

“Eurolab 2011” over the years has been associated with notory figures from the underground: Well, Curo and Taki. According to well-informed sources, the control over “The Captain” is among the factors that have led to an exacerbation of relations between Krasimir Kamenov – Curro and Christoforos Amanatidis – Taki. In recent years, the two have been mentioned as participants in the war between Vasil Bozhkov – The Skull and the Oligarch and MP from the Movement for Rights and Freedoms Delyan Peevski. Both sides in this alleged conflict report to the institutions of particularly serious crimes committed by their erstwhile partners.

As we revealed

earlier, Vanina Koleva’s father Prof. Simeon Vassilev is a longtime colleague with prof. Plamen Mollov, who is the current rector of UFT Plovdiv. Mollov offered a bribe in favor of “Eurolab 2011“. The daughter of prof. Simeon Vassilev revokes the preliminary execution of the order of the Director of the Bulgarian Food Safety Agency (BFSA), which orders “
Eurolab 2011
” to leave immediately rented premises in the area of the Kapitan Andreevo border checkpoint.

With the arrival of the caretaker government of President Rumen Radev it turned out that there is no case with the preliminary execution of the removal of “Eurolan 2011” from “The Captain”. The leadership of the BFSA was replaced, and in the meantime it turned out that the preliminary execution of the order was not Requested. The High Magistrates held that the Court of First Instance had annulled a non-existent order granting provisional enforcement by which it had issued an inadmissible judicial decision.

Is the judge not obeying the law?

A check of the property declaration of Judge Vanina Koleva found that it did not describe the project for superstructure and reconstruction of an existing building with 64.56 sq. m. This is a house purchased in 2018 with a yard in Lozenets district in Sofia with a total built-up area of 109 sq. m. on 2 floors.

In 2022, the renovated house is visibly grown with a 3rd attic floor. The building and reconstruction permit issued by Sofia Municipality No139/26.11.2019

is for total built-up area of 173,56 sq. m. , or 64.56 sq. m. more.

We also draw information about construction from the Sofia Municipality’s online whistleblowing platform. From there we understand that on 22.12.2020 the renovation of the house has already begun. Sofia Municipality has been submitted signal with photos for pouring a concrete slab without visibly having a construction site. A month and a half later, the district administration Meetsthat they have carried out an inspection and violations have not been established. However, the lack of signs for a construction site is not commented on in the response.

Bargain family property deal

In 2019, Judge Vanina Koleva declares the purchase of a house with a yard in Sofia. As acquired real estate in the calendar year 2018 were declared for her and her husband 1/8 ideal part of a house 109 sq. m. with a yard of 279 sq. m. The declared origin of funds is savings. The cost of acquiring 1/8 is 29 340 BGN. or total 58,680 for 1/4 id. Am. of the spouses. The purchase is on 21.02.2018 and is without a mortgage.

However, it is not clear from the declaration that the remaining 3/4 id. h. are purchased in the name of the parents of a judge Vanina Koleva – Simeon and Sofia Vassilevi. A check in the Property Register shows that the purchase is of material interest BGN254,257.90 and on this declared amount a registration fee was paid.

The price of the house with a yard is very profitable and is below the market prices in one of the most expensive neighborhoods of Sofia at that time. Only the yard, even if there was no building on it, costs 465 euros / sq. But in the property there is also a house with 109 sq. m. RZP. The average price of houses in sq. Lozenets is 1500 euro/sq.m. in February 2018, according to information on a real estate site.

In December 2017, the father of Judge Vanina Koleva – prof. Simeon Vassilev sold together with a relative a property in Plovdiv and thus secured part of the funds for the family property deal in Sofia.

The declarations of Judge Vanina Koleva

In 2019, Judge Vanina Koleva
declared
1/8 ideal part of a house 109 sq. m. with a yard of 279 sq. m. for her and for her husband Ivaylo Kolev. In the same year, the two did not sell real estate and had no mortgage loans.

The declarations of Judge Koleva, submitted in the following years: entr.No 1951/11.03.2020, entr.No 4258/27.04.2021 and entr.No 3841/11.04.2022

, there is no information on the project for reconstruction and upgrading of an additional 64.56 square meters.

For the year after obtaining the building and reconstruction permit, one inherited property of the judge’s husband in Sofia and others in the country was declared. In the last declaration, covering the period of construction and repair activities, it is noted: “I have nothing to declare.”

Approached for comment, Judge Vanina Koleva saw a tendentious attitude in the fact that we analyze her properties and challenged the obligation to declare the upgrade:

“You’ve written an entire article and now you’re digging about my property declaration because you’re asking me about property. I follow everything very closely. There is a construction that is subject to Act 15. I have a contract with construction supervision, although I only have 1/4 or 1/8, but I have a contract with a construction supervisor who must issue Act 15. When it meets the construction of the requirements to receive Act 15, then it is redeclared.”

However, this interpretation of the law is highly controversial. Under the instructions

of KPKONPI, the right to build, upgrade and extension are also subject to declaration of real estate. The floor area also includes built-up areas in the the attic space (page 17). The same instructions are present at Site the Inspectorate of the SJC. The preliminary contracts for the purchase of properties that do not give rise to a real transfer effect, but only if the deposit on them is BGN 10 or more thousands, are also subject to declaration.

In all circumstances, the upgrade of another 64.56 square meters., is not less than 500 euros per square, which means that her family’s investment exceeds BGN 10,000. The practice is for such investments to be reflected in the property declaration of magistrates. Apart from this, the building has Act 14, which means that it can now be traded as a rough construction and has its convertible value and price.

In the continuation of the conversation, she accused BIRD.BG of tendentious and personal attitude towards her and said that the media exerts pressure on magistrates who have ruled and rule on the cases of Eurolab 2011

.

“I haven’t heard of Well, Taki and Curro, but when I saw the case I trembled.”

In the conversation with our reporter, the judge expressed his conviction that the article about the connections of her family with NMSS and Professor Plamen Mollov was published because of the rumor about her posting to the Supreme Administrative Court.

Vanina Koleva expressed her resentment that she had fallen into a scheme (the graphic image of the Eurolab 2011 case) with faces from the underworld to whom she had not heard the names before our article. She almost felt like an “outcast” thug.

In general, this accusation is extremely surprising, because the participants in this case are who they are. However, not knowing who was who, Judge Koleva said that she was all trembling when she saw who her applicant was. Colleagues came to her and said:

“The media will crucify you if you do, if you cancel it.”

Since this was her inner conviction – that the preliminary execution was not motivated and since she thought YOU would leave it in force, she decided that she would write the definition.

thus. Subsequently, YOU Confirms her act. We have noted from BIRD.BG that we do not believe that the ruling by the Supreme Administrative Court is a measure of justice. Here Judge Kolova surprised us:

“I, as a judge of first instance, concur in this opinion. And I’m telling you, I agree with many of your articles.”

Although Judge Koleva shares our critical position regarding the practice of the Supreme Administrative Court, she expressed confidence that our team acts in a custom way:

“I think you’re just a bat, that someone told you that certain people have to be hit because of some rumor of secondment.”

The magistrate added that with its actions and publications the media exerts pressure on us on individual magistrates.

“Do you understand that you are putting pressure on me and the colleagues who are watching this case!”

Our team will not publish the entire conversation with Judge Koleva because we are convinced that it will be very difficult for her to prove some of the theses she articulates. Our goal is not to put anyone in a difficult situation and possibly bring them into litigation with third parties.

However, we want to emphasize that our team completely disagrees with her claims of “pressure” and “order” and believes that the truth is completely different. First of all, we do not accept that we can put pressure on magistrates in connection with the ruling on a case on which they have already ruled. In addition, it is a fact that through her relatives by blood and by marriage, Judge Koleva is related to a professor Plamen Mollov. The latter, as we have already recalled, is involved in an attempt to offer bribery to Professor Hristo Daskalov in order to “serve” the interests of Eurolab 2011. Such connections are certainly an occasion for every magistrate to take away, so as not to raise suspicions of an opaque ruling on a case of high public interest.

Of course, removal from cases under alleged conflicts of interest has no tradition of administrative justice in our country. Before he heads YOU, Georgi Cholakov ruled on the restoration of Chavdar Bozhurski, Direct
Head
of his own brother. Probably, magistrates are taken away in case of suspicions of conflict of interest only in countries where the judiciary and in particular the court enjoy public trust. Bulgaria is definitely not among these countries. The acts by which many of the administrative judges rule and the factual situation on some of their cases further increase the suspicions of opacity and corruption. And as a member of SCM Cholakov is not taken away from the vote of Judge Nelly Stoyanova, for whom it is documented that they were in close relations. How can we expect a judge? Vanina Koleva or any other judge would go to prevent suspicion and preserve the good name of the court, if the head of administrative justice does not?

In the course of the conversation, Judge Koleva also commented
on the case
with her father – Prof. Simeon Vasilev. She stressed that there was no evidence on the accusation against him. According to him, any conscientious prosecutor would dismiss the case. already in the pre-trial phase in such a factual situation, which, however, does not happen. A curious point is that in the judicial phase prof. Simeon Vassilev and his lawyer They want the recusal of Judge
Petko Ivanov Minev
, because at that time he was already a part-time lecturer at the University of Food Technologies – a detail confirmed by Judge Koleva herself.

It turns out that both the judge and the defendant teach at a university, and prof. Vassilev was in conflict with the then leadership. Moreover, the professor and his family suspected the intervention of the then rector in bringing the charges. Prof. Simeon Vassilev obviously has concerns that Judge Minev is not impartial because he is a teacher and to some extent dependent on the same leadership. The situation undoubtedly bears the marks of conflict of interest. Ironically, when considering the Eurolab 2011 case, Judge Koleva is in a similar situation to that of Judge Minev in her father’s case. Both magistrates are not taken away, although there are no grounds for this, to put it mildly.

***

Разследващата журналистика е разузнаването на гражданите. BIRD се финансира от дарения. Ние не публикуваме реклами. Не получаваме държавни субсидии. Не разчитаме на грантове. Финансирането чрез малки дарения от читатели е гаранция за нашата независимост. Включете се, за да продължим да разкриваме злоупотреби и да държим отговорни властимащите. Използваме Вашите пари за хонорари на журналистите, командировки, изграждане и поддръжка на нашите информационни системи, такси за фирмени и имотни регистри у нас и по света, придобиване на техника и специално оборудване, осигуряване на нашата безопасност и други важни работни мисии. Важно: Ако дарявате всеки месец това ще ни даде възможност да планираме и организираме нашата работа. Благодарим Ви! Нас ни има, защото Вас Ви има!

This post is also available in: Български (Bulgarian)