Rotten Apples come out expensive… to YOU

Destitute judge Andrey Ikonomov sentenced the Supreme Administrative Court to pay him BGN 112,000

One of the most scandalous and iconic figures in the judiciary recently sentenced the Supreme Administrative Court (in solidarity with the SJC) to pay him compensation of BGN 112,000 for “discrimination”. The decision in Case 13446/2020 of the RCC is not final, but the very fact of its ruling is a bitter irony. The bitterness remains at the expense of the budget, however. And is a moral “black dot” on the lapel of Joro 2.0 – the head of the Supreme Administrative Court Georgi Cholakov – who was recently
illuminated
by us as the main and first (but far from last) character in #БасейнГейт.

In 2010, judges at the Supreme Administrative Court Andrey Ikonomov, Panayot Genkov and Nikolay Urumov became famous in a grandiose property scandal in which their relatives acquired appetizing seaside plots for free. Investigation

Capital revealed how 80-year-old Elka Ikonomova (Andrey’s mother) received in 2004 the right to build on 430 sq. m. to Primorsko for 1,677 BGN For pennies, which is called. Previously, it declared that She lives as a sorely needy. Five years later, a residential building was built there, which Elka contributed to a commercial company managed by Judge Ikonomov’s brother. Of course, the material interest of the aport is already many times higher. It is very reminiscent of the real value of Tsatsarov orchardsRight? A for Georgi Kolev’s stones

(Joro 1.0) not to mention that we will not have enough for a whole day.

Neither for Ikonomov nor for the other judges there were any real consequences. Although the SJC punished them (only!) with a reduction in wages, these penalties were subsequently Canceled from… YOU. That’s right, from the same court where bad apples administer justice. Raven crow eye doesn’t pull out, does it?!?

Either way, at the end of 2015 Ikonomov retired from the Supreme Administrative Court and filed a claim for payment of gross remuneration, what is due to all magistrates. He was paid “only” 4 gross salaries. Ikonomov claims before the court that the head of the Supreme Administrative Court at that time (Georgi Kolev – Joro 1.0) demonstrated incompetence (lol, we agree!

) and ignorance of practice application of the JSA in similar cases where much larger retirement benefits were paid. However, the protective thesis of YOU is very interesting. First of all, they claim that Ikonomov should have filed his claims under the APC, not the CPC – which would be very convenient for YOU, of course! Why – well because then the case will be heard before the ACSC and then before the SAC itself – and as we well know, Case law does not know of a case in which the Supreme Administrative Court condemns itself. A timid attempt at such a breakthrough recently made a remarkable decision of Adm. Court Stara Zagora, which ordered the Supreme Administrative Court to pay BGN 150,000 to a broke legal entity. Of course, the SAC subsequently overturned this decision — “Sakon colleagues, let’s not get up for a rezil!

“

(as Georgi Cholakov would say to the court panel – and it is very likely that he really told them

). The ultimate effect of this ‘self-washing” is that a few days ago the company filed a
complaint
to the ECHR. And the court in Strasbourg has already at least twice had occasion to declare that the Supreme Administrative Court implements a denial of justice and violates the ECHR – see

here and here

. We raised it, as they say.

Either way, the SSD rejects this objection of the Supreme Administrative Court, citing a SCC practice according to which it is the district court that has jurisdiction to hear the case. The court also rejected the objection of the statute of limitations, insofar as a careful analysis of the facts made it clear that the application was filed a few days before the expiry of the 3-year period. In essence, Judge Hadzhieva makes numerous references to the practice of the ECJ, the ECtHR and the Supreme Court of Cassation in order to reach the conclusion that the claim has been proven on grounds and amount. Awarded are 81,000 leva, and to them we should add another 31 thousand leva interest, accumulated over the last 4 years. Of course, this case has to go through 2 more instances – and if the decision is confirmed, it will mean at least as much interest that eventually the Supreme Administrative Court (and the SJC) will have to pay. It’s nice, isn’t it?

Here it is imperative to recall something else – Andrey Ikonomov is also known for being chairman of the Supreme Administrative Court, which in 2007 issued a decision to delete the Strandzha Nature Park., the largest protected area in the Balkans. The lawsuit was filed by a company with the appetite to build in a protected area of the park, and the press pointed to the company’s links with companies from the orbit of the park.Multigroup“, close to the main doner of the republic Ahmed Demir Dogan. The scandalous court decision of the panel, headed by Andrey Ikonomov, led to a reaction of the parliament, which adopted an amendment to the Protected Areas Act, preventing the orders declaring protected areas to be subject to judicial review. Thus, after the strong public pressure, Strandzha Nature Park was saved. We can seriously assume, however, that Ikonomov has taken back what he owes is sticking to this scandalous decision – as well as to that of Kamchia Sands, where with similar skillful arguments he revoked the status of a protected area.

There are no good heroes in this story.. On both sides stand proven corrupt magistrates and compromised institutions. The decision of the RCC seems legally sound and in good faith, but this does not change the final result – one of the Bad Apples in the Judicial System It has just enriched itself even more. At the expense of the budget. And everything is legal – as it was once with his hotel (sorry, his brother’s) in Primorsko.

And finally, a few words about the other two stars in Primorsko-gate. After a short “exile” in Burgas, Panayot Genkov quietly returned to the Supreme Administrative Court And to date, he has been administering justice there again – according to our observations, for about two years. And Judge Denitsa Urumova, Nikolay Urumov’s “destitute” daughter-with-hotel, was actually the only one fired. Of course, then YOU Cancel And that punishment. The judge herself is to date Holder in the Sofia District Court – but there is time, she is probably still waiting for promotions. And the judge’s five-story hotel still sits to this day — and thrives. And no doubt it generates much more income than the modest and (or indeed not so modest) judge’s salary. Raven-raven eye does not pull. Not in 2004, not in 2012, not in 2022. To the winners, congratulations.

***

За да научавате преди всички за нови разследвания, инсталирайте си нашето мобилно приложение:

Щом сте стигнали дотук, вероятно вече си задавате въпроса как се финансира този журналистически проект.

От създаването си BIRD се финансираше от подаяния в нашето журналистическо чекмедже.
Но на чекмеджето му мина времето. Даже прокуратурата затвори онова Чекмедже, знаете кое…
Нашето финансиране влиза в крак с епохата. Фондонабиращата ни кампания вече се казва

#МятайСБЪРД

Дарявай за BIRD и мятай павета в блатото с корумпирани политици и други тарикати.
Те тайно премятат пари от твоя джоб в своя. Те размятат безнаказано лукса си пред очите на всички. Няма кой да ги накаже ако се надяваш на държавата.
Мятай, за да ги накажеш ти. Да дариш за разследващите журналисти е гаранция, че гадостите, с които силните на деня те замерят, ще им се върнат.
Можеш да метнеш веднъж, за да ти олекне!
Но по-добре е да мяташ редовно всеки месец и да се чувстваш трайно удовлетворен.
А най-добре е да доведеш приятели и да мятаме редовно заедно в екип. С мощен залп!
*За кръстник на новата ни фондонабираща кампания избрахме другарката Ваня. Благодарим й за вдъхновението!