In brief
At the General Assembly of Judges on 31 October 2026, Maria Terziyska, a candidate for the Supreme Judicial Council and deputy chair of the Varna Regional Court, highlighted the need to prioritize updating its secondary regulation governing court staff status, administration and judicial ethics. Her remarks spotlight a call for a clear vision, active judge participation, and reforms that would strengthen effectiveness and rebuild public trust in the judiciary.
At the General Assembly of Judges on 31 October 2026, held at the Sofia Event Center, the new cohort of the Supreme Judicial Council took shape while former judge Maria Terziyska made a striking call for reform. The Assembly, a gathering of senior judicial officials responsible for selecting council members, opened the session with an introduction to the candidates and the agenda.
Terziyska, a seasoned jurist and deputy chair of the Varna Regional Court, was running to join the council as a member and was positioned to become its deputy chair, a role that would expand her influence over court governance.
During her brief speech, she singled out the council’s secondary legislation—rules that manage the status of court staff and the administrative framework of the judiciary—as a key focus for the incoming commission. The secondary regulations, as she noted, are the legal backbone that determines how court personnel are classified, remunerated and supervised.
She said that an overhaul of these regulations could heighten the council’s effectiveness and re‑establish public confidence in the impartial adjudication of cases. In her view, clearer procedural rules would streamline decision‑making and reduce bottlenecks in court operations.
Terziyska framed her proposal in terms of a clear vision of the council’s role and nature, arguing that judges’ active participation is essential to achieving a functional judicial organ. She maintained that a shared commitment to justice and normative standards would bind the council’s future actions.
She added that the council must be guided by a shared commitment to justice and normative standards, which she believes are foundational to the rule‑of‑law culture in the judiciary.
Terziyska summarized her guiding principle with a statement on ethical conduct:
As a judge, I always strive to apply the law correctly and fairly and to observe the principles of ethical conduct for magistrates. I maintain that professional integrity is an essential and necessary part of quality justice.
She emphasized that current ethical rules need revisiting, especially in light of public scrutiny over the integrity of certain judges and prosecutors, a concern that has emerged in recent months across the country.
Terziyska highlighted the growing frequency of public appeals for detailed investigations into the professional conduct of judiciary officials, underscoring the urgency of re‑examining the council’s ethical framework. Her remarks align with the broader public demand for transparency and accountability in the justice system.
The sweeping call arrives as the council prepares to set its agenda for the next legislative period, with the expectation that updated regulations will serve both as a practical guide for court personnel and as a symbolic reinforcement of the judiciary’s commitment to fairness. The council’s mandate includes ensuring fairness in judicial appointments and overseeing ethical compliance.
Observers note that the proposed reforms touch on both procedural aspects—such as classification of staff roles, salary structures, and benefits—and moral dimensions, particularly how the council monitors and addresses misconduct. These dual focus areas are intended to increase both efficiency and integrity within the courts.
The question remains how the newly elected council will negotiate these priorities with the broader legal community and the public, as the council continues to be seen as a guardian of judicial independence. The outcome will likely influence how the judiciary is perceived among citizens and international observers.
The emphasis on ethical conduct also reflects a broader trend within the Bulgarian judiciary toward transparent accountability, a trend that has been amplified by recent high‑profile case studies and media investigations. This trend points to an evolving legal culture that demands rigorous standards from all judicial actors.
Terziyska’s remarks signal an urgent need for a living body, one that can adapt its regulatory framework to evolving demands, including digital transformation, modern administrative practices, and evolving standards of professional integrity. She argues that the council should adopt dynamic procedures that reflect the realities of contemporary court work.
With the next council’s election still pending, the voice of the proposed reform indicates a specific direction for tomorrow’s legislative cycle, one that could reshape the procedural backbone of the Bulgarian court system and bolster its reputation in the national public eye. The reforms, if adopted, would set a new precedent for transparency in the judicial system.
