Bill to amend and supplement the Civil Servant Act

MR IVAILLO CALFIN
DEPUTY MINISTER-PRESIDENT
ON DEMOGRAPHIC AND SOCIAL POLICY,
MINISTER OF LABOR AND SOCIAL POLICY I
CHAIRMAN OF THE NATIONAL COUNCIL
FOR TRIPARITE COOPERATION

SUBJECT: Bill to amend and supplement the Civil Servant Act

DEAR MR CALFIN,

The Confederation of Employers, Industrialists in Bulgaria /KRIB/ supports the idea of ​​improving the provisions of the Law on Civil Servants in the direction of stopping the vicious practices of avoiding competition, equality and transparency of procedures for the selection of civil servants.

The good work of the state administration at all levels is extremely important for citizens, entrepreneurs and for the normal functioning of public life in general.

Along with the good proposals, the bill contains provisions that give rise to ambiguous interpretation and may create serious difficulties in their implementation.

It is not clear the motivation for the creation of two stages of the holding of a competition for holding a civil service - centralized and decentralized /§4 and §5/. The terminology itself is incorrect - the content points to the holding of a general and special competition/ for the specific position/. The more important thing is something else - what does it require and how can the competence of the candidate for holding a public office "in general" be verified. The fact that this will be done through tests and organized by the Institute of Public Administration does not contain any guarantees for the objectivity and equality of the participants. The requirement to hold such a competition is extremely important, since successfully passing it is a mandatory condition for the candidate to appear in the "decentralized" competition for the position he wishes to occupy, and for which he claims to have the required competences, professional and business qualities. The draft law does not contain clarity on what periods of time these contests will be held and whether the time of their holding will not be an obstacle to the candidate's participation in the actual contest. The provision of Art. 10e, para. 5 concerning the prohibition of candidates appearing for the test more than twice within a year is also confusing.

The text of the provision of Art. 10e, para. 10. Candidates who are not ranked first have the opportunity to object to the appointing authority. And "if the objection is justified" he should terminate the competition procedure and appoint a new one. Actions with such legal consequences must be comprehensively regulated by law. The subjective assessment of the appointing authority, not based on normative criteria and not subject to control, renders the holding of any competitions meaningless.

There are also other provisions in the presented draft law, which presuppose difficulties in their implementation - the creation of the institute of the "key position" and its definition /§34/, the foreseen "shared performance of a position" /§ 30/, etc.

In conclusion, we believe that the bill as it stands is not ready to be introduced into the legislature. It needs thorough discussion and refinement.

With respect,
Eugene Ivanov
Ex. director