Anyone who follows Bulgarian news in 2026 keeps meeting the same three letters: SJC — in Bulgarian, VSS (Visch sadeben savet). The Supreme Judicial Council is the body that appoints, promotes and disciplines the country’s judges, prosecutors and investigators, and the long-delayed election of its new members is one of the central public-law stories of the year. This article explains, for readers outside Bulgaria, what the Council is, how it is formed and why its composition matters — and what it does and does not mean for an ordinary court case.

What the Supreme Judicial Council is

The Constitution of 1991 places the administration of the judiciary in the hands of a body separate from the government: the Supreme Judicial Council. The idea is that decisions about judicial careers should not be taken by the executive. The Council is not a court and decides no cases. Its role is one of governance: personnel, discipline, organisation and budget.

How the Council is composed

The Council has 25 members:

• Three ex officio members — the President of the Supreme Court of Cassation, the President of the Supreme Administrative Court and the Prosecutor General.
• Eleven members elected by the National Assembly — the so-called parliamentary quota — by a two-thirds majority of all members of parliament, which in a 240-seat assembly means 160 votes.
• Eleven members elected by the magistrates themselves — the professional quota: six by the judges, four by the prosecutors and one by the investigators.

Elected members serve a five-year term and cannot be re-elected immediately. The Minister of Justice chairs the sittings of the plenary but has no vote.

Two colleges and a plenary

Since the constitutional amendments of 2015 the Council works through two colleges, so that judges’ careers are decided primarily by judges and prosecutors’ careers by prosecutors:

• the Judges’ College has 14 members — the presidents of the two supreme courts, six judges elected by their peers and six members elected by parliament;
• the Prosecutors’ College has 11 members — the Prosecutor General, four prosecutors and one investigator elected by their peers, and five members elected by parliament.

The plenary of all 25 deals with matters common to the whole judiciary, notably the draft budget, the management of judicial property and the nominations for the three most senior posts.

What the Council decides

• Appointments and careers. Each college appoints, promotes, transfers and dismisses the magistrates in its branch, following competitions and periodic appraisals.
• Heads of courts and prosecution offices. The colleges appoint the administrative heads — court presidents and heads of prosecution offices — for five-year terms.
• The three top posts. The Council proposes to the President of the Republic the appointment of the presidents of the Supreme Court of Cassation and the Supreme Administrative Court and of the Prosecutor General, each for a single seven-year term.
• Discipline. The colleges impose disciplinary sanctions, including dismissal.
• Organisation. The Council determines the number of magistrates in each court and office, and — a recurring topic — the “judicial map”, that is, the network and boundaries of courts.

An Inspectorate attached to the Council, whose members are elected by parliament, reviews the work of the judicial bodies, checks magistrates’ integrity and asset declarations and may propose disciplinary proceedings.

Why the composition is debated

Two features of the Council have been discussed for years by Bulgarian lawyers, by the European Commission in its annual Rule of Law Reports and by the Council of Europe’s Venice Commission.

The first is the weight of the parliamentary quota. Supporters see the members elected by parliament as a source of democratic legitimacy and outside perspective; critics argue that it exposes judicial appointments to political influence. The requirement of a two-thirds majority is meant to force broad agreement across parties.

The second is the position of the Prosecutor General within the Council and the accountability of that office. A constitutional reform adopted at the end of 2023 would, among other things, have divided the Council into two separate bodies for judges and for prosecutors; in 2024 the Constitutional Court struck down most of those amendments, so the single Council with two colleges described above remains the constitutional model.

An expired mandate

The five-year term of the Council’s elected members ran out in 2022. A successor could not be chosen because the series of early parliamentary elections that began in 2021 produced fragmented assemblies in which a two-thirds majority was out of reach. The outgoing members therefore remained in office long after their term ended — by now for more than four years.

That situation raised a question of legitimacy: may a council whose term has expired go on making long-term appointments, including to the most senior posts? The legislature answered by restricting the powers of a council that has outstayed its mandate by more than a year in respect of appointments and other long-term decisions. One visible consequence has been that key positions are held by acting, rather than permanently appointed, heads.

The 2026 reform and the election of a new Council

On 26 June 2026 the National Assembly adopted amendments to the Judiciary Act intended to break the deadlock. According to the published reports, the amendments:

• set 17 October 2026 as the deadline for electing the new members;
• provide that magistrates vote for their representatives by paper ballot;
• bar certain categories of former senior office-holders and long-serving acting members from being elected to the new Council.

As at the date of this article, the process stands as follows:

• Judges. The General Assembly of Judges has elected its six representatives. Voting took place by paper ballot at 30 polling stations corresponding to the district courts, with a reported turnout of about 84% of the 2,275 judges entitled to vote, after a first round in which no candidate obtained the required majority.
• Prosecutors. The General Assembly of Prosecutors has elected its representatives in a two-round vote.
• Investigators. The investigators are still to elect their single representative.
• Parliament. The National Assembly has yet to elect its eleven members. The Legal Affairs Committee completed its hearings of the 21 candidates on 5 November. Each candidate needs 160 votes, which requires support beyond the governing majority.

The Minister of Justice has spoken publicly of fallback mechanisms should parliament again fail to reach the required majority; these are, for now, proposals under discussion rather than law.

What this means for people with a case in Bulgaria

It is worth separating two levels.

Day-to-day justice. The Council does not hear cases, and the debate about its composition does not suspend the work of the courts. A divorce, an inheritance dispute or a property claim is decided by an individual judge under the procedural codes, with the usual rights of appeal. Parties are protected by the guarantees of the Constitution, the European Convention on Human Rights and — in matters within the scope of EU law — the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights and the possibility of a preliminary reference to the Court of Justice.

The institutional level. Over time, however, the Council’s work shapes the quality of justice that litigants experience: how quickly vacancies are filled, whether courts are adequately staffed and led, how judges are assessed and promoted, and how complaints are handled. A functioning, legitimately elected Council is a precondition for resolving the practical problems — uneven caseloads between courts, unfilled posts, delays — that users of the system actually feel.

What to watch next

• whether the National Assembly musters 160 votes for its eleven candidates;
• the investigators’ vote, which completes the professional quota;
• the first decisions of the new Council — above all, the procedures for permanent appointments to the posts currently held by acting heads;
• announced further legislation, including on the Inspectorate.

This article will be updated as the process is completed.

Sources

• The Sofia Globe — Bulgaria’s MPs set firm October date to elect new SJC line-up (26 June 2026)
• BTA — Judges Elect Six Representatives to New Composition of Supreme Judicial Council (9 November 2026)
• Novinite — Bulgaria’s Justice Minister Seeks PP-DB Support for New Judicial Council (9 November 2026)

Last reviewed: November 2026. This article provides general information about Bulgarian law and is not legal advice. Every case depends on its own facts and documents.

Need advice on a specific situation? Contact Rositsa Astakova, Attorney-at-Law in Sofia — consultations are available in English, Spanish and Bulgarian, in person or remotely.