Mandate

The competencies of the Advocacy and Legal Advice Centre include providing legal consultation to citizens on cases, which fall into all of the categories presented below:

A. The complaint presented by the citizen contains data which points to a violation of corruption nature.

The conclusion as to whether the violations, referred to by the citizen, are of corruption nature, is based on the definition of corruption, accepted by Transparency International-Bulgaria, where corruption can be defined as any undue performance of the duties of an official, aiming at the direct or indirect appropriation of any benefit.

The Advocacy and Legal Advice Centre offers consultation to individuals who have been victims or witnesses of corruption behaviour, both when this behaviour has led to the perpetration of a corruption crime, and when the deed does not contain the level of public danger necessary for its incrimination, but constitutes the corpus delicti of an administrative breach or a disciplinary violation.

The mandate of the ALAC covers the crimes, defined in Art. 220, Art. 282-283 (b), Art. 285, Art. 288, Art. 289, Art. 294, Art. 295, Art. 299 and Art. 301-307 of the Criminal Code.

B. The citizen possesses materials, which support his claims

Since the ALAC does not have investigative competences, the only means through which the legal adviser can make a well-founded conclusion that the claims of the complainant contain data pointing to a committed corruption violation, is the analysis of the materials which the complainant possesses or to take generally known facts under consideration.

The question whether the citizen possesses written documents on the case, has to be cleared during the initial communication with the legal team of the ALAC.

In the case of a negative answer to the abovementioned question, the member of the ALAC legal team who has initially processed the complaint, directs the citizen towards the relevant competent state authority which possesses investigative competencies – court, prosecution office, investigation services or administrative penal jurisdiction.

The same procedure applies to situations when the citizen points out that information on his case might be in the possession of third parties in the form of documents, evidence, witness explanations, etc.