On 12th May 2005 during the last days of the preceding government, without any transparency whatsoever, Decision No 428 of the Council of Ministers was decreed at the suggestion of the former Minister of Regional Development and Public Works Valentin Tzerovski which decision deprived the Bulgarian Chamber of Commerce and Industry (BCCI) of its building – the Chamber being the biggest non-governmental organization in the Republic of Bulgaria.

In May 2005 “Bulgarkontrola” Plc. acquired from the state the ownership of the BCCI’s building situated in the most expensive region of Sofia (“Vitosha blvd.) with luxurious composition of the ground floor and the sixth floor ordered and paid for by the BCCI. In return the company gave the state the ownership of a building requiring a lot of repairs, with a less prestigious location at 12, “Ekzarh Yosif” Str. bought on 17th July 2003 from “Obshtinski Imoti” Jsc. – a company owned by Sofia municipality, for 1 500 000 BGN. The two exchanged buildings were valued almost equally–at approximately 3 500 000 BGN (i.e. as a result after a year and a half in regard to the property situated at 12, “Ekzarh Yosif” Str. the municipality transferred possession to the state with a positive difference of 2 million BGN for the company which organized the transactions). A few months after the exchange “Bulgarkontrola” Plc. sold the building, situated on “Parchevich, 42” str., to “Darik Imoti Bulgaria” Jsc. which, in its turn, immediately mortgaged it for an evidently higher price. One and the same person figures as the owner of both companies.

In order to protect its rights the BCCI has notified with numerous letters the President of the Republic of Bulgaria, the Chairman of the National Assembly, the Prime-minister as well as referring the matter to the Procurator’s Office. Along with that on 30th November 2005 the BCCI filed a declaratory claim before the Sofia District Court for establishing its real estate rights over the property. Unfortunately, since that moment to the beginning of February 2007, the case has not been heard because of absence of the jury.

Notwithstanding the formally done sale on 24th June 2005 “Darik Imoti Bulgaria” Jsc. – a company in which the main shareholders are “Darik” Jsc. and “Darik Radio” Jsc. whose capital (99%) is owned by Radosvet Radev – General Director of “Darik Radio” Jsc. and president of the Board of Directors of the Union of the Bulgarian National Electronic Media, attacked Order No 04-16-0096 dated 12th October 1993 of the Minister of Finance before the Supreme Administrative Court, which order acknowledges the BCCI real rights of the specified building.

Under these circumstances, while waiting for the ruling of the decision of the Supreme Administrative Court, in March 2006 a program was being aired on the national “Darik radio” in the course of a month pretending to “elucidate” on circumstances and facts of the historical development of the chambers of commerce and industry in Bulgaria. Selectively cited and randomly interpreted reminiscences of some former functionaries of the Chamber were presented on purpose intending to divert the attention from the act of the illegal deprivation of the BCCI of the building. Personal attacks were launched, the independence, impartiality and the inner conviction of the Supreme Court were brought in question, which court in 1992 by a decision No F-18 dated 25 February 1992 decreed a judicial act for re-registration of the Chamber, which has a binding force to all persons, as the competence and the jurisdiction authority of the biggest legal institution and the status of the Chamber were attacked, using unacceptable insinuations.

It is unacceptable that a discrediting war should be waged through a media pretending to be a national one, managed by people directly interested in the outcome of the specific dispute at that and compromising allegations should be propagated, which lower the reputation of the institution and affect its recognized international standing and interaction with the European institutions and the International Labour Organization as well. The BCCI is an association of the Bulgarian entrepreneurship, however the media has waged a war against it – a national media against the national entrepreneurship – completely inappropriate. The disputes in relation to the violated rights are to be settled on the basis of the objective truth and the actual facts by the competent bodies and institutions, not to be “pre-determined” with PR campaigns by one or another interested party.

On 31st May 2006 “Darik Imoti Bulgaria” Jsc. assisted by the private enforcement agent Veselka Lyubenova, registered under No 780 in the Chamber of the Private Enforcement Agents, attempted to carry into effect a writ of possession and to seize the possession of the BCCI building. The same actions were also repeated on 18 October 2006.

The actions of the private enforcement agent were appealed against by the Chamber and with a decision enforced on 16th November 2006 the Sofia City Court overruled these actions and made the private enforcement agent reinstate the BCCI in possession of the property. Up to the present moment Veselka Lyubenova has refused to execute the court decision and to restitute the factual possession over the property, which has been referred to the Chamber of the Private Enforcement Agents, the Minister of Justice and the Procurator’s Office. There is still no answer.

Under these circumstances, a final decision No 11123 dated 13th November 2006 was decreed by a five-member jury of the Supreme Administrative Court which overrules the claim of “Darik Imoti Bulgaria” Jsc., upholds the effect of Order No 04-16-0096 dated 12th October 1993 and acknowledges the indisputable fact of the construction of the building by the Chamber. A year and a half later the justice triumphed also due to the adamant and professionally-expressed position before the court of the Ministry of Finance in support of the validity of the order.

Upon these failures “Darik Imoti Bulgaria” Jsc. immediately renewed the attacks against the building of the BCCI by making a request to the Minister of Finance for overruling Order No 04-16-0096 dated 12th October 1993. The request is absurd – overruling of an administrative act, having brought forward its respective civil consequences, to be requested 14 years after the date of issue.

In parallel to these actions on 28th December 2006 the BCCI received three letters from the private enforcement agent Milen Bazinski with reg. No 838 notifying us that part of the building at 42 “Parchevich” Str. at market value 3 686 000 BGN will be offered for public sale to cover “Darik Imoti Bulgaria” Jsc. liabilities amounting to 112 200 BGN. The market valuation of seven floors from a building in the Sofia city centre and the sale scheme are indicative of the course of action taken against the BCCI and the conclusions need no comment.

On 29th December 2006 “Darik Imoti Bulgaria” Jsc. through the private enforcement agent Ivan Cholakov with reg. No 783 – Vice-president of the Chamber of the Private Enforcement Agents attempted to take away the possession of the BCCI over the yard next to the building at 42 “Parchevich” Str., which is BCCI’s property. The enforcement agent did not grant the claim to “Darik Imoti Bulgaria” Jsc. backing it with arguments. The executory process was consecutively transferred from the enforcement agent Ivan Cholakov to another enforcement agent Nikola Popov and upon the exception taken by the latter – to a third enforcement agent – Ulyana Dimolarova.

On 26th January 2007 private enforcement agent Ulyana Dimolarova formally refused the claimant “Darik Imoti Bulgaria” Jsc. to execute the writ of possession. This refusal was immediately appealed against before the Sofia City Court and on 1 February 2007 the Court ruled its final decision which revoked the refusal and obliged the private enforcement agent to execute the writ of possession in relation to the disputed property. The court decision was decreed within 3 working days – on 1st February 2007 and not by a competent judicial panel but by three city judges for some unknown reason chosen to be engaged in that legal case.

On the same day – 1st February 2007 Ulyana Dimolarova proceeds to execute the court decision without informing the BCCI.

The private enforcement agent Ulyana Dimolarova took aside the BCCIs removed by not only as regards the disputed 356 sq.m. which constitute a land piece with an area No 4(the land under the building and the passage to the yard) but also in relation to the remaining 130 sq. m.(parking places in the yard), property of the BCCI which were not indicated in the adjudication order and for which “Darik Imoti Bulgaria” Jsc. does not possess any title to property.

The writ of possession was executed in the context of a pending civil legal dispute, which circumstance was not taken into account by the Sofia City Court and by the private enforcement agent Ulyana Dimolarova.

The BCCI is the biggest non-governmental organization in Bulgaria which has more than 47 000 members (accounting for 44% of the GDP of the country, 67% of the export, comprising 46% of the employed people in the economic sector), serves more than 90 000 companies a year (approximately 300 companies a day), organizes annually more than 120 business forums and seminars with approximately 7 000 participants and 70 business delegations with the participation of some 1 200 companies. The BCCI issues nationally and internationally recognized certificates, provides bar coding and an electronic signature and is the host of the Euro-Info Center – Sofia as well. The Chamber is a member of approximately 20 recognized international organizations among which EUROCHAMBRES, the International Chamber of Commerce (ICC) – Paris, the International Organization of Employers, the World Trade Centers Association. The BCCI maintains unique registers of companies and foreign trade representation offices, the Chamber houses the Court of Arbitration, the BULPRO Committee, the National Center for Professional Training, the Euro Club, the Center for Mediation to the Court of Arbitration.

All that activity for the benefit of the companies and the entrepreneurs, the international prestige and the authority have been threatened now for the second time in the Chamber’s 112 year history (the Chamber was liquidated in 1948 for the period of four years) by depriving, by means of an outraging violation of the law, the Bulgarian entrepreneurship of its property, financed and owned by it. These facts demonstrate which governments have acted in good faith towards national entrepreneurship during the history of the economic development of Bulgaria.

The building at 42 “Parchevich” Str. taken away from the BCCI was built entirely at the Chamber’s own expenses during the period between 1969 and 1975 in accordance with a decision of the then Council of Ministers from 1969.

The BCCI believed in and made every endeavour in relation to the accession of Bulgaria to the European Union. These efforts were prompted not only by the benefits for the Bulgarian entrepreneurship taking part in the common European market, but also by the hope that, as part of a democratic and lawful Europe, in Bulgaria there will be put a halt to all criminal activities in our reality which prevent the Bulgarian business from further development. We continue to believe that the offenders will be brought to account.

There are still questions hitherto without an answer:

• Is the price of the sold building of the BCCI real?
• Why was the exchange carried out in absolute secrecy during the last days of the mandate of the preceding government with which the BCCI, being the biggest employers’ organization, was in constant partnership relations?
• Which is the serious and legal reason that the procedure of the exchange should be kept in such a secret from the BCCI so that the organization learned about that act three months after the decision of the Council of Ministers?
• If the BCCI does not need the building at 42, “Parchevich” Str., then does “Darik Imoti Bulgaria” Jsc. need such a building?
• Why has the building not been offered to the BCCI in the first place if it is considered that the same is not the owner?
• Has the resource from the sale of state and municipal properties been exhausted so that the properties of social organizations have been subjected to encroachment?
• Why has it not been possible for the declaratory claim filed by the BCCI on 30 November 2005 to be appointed for hearing up to the present day? Who stands in the way?
• Why cannot any of the informed state authorities – the Presidency, the government including the Ministry of regional development and public works as well as the Procurator’s Office do anything in defence of the oldest and the biggest non-governmental organization of the business? Who benefits from their inaction?

From the BCCI management

May 16, 2006