СИГУРНОСТ НА ДЪРЖАВАТА ИЛИ ПРАВА НА ГРАЖДАНИТЕ

Abstract

The article criticizes the Counter-Terrorism Act, adopted at the end of 2016, in several directions. First of all, some inconsistencies in the adoption of the law itself with the Act on Legal Acts are emphasized - formal motives, lack of reference for compliance with the European Convention of Human Rights, and the fact of the adoption of the law in these irregularities. The legal and factual contradictions between the bodies and structures in the Counter-Terrorism Act are analyzed as well as some problems in the field of exchange of information between the structures involved. It is underlined the lack of possibility to issue secondary legislation to ensure interaction. It is pointed out that the lack of an international legal definition of terrorism does not exempt national legislation to regulate such. The provided powers of the army, which are extremely broad and unjustifiable as police functions, is also taken into consideration. In the article is paid attention to the possible violations of the right of ownership without legal guarantees of indemnification. It is also pointed out that the law does not envisage any functions of prosecutors in the system regulated by the act. The main conclusion is that, despite the explicit prescriptions of international law, which, according to Art. 5, para. 4 of the Constitution have a priority, the security principle, especially the security of the state is outlined, not taking into account all other rights and freedoms of the citizens.