Amendments to the Constitution passed at third reading in committee for 10 minutes
10 minutes Temporary Committee on constitutional changes approved them at third reading.
At the meeting attended by 12 of its members, as 11 voted "for", but Atanas Atanasov DSB abstained. Mihail Mikov and Chavdar Georgiev from BSP absent because, as expressed chairman of the commission Dimitar Lazarov GERB - "must be a funeral."
Lazarov recalled that at the third reading vote already adopted as a whole, do not discuss specific texts and can only be made legal and technical amendments. Referrers to the National Assembly, however, were reviewed at second reading and found no problems.
During the meeting, he spoke only Atanasov, who asked to explain why not support the draft amendment in its type approved last week by the Chamber. "I have three reasons. The first is the text in the transitional provisions, which provides parliamentary quota in the Supreme Judicial Council to be divided into two colleges of SJC itself. This is nonsense. This quota is elected by the National Assembly, and we provide the opportunity SJC to distribute it "began Atanasov. Then blamed the expected change in the distribution of judicial and legislative power in both chambers of the council. "On first reading with 184 votes foresaw another partition, it was changed for us this is unacceptable," said the MP from DSB. Then said a third reason not to support the project: "unnoticed one crucial element. On second reading was passed unconstitutional text for the management of court property. This power was assigned to the SJC, and according to Art. 106 of the Constitution State Property managed government and is unacceptable similar function to be assigned to another body. Ultimately, is inappropriate. SCM is a senior staff body, and we put our business functions - hold tender for repairs of buildings. "
Then Dimitar Lazarov reminded committee members that at the third reading of the draft amendment of the Constitution in plenary is held roll call vote. With rising from every place of the MPs must make an oral statement that is "for", "against" or "abstain" said Lazarov and closed the meeting.