Less then a week after the opposition parties left in protest the consultative council on national security, summoned by President Georgi Purvanov, and announced that they would start an impeachment procedure against the president, it turns out that not all opposition parties are unanimous on the measures to be taken.

Part of the opposition refuses to support the impeachment, finding no sufficient constitutional grounds for it, and another part believes that the opposition should not waste its efforts and should only focus on going after the Cabinet and pursuing snap elections.

Both the impeachment procedure and the sixth no-confidence motion against the Cabinet, which the opposition parties are preparing, are grounded on the European Union funds jumble in the country. The President is under fire for his relation to a campaign sponsor, allegedly involved in EU funds embezzlement, while the Cabinet incurred the no-confidence motion because of the expected negative interim report drafted by the European Commission (EC) on Bulgaria's efforts to fight organised crime.

In the past days, all leaders of opposition parties have made their views known in public, only to show that the opposition is far from being united.

On the morning talk show of Nova Television on July 21, Bulgarian New Democracy (BND) leader Nikolai Svinarov, former Sofia mayor and Union of Free Democrats (UFD) leader Stefan Sofiyanski and ultra-nationalist Ataka party leader Volen Siderov commented on the two issues.

Sofiyanski said that if the opposition parties demanded Purvanov’s impeachment, it was because he did not resign. One of Purvanov’s sponsors was shot dead, another one was severely wounded and now a third one is accused of embezzling EU funds. Purvanov should resign, Sofiyanski said.

The situation with the presidential sponsors was “a controversy comparable to Watergate”, Siderov said. The opposition demanded the president’s resignation and should he refuse to step down, the next step of the opposition was impeachment.

However, Svinarov said that there were no legal grounds for the impeachment procedure. Still, BND would continue demanding President Purvanov’s resignation, he added.

Asked whether it was not easier to back the impeachment procedure launched by Union of Democratic Forces (UDF), Svinarov said that his party did not believe that the grounds presented by UDF fit well with the constitution. Regarding the motion of no confidence, Svinarov said: “By all means, there will be concerted action on behalf of the opposition against the Cabinet […] The matter is being discussed.”

Days earlier, in another talk show, Sofia mayor and Citizens for European Development of Bulgaria (abbreviated as GERB in Bulgarian) leader Boiko Borissov said that the opposition was focusing its energy and attack where it was undoubtedly clear that neither the Bulgarian Socialist Party (BSP), nor the Movement for Rights and Freedoms (MRF), nor the constitution would allow the head of the state to be impeached.

At the same time, the Cabinet was allowed a breath of fresh air, he said. The real problem was not the President, because he did not deal with EU funds or judicial system reforms. “He was doing his representative job even too well. The real problem came from the thieves in the Cabinet,” Borissov said.

Order, Law and Justice leader Yane Yanev told private broadcaster bTV that his party wanted snap elections “because in case the no-confidence motion vote succeeds, we will enter a parliamentary roundabout and some freak like Berov’s cabinet (1992/94), even more thievish, may be born”.

The chances for success of the impeachment procedure were hazy, Dnevnik daily reported on July 21, quoting members of Parliament form both the ruling coalition and the opposition parties as saying. Even lawyers from the opposition parties conceded that there were no constitutional grounds for the impeachment. However, the opposition parties plan to continue consultations on the procedure.

According to Bulgarian constitution, the authorities of the president could be terminated in case of resignation, severe illness, causing permanent incapability to handle the duties or in case of high treason and violation of the constitution. At least one quarter of MPs, namely 60, should support the impeachment proposal on the grounds of high treason, Dnevnik said.

The impeachment vote in Parliament would required a two-thirds majority in favour to pass, but the final say would be with the Constitutional Court. The opposition bet on presenting the lack of moral of Purvanov and his relation to the campaign sponsor as a threat to national security, which is the ground for the impeachment motion. Even if opposition collected the votes needed to start the procedure, it could not collect enough support enough to see it through, especially after the National Movement for Stability and Progress (NMSP) party that is part of the ruling coalition but has often criticised Purvanov, decided not to back the motion, Dnevnik said.