"Civil disobedience like the emergencies we have got used to is a serious turbulence in public relations and public order, in which, in the name of compliance with high values, certain disturbances in public order and violations of more peripheral laws are allowed." This was clarified to BNR by lawyer Mihail Ekimdzhiev from the Association for European Integration and Human Rights Protection.
"What is essential? These civil protests are in the name of basic constitutional principles which we, as a society, enshrined in the Constitution 30 years ago and which are brutally crushed by the ruling authorities, the prime minister, the government, the chief prosecutor. Taking to the streets of these people is a symbolic gesture – this means that they have already jumped out of their skin and can no longer tolerate the governance which has disappointed them, which has made them feel ashamed, disgusted, depressed. And then the people as sovereign, His Majesty the people, come out onto the streets. The people refuse to follow the formal rules – to act through their intermediaries: the MPs in parliament and institutions and they say they want a change. They don't want to negotiate with these rulers. This is the meaning of civil disobedience. This distinguishes civil disobedience from, say, the vandalism of football mega-fans which are ends in themselves and aim only at disturbing the public order", Ekimdzhiev commented.
According to him, the current protests and blockades pursue the ultimate goal – "bringing the government into legal order."
The Strasbourg court says such protests are an expression of political opinion and the right to assemble and express political opinion has the highest intensity of protection under the European Convention on Human Rights, the lawyer explained.
Mikhail Ekimdzhiev clarified that in two of its decisions – versus Hungary and Turkey, the court in Strasbourg stated that in such political protests the state should tolerate actions that cause disturbances in car traffic and public order, as long as they are not accompanied by violence. He asked "what is so disturbing about freedom of movement when the Eagle Bridge can be bypassed in 10-15 minutes", adding that this is not a disturbance of freedom of movement but a "disturbance of the comfort of movement".
Even the conservative Bulgarian court has ruled in three of its decisions that throwing tomatoes and eggs is a permissible expression of political opinion, said lawyer Ekimdzhiev.
The context is always to be assessed and when it comes to politically motivated actions, the state must protect and tolerate such actions, the lawyer concluded.
