Speaking about the “Talir” case in an interview with Alfa TV, lawyer Elenko Milanov said that the court and the state Judicial Council are trying to keep a lay judge, whose mandate has expired, contrary to the Law on Courts, just to keep the case persisting.
Milanov emphasizes that they should have thought much earlier and planned that the mandate of this lay judge will end, but also that there are reserves of lay judges, and only in this case there are not.
In a statement to the Basic Criminal Court yesterday, a representative of the political party stated publicly in the courtroom that he could not be a lay judge and that he did not want to participate in the proceedings while there is a lay judge who cannot perform that function after 60 years and left the session. The court issued a statement saying the state Judicial Council had been notified. Why did they notify it if they did not ask for his dismissal? They use wordplay and try to keep that lay judge. If we look at the law on courts, there is a problem with the further involvement of this lay judge in the case and they must solve it, said Milanov.