Since 2021, the United States’ application of the Global Magnitsky Act in Bulgaria has represented a clear overreach—undermining due process, damaging democratic institutions, and interfering in the country’s internal affairs. Sanctions imposed on prominent Bulgarian political figures, including members of parliament, former ministers, and civic leaders, were not only unjust but deliberately timed and ideologically driven. These actions have disrupted Bulgaria’s political stability and raised serious questions about the weaponization of foreign policy. This article lays out the evidence of this unfair targeting and examines the lasting harm these sanctions have inflicted on Bulgaria’s sovereignty and political landscape.

Magnitsky Sanctions in Bulgaria

In June 2021, the U.S. Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) sanctioned Delyan Peevski, Vassil Bozhkov, and Ilko Zhelyazkov, along with 64 associated entities. In 2023, sanctions were extended to five additional individuals, including former finance minister Vladislav Goranov and former energy minister Rumen Ovcharov. The official justification was “significant corruption,” with accusations ranging from bribery to undue influence over state institutions and election manipulation.

The real pattern that emerged was political. Most of the sanctioned individuals had strong ties to conservative political circles. The designations were issued in close proximity to national elections, creating the appearance of direct interference in Bulgaria’s democratic process. In many cases, including that of Peevsky, Goranov and Malinov, the accused were given no opportunity to see the evidence against them, confront their accusers, or defend themselves in any legitimate legal setting.

Lack of Transparency

Sanctioned politicians, particularly conservatives like Peevsky, and Goranov, rightfully argue the US lacks evidence and applies sanctions selectively. The foundation of any credible sanctioning process must include evidence, transparency, and the right to respond. In Bulgaria’s case, this was entirely absent. OFAC’s use of classified intelligence means that sanctioned individuals are publicly accused but privately prosecuted, with no access to the evidence used to destroy their reputations and livelihoods.

This lack of transparency prompted the Bulgarian Supreme Administrative Court to rule in 2024 that the U.S. Magnitsky sanctions were unenforceable under Bulgarian and EU law. The court cited the absence of due process and formal charges, affirming that foreign administrative decisions cannot override domestic legal protections.

Additionally, the timing of these sanctions cannot be dismissed as coincidental. In both 2021 and 2023, sanctions were announced just ahead of parliamentary elections. This effectively undermined key political actors, damaged the public image of opposition groups, and cast a shadow over the legitimacy of the electoral process. Instead of supporting democracy, these sanctions interfered with it.

Implications

The use of U.S.-imposed sanctions under the Magnitsky Act has not only disrupted Bulgaria’s political class but also triggered a growing backlash from the public and within national institutions. Despite being sanctioned, figures like Delyan Peevski have maintained significant political influence. His party, DPS, secured 45 parliamentary seats in the 2024 elections. This underscores the disconnect between foreign attempts to marginalize political actors and their continued legitimacy in the eyes of Bulgarian voters.

At the same time, the 2024 ruling by the Bulgarian Supreme Administrative Court invalidating the enforcement of Magnitsky sanctions domestically exposed the legal limitations of external pressure and reaffirmed national sovereignty. The court’s decision emphasized the lack of due process and the incompatibility of foreign administrative decisions with Bulgaria’s legal framework.

Conclusion

The evidence now points to a troubling conclusion: the sanctions imposed under the Global Magnitsky Act against Bulgarian political figures were unjust and politically motivated. They were executed without due process, lacked transparency, and undermined the democratic fabric of Bulgaria’s political system.

While the stated purpose of these measures was to fight corruption, their application reveals a strategy of political targeting that eroded national sovereignty and public trust.