Bulgaria’s early parliamentary elections offered voters a genuine choice, but were marked by high levels of polarization and negative rhetoric, international observers say

SOFIA, 20 April - Bulgaria's 19 April early parliamentary elections were marked by an increase in participation and were administered transparently and efficiently, despite gaps in the legislative framework and a last-minute amendment on the number of polling stations abroad, that undermined the stability of the electoral law and the inclusiveness of the process, international observers said in a preliminary statement released today. Held against a backdrop of repeated elections and prolonged political instability, the authorities undertook measures to safeguard electoral integrity, including efforts to address persistent allegations of vote buying and intimidation.

Fundamental freedoms were generally respected, but the campaign was highly polarized and marked by negative rhetoric, the observers said. Online campaigning, which is largely unregulated, played a prominent role in voter engagement, while also facilitating the circulation of disinformation narratives, including about government activities. Key policy issues such as energy, foreign policy, corruption, the rising cost of living, the rule of law, and infrastructure dominated campaign messaging.

"The process we have observed offered voters a genuine choice, but in an atmosphere of significant political polarization and campaign rhetoric that was often negative," said Dunja Mijatović, head of the election observation mission from the OSCE Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights. "Fundamental freedoms were respected and the process was generally well administered. At the same time, work remains to be done, including in addressing issues such as alleged vote-buying, disinformation, and limited transparency in many aspects of the campaign."

"After years of political instability and repeated returns to the polls, Bulgarian citizens defied logic and voted in strong numbers to give the country a chance for stable government," said Chris Said, Head of the delegation of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe. "The responsibility now lies with Bulgaria's political leaders to respect that message and turn this vote into effective and credible governance."

The legal framework provides a generally adequate basis for democratic elections, although a number of prior ODIHR and Council of Europe Venice Commission recommendations remain unaddressed, including those concerning the residency requirement for candidates, the effective investigation and sanctioning of electoral violations, legal avenues to challenge results, and measures to enhance the participation of women and minority groups.

The media landscape is pluralistic, yet concerns were raised about political and economic influence, widespread self-censorship, and limited analytical reporting, limiting voters' access to impartial and comprehensive information. While legal guarantees for freedom of expression and access to information exist, criminal defamation and unimplemented safeguards under the European Media Freedom Act remain concerns for editorial independence. ODIHR media monitoring indicated that, despite formal compliance with airtime rules, a reduced scope of editorial and critical news coverage on the part of private media outlets weakened voters' ability to make informed choices.

Although government authorities established mechanisms to address disinformation, the risks of cyber threats, and foreign interference, gaps in the implementation of the EU Digital Services Act and delays in co-ordination between oversight bodies negatively affected their effectiveness.

The election administration met legal deadlines and managed preparations efficiently across all levels, although late resignations of lower-level commissions strained the process. Election day was generally calm and orderly. While the vast majority of polling stations operated smoothly, some procedural shortcomings were noted, including isolated cases of ballot handling and failure to ensure the secrecy of the vote or to follow proper voter verification procedures.

Women remain underrepresented in public and political life, and few parties promoted women candidates or addressed women's political participation in their campaigns. There were several instances of gender-based attacks and smear campaigns, however, including in the use of AI-generated content to defame a woman journalist. Positively, women featured as prominent speakers in more than half of the campaign events observed.

The legal framework that governs party and campaign finance continues to leave prior ODIHR recommendations unimplemented, including those on the lack of pre-election reporting and limited oversight by the National Audit Office. The legislation does not regulate third-party campaigning, and online political advertising is not subject to comprehensive disclosure, creating potential loopholes for unregulated spending. In some instances, campaigning by public officials during working hours blurred the line between state and party.

Election dispute resolution is provided for through both election commissions and administrative courts, with expedited procedures for filing and adjudicating some complaints. Gaps in the legal framework, including restrictive standing, the inability to challenge election results protocols directly, and lengthy sanctioning and enforcement processes, limited access to effective legal redress and undermined due process.