PRESS RELEASE Committee for Open Democracy (COD) International Election Observation Mission – Bulgaria Parliamentary Elections Preliminary Statement – April 20, 2026

The Committee for Open Democracy, an experienced international election observation organization, deployed a mission to Bulgaria for the parliamentary elections held on April 19, 2026. The mission consisted of 10 observers from the United States, Lithuania, Ukraine, Sweden, Canada, and Denmark, led by Countess Walburga Habsburg Douglas of Sweden. Observers were deployed across Sofia, Varna, Plovdiv and Blagoevgrad regions of the country and visited a sample of more than 100 polling stations.

General Assessment

The election process was, in large part, administered in a calm and orderly manner, with voters able to exercise their rights freely across most observed locations. Election officials generally demonstrated professionalism, and polling procedures were followed in accordance with established legal frameworks. The conduct of this election was a noted improvement over previous parliamentary elections in Bulgaria. These improvements are a credit to the caretaker government and Ministry of the Interior of Bulgaria, which made serious efforts to suppress vote buying and electoral fraud.

Election Administration and Integrity Measures

The mission notes positively the efforts undertaken by the caretaker government and the Ministry of Interior to address long-standing concerns related to electoral manipulation, particularly vote-buying and organized “controlled voting” practices. Measures implemented in advance of election day, as well as enforcement actions during the voting period, appear to have had a tangible deterrent effect in several regions historically vulnerable to such practices. The Interior Ministry seized more than one million euros of cash intended for vote buying prior to Election Day. In addition, more than 2000 election offenses were reported to the Interior Ministry which resulted in 360 arrests before Election Day.

COD found that the election commissioners were generally experienced and trained to properly perform their duties. With the exception of the incident in Blagoevgrad where a candidate was permitted to instruct the commissioners, the other election commissions were largely professional in their administrative conduct.  While challenges remain, these steps by the Interior Ministry represent a meaningful attempt to strengthen electoral integrity and restore public confidence in the process.

Voter Turnout

The official turnout was 51%, which was a marked increase from previous Bulgarian elections. For example, in the June 2024 parliamentary election, only 34% of Bulgarians participated. Turnout varied by region, with somewhat higher participation in urban areas compared to rural districts. The mission underscores that sustained efforts to increase voter confidence and participation remain essential for the long-term health of Bulgaria’s democratic process.

Election Day Observations

On election day itself, polling procedures were largely transparent and efficient. Observers reported that voting was conducted without significant disruption, and the secrecy of the ballot was generally respected. Minor procedural inconsistencies were noted but did not appear to systematically affect the overall conduct of voting. We have observed the following issues at the polling stations: ‘Smart cards’ used to operate the voting machines did not work; ballot printing was clogged at times and would not emit ballots; and machines sometimes shut down due to a lack of ballot paper. Nevertheless, problems were mostly overcome, and machines became operational except where the ballot paper had run out.

However, in an incident in the Blagoevgrad region, voting station 010200008 occurred in which a candidate from the Movement for Rights and Freedoms party entered a voting station after the closing of voting. She proceeded to give orders to the election commissioners, which they obeyed despite the candidate lacking the legal authority to command a voting station. The candidate proceeded to kick out others from the voting station, including the translator for a COD observer.

In another Blagoevgrad voting station, the ballot box was unsealed, and folded ballots were given to voters. Polling station members seemed confused as to how to deal with them. In addition, a number of voting machines in the Varna region were not functioning properly but were quickly fixed.  

Although activities at polling stations (PECs) were relatively calm and orderly during the day, the vote-counting procedures left much to be desired.

The fact that the Central Election Commission (CEC) was aware of this issue and implemented new restrictions/requirements for PEC member replacement was helpful as a preventative measure, in our opinion, and should remain in place or be improved for future elections.

Generally speaking, except for the smaller polling stations, voter turnout was noticeably higher at other PECs, and those PECs in tight confines had long lines, severe crowding inside, and noticeable anxiety among PEC members.  It was harder to determine the accuracy of PEC conduct in these cramped scenarios.

It was reported that the credentials of observers and others were not checked, so there was no assurance that only authorized individuals were present in the polling station.  We observed what appeared to be fake “Observer” badges being worn.

Many PEC closings appear to be well-intentioned but suffer from inadequate training. While vote-counting training needs improvement, the most concerning issue was the participation of non-PEC members in vote counting, including handling ballots. Additionally, there was a casual attitude toward unused ballots. Unlike other countries, the CEC does not require unused ballots to be canceled, a practice that should be addressed to prevent potential fraud involving these ballots.

Post-Election Developments

The mission expresses concern regarding reports of late-stage irregularities and procedural ambiguities during the early hours of the post-election period. Observers noted instances of delayed reporting, inconsistent tabulation practices, and allegations of last-minute adjustments that may have influenced the relative positioning of political parties. In the Vratsa region, there appeared to be changes to some of the protocols in violation of the actual results.

Most importantly, it is highly recommended that the CEC conduct at least a ‘spot audit’ (25% or more) of PEC results after each election.  This will both expose fraudulent activity or errors and act as a deterrent to potential illicit activity.  As the recent Constitutional Court decision in March 2025 showed, despite the best efforts of many officials and observers, vote-count violations still occur.  It is our opinion that unless post-election ‘spot audits’ occur and violators are strictly punished, there will never be a real sense of assurance that voting results were accurate.

While these developments require further clarification by the relevant authorities, they underscore the importance of transparency and consistency not only during voting but also throughout the tabulation and results aggregation process.

Political Context

The elections took place in a highly competitive political environment marked by shifting public sentiment and evolving party dynamics. Preliminary outcomes suggest a significant reconfiguration of the political landscape, with established actors facing notable challenges. Importantly the higher turnout signified that Bulgarians were less apathetic in this election as it was one of the highest turnouts since 2009. 

The mission emphasizes that any interpretation of electoral outcomes should be grounded in verified official results and assessed within the broader institutional framework.

Conclusion

The April 19 parliamentary elections in Bulgaria demonstrated both progress and persistent challenges. Efforts by the caretaker government and Interior Ministry to address electoral malpractice are a welcome development and should be further strengthened and institutionalized. At the same time, concerns regarding post-election processes highlight the need for continued vigilance, transparency, and adherence to democratic standards at all stages of the electoral cycle.

The Committee for Open Democracy will continue to monitor developments and will issue a final report with detailed findings and recommendations in the coming weeks.