Author: Yanka Kosarova, attorney-at-law 

Editor: Valeria Ilareva, attorney-at-law, PhD

07.07.2025

On 02.05.2025, a Decision[1] was published on the website of the Council of Ministers – pris.government.bg – whereby, pursuant to Article 2, paragraph 2 of the Asylum and Refugees Act, a new Program for Humanitarian Support and Integration of Displaced Persons from Ukraine was adopted (hereinafter referred to as “the Decision” and “the Program,” respectively).

The Program is effective as of May 1, 2025. Under the new Program, displaced persons from Ukraine who have been granted temporary protection after February 24, 2022, and who do not fall into a risk group, may benefit from this Program once for a period of up to 60 calendar days. The Program specifies the criteria according to which a person falls into a risk group and, on this basis, can benefit from accommodation for the entire duration of temporary protection until March 4, 2026. 

Following the adoption of the Program, thousands of Ukrainians with temporary protection in the country face a number of difficulties—both in relation to submitting documents for participation in the new Program and, above all, in relation to how long they can remain accommodated and whether they fall into the so-called “risk group,” which allows them to stay until March 4, 2026. 

The Foundation for Access to Rights (FAR) provides support and legal assistance to all those in need through explanations and guidance on our hotline, by disseminating useful information on the subject on the website refugeelight.bg, on social media, and above all through legal assistance and protection from our lawyers. 

In their practice, FAR lawyers have identified a number of problematic issues in the Program, both in terms of which persons fall into the risk group and in terms of the way in which the procedure for applying for and obtaining permission or refusal for accommodation is described. Below, we highlight some of the key problematic provisions in the Program that contradict Bulgarian, European, and international law. 

Risk groups

Firstly, the Program defines as persons from a risk group with the right to accommodation in point 5.1. letters a-g:

"a) a child from 0 to 12 years of age, accompanied by a parent or other adult caring for the child by proxy;

b) children aged 12 to 16, accompanied by a parent or other adult caring for the child by proxy, where the child is not covered by the education system in Bulgaria for reasons beyond the parent's control and after an application for admission to school has been submitted;

c) a pregnant woman after the third month of pregnancy, when this is certified by a medical document issued by a competent authority in the Republic of Bulgaria

d) a person with a permanent disability established by a competent authority in the Republic of Bulgaria

e) a person with a mental illness, certified by a medical document from a competent authority in the Republic of Bulgaria;

f) a person caring for a seriously ill family member, including a person with a mental illness, when the latter is dependent on outside care;

g) a person aged 65 or over.“

These criteria for “vulnerable persons” are in direct contradiction with § 1, item 17 of the Additional Provisions of the Asylum and Refugees Act (ARA), according to which “persons from a vulnerable group” are „minors, unaccompanied minors, persons with disabilities, elderly people, pregnant women, single parents with children under the age of majority, victims of human trafficking, persons with serious health problems, persons with mental disorders, and persons who have suffered torture, rape, or other serious forms of mental, physical, or sexual violence." According to the legal definition given in the Asylum and Refugee Act, all minors are vulnerable persons. There is no legal provision limiting the legal definition of vulnerable persons given in the Asylum and Refugee Act to beneficiaries of international protection. Insofar as the Decision was issued on the basis of the Asylum and Refugee Act, and the Asylum and Refugee Act implements the provisions of Directive 2001/55/EC (§1a of the Asylum and Refugee Act), the concept of a vulnerable person under the Program, applicable to persons under temporary protection, cannot differ from that defined by the legislator. 

Children

The rules of the Program relating to children under letters “a” and “b” are primarily discriminatory against a certain category of schoolchildren and are adopted in direct violation of Article 6, paragraph 2 of the Constitution and Article 4, paragraph 1 of the Protection Against Discrimination Act. Article 6(2) of the Constitution expressly states that restrictions on rights and privileges based on education are not permitted, and this principle is further developed in Article 4(1) of the Protection Against Discrimination Act, which prohibits discrimination based on the education and age of the person concerned.

The contested provisions of the Program place all children over the age of 12 who have been granted temporary protection in Bulgaria at a disadvantage and discriminate against them. The lower age limit of 12 years specified in the Program does not correspond to the generally accepted division of children by age in Bulgarian substantive law—minors under 14 years of age and juveniles between 14 and 18 years of age. In this sense, the lower limit has been chosen entirely arbitrarily and is contrary to the other provisions of Bulgarian personal and family law.

Furthermore, all children over the age of 12 attending Bulgarian schools are also placed at a disadvantage. According to Article 53, paragraph 2 of the Constitution and Article 8, paragraph 2 of the Law on Preschool and School Education, school education is compulsory until the age of 16. The provisions are mandatory and require all children residing in the country to attend Bulgarian school until the age of 16. For this reason, the privilege granted in the Program to children who do not attend school is in direct violation of substantive law. Insofar as the Program is adopted by the Council of Ministers of the Republic of Bulgaria, it is unacceptable to introduce rights and privileges for non-compliance with Bulgarian law. The Bulgarian state has the obligation and responsibility to ensure that all children up to the age of 16 are covered by the country's education system, insofar as Article 53, paragraph 2 of the Constitution and Article 8, paragraph 2 of the Pre-school and School Education Act do not impose a right, but an obligation. 

Children who have reached the age of 16 are also excluded from the Program. On the one hand, they are minors, and their parents should provide supervision and care for them. On the other hand, because they are not included in the Program, situations arise in which parents and children up to 12 years of age, or from 12 to 15 years of age, are accommodated, but a 16-year-old child is denied accommodation with the family. The Access to Rights Foundation (FAR) was notified of just such a case—a minor who is still in school was separated from his family and left alone, without housing or means of subsistence.

Pregnant women

Next, in violation of Bulgarian law and fundamental human rights, is the following vulnerability criterion under the Program under letter “c,” according to which only pregnant women after the third month of their pregnancy are considered vulnerable. According to § 1, item 17 of the Asylum and Refugees Act, pregnant women are vulnerable persons regardless of the month of pregnancy. The introduction of an additional restriction in the Program—that the woman must be past the third month of her pregnancy—is completely unlawful and in direct contradiction to substantive law. Such a restriction means that a pregnant woman will be denied accommodation under the Program for the period of her temporary protection simply because she was in the first three months of her pregnancy on the date of application. 

Elderly people

The criterion set out in the Program for a person to be accommodated for the entire period of temporary protection, namely that the person must be over 65 years of age, is also unlawful. Bulgarian legislation lacks a legal definition of “elderly person,” although the term is widely used. UNHCR explicitly states in its handbook “Working with Forcibly Displaced Elderly People” that the UN defines an elderly person as anyone over the age of 60[2]. Alternatively, to determine which people are elderly, the retirement age could be taken into account, which in 2025 is 62 years and 4 months for women and 64 years and 8 months for men, i.e. under 65 years of age.

Families

The provision that children under the Program may only be accommodated if accompanied by one parent is in direct contradiction with the right to family life under Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights and in gross violation of the fundamental principle of the best interests of the child. According to points 5.1. and 5.2. of the Program, if the child has two parents, the family cannot be accommodated. This is detrimental to the interests of the child because, in order to be accepted under the Program, parents are forced to separate and live apart. 

The relationship between family members is unlawfully severed, given the provision of point 5.2(c) of the Program. A person aged 65 or over may be accommodated, but their spouse may only join them if they are aged 60 or over and are retired in Ukraine. This means that all families in which one spouse is under 60 years of age and/or is not yet retired must choose between being separated and one spouse benefiting from the Resettlement Program, or remaining outside of it. 

There is no legal reason for the restriction of 60 years of age and above, or the cumulative requirement of retirement in Ukraine. On the contrary, in accordance with the right to family life under Article 8 of the ECHR, when one spouse is accommodated under the Program, the other spouse should also be granted the right to accompany them. 

Last but not least, there are no opportunities for large families to benefit from the Program. In its practice, FAR has identified a number of cases of parents with three, four, or more children who have been denied accommodation but who, due to the very number of children and the specific needs of each of them, need support, including accommodation under the Program.

Lack of a lawful procedure

The adopted Program also lacks a written procedure for deciding on applications submitted by individuals for membership in one of the risk groups mentioned above. Currently, applicants learn the outcome of their application either verbally from the manager of the relevant accommodation facility or through the posting of lists in these facilities indicating which persons have been accepted and which have been rejected. These lists are posted publicly and contain personal data, including the personal identification number of each applicant, which is a gross violation of the law. 

Furthermore, the procedure for deciding on each person's application should be concluded with the issuance of a reasoned individual administrative act, which is subject to judicial review. Currently, such acts are not issued and delivered, and applicants do not understand the reason for their refusal of accommodation because the lists posted in the accommodation facilities do not contain any reasons or instructions on whether and to whom each refusal can be appealed. This constitutes a gross violation of the right to legal remedies, effectively preventing these vulnerable refugees from accessing justice.

Violation of Bulgaria's international legal commitments

All of the above-mentioned criteria under the Program also contradict international treaties to which the Republic of Bulgaria is a party and which are part of domestic law pursuant to Article 5, paragraph 4 of the Constitution. 

Article 16 of the European Social Charter (ESC) states that “the family, as the fundamental unit of society, is entitled to appropriate social, legal, and economic protection to ensure its full development.” According to the practice of the European Committee of Social Rights, this also includes the right to accommodation and housing for the family; this provision is interpreted in conjunction with the right to housing regulated in Article 31 of the ESC[3]. The right to accommodation enables the exercise of a number of other rights – civil, political, economic, social and cultural. [4]

Furthermore, the provisions of the Program are also in conflict with Article 27, paragraph 3 of the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, according to which "states Parties shall, in accordance with national conditions and within their means, shall take appropriate measures to encourage parents and others responsible for the child to implement this right and, in case of need, provide material assistance and support programmes, particularly with regard to nutrition, clothing and housing." The provisions of the Convention apply to all children, regardless of their nationality and legal status in the country party to the Convention, without any distinction based on age, education, etc. In this sense, and in direct contradiction to the Convention, the introduction of rules in the Program, adopted by the Council of Ministers' Decision, which divide and discriminate between different categories of children according to their age and education, especially when it comes to the realization of a fundamental human right, such as the right to housing and accommodation – a prerequisite for the exercise of all other rights, including with a view to their integration into Bulgarian society. 

According to Article 24(3) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (CFREU), every child has the right to maintain regular personal relations and direct contact with both parents, unless this is contrary to his or her interests. Article 34(3) of the CFREU provides that “in order to combat social exclusion and poverty, the Union recognises and respects the right to social and housing assistance so as to ensure a decent existence for all those who lack sufficient resources, in accordance with the rules laid down by Union law and national laws and practices”. The Program does not contain any criteria for conditioning humanitarian support on the presence or absence of resources among beneficiaries of temporary protection. Contrary to any legal and practical logic, the possibility of using accommodation under the Program is in no way linked to an objective and measurable financial indicator. 

Conclusion and recommendations

In its efforts to address the aforementioned unlawful provisions in the new Program, Foundation for Access to Rights (FAR) is conducting an awareness campaign and providing legal support to the affected persons. An important step towards protecting the rights and interests of persons under temporary protection is the judicial appeal against the Council of Ministers' decision to adopt the Program, filed by affected persons under temporary protection who were supported by FAR with legal assistance and representation. 

Regardless of the legal and advocacy actions taken, it is imperative that the institutions involved in the implementation of the Humanitarian Support and Integration Program take concrete and effective measures to overcome the identified contradictions with national and international law. 

Firstly, the Council of Ministers should initiate an amendment to the Program so that it reflects the legal definition of vulnerable groups under the Asylum and Refugees Act and Directive 2001/55/EC.

The Working Group, which makes the final decisions on accommodation, should issue reasoned individual administrative acts subject to judicial review, rather than relying on verbal communications or public lists containing personal data – a practice that grossly violates the right to defense and privacy.

The Ministry of Labor and Social Policy, through the Social Assistance Agency, should ensure an objective and non-discriminatory assessment of membership of a risk group, including with the participation of non-governmental and international organizations where necessary. 

The Ministry of Tourism should strengthen control over accommodation procedures and ensure that support is provided in accordance with the principles of legality, transparency, and equality.

The State Agency for Child Protection should monitor the Program's compliance with the principle of the best interests of the child, responding to cases of separation of parents and children or refusal to accommodate minors. 

The Ombudsman of the Republic may take up cases of violations of the rights of vulnerable persons and children, and the Commission for Protection against Discrimination may carry out checks on the discriminatory criteria set out in the Program.

The National Legal Aid Bureau should guarantee access to free legal assistance for affected persons under temporary protection, especially in cases of refusal of accommodation.

Only through coordinated, legally sound, and transparently implemented actions by all responsible institutions can not only the right to housing be guaranteed, but also the right to personal and family life, the rights of children, the right to protection from discrimination, and the right to effective legal protection—fundamental human rights that are the basis for a dignified life, security, and successful integration of Ukrainian refugees with temporary protection in Bulgaria.

[1] https://pris.government.bg/document/6d69bf743388f6a39ebd340a91111fb6

[2] See . https://emergency.unhcr.org/sites/default/files/2024-06/UNHCR_NTKG_Older%20Persons_EN.pdf, p.4

[3] See European Roma Rights Center (ERRC) v. Bulgaria, Complaint No. 31/2005, decision on admissibility of 10 October 2005, §9;

[4] See European Roma Rights Centre (ERRC) v. Greece, Complaint No. 15/2003, decision on the merits of 8 December 2004, §24

With the financial support of UNHCR, the Bulgarian Fund for Women and the European Union. Views and opinions expressed are those of the author(s) only and do not necessarily reflect those of the UNHCR, of the Bulgarian Fund for Women, the European Union or the European Education and Culture Executive Agency. Neither UNHCR, BFW, nor the EU or EACEA can be held responsible for them.