Revocation of Citizenship under Bulgarian Law: Legal Analysis and Context

Private Clients, Citizenship and Immigration

Introduction and Legal Framework

Under Bulgarian law, citizenship is generally stable and protected – especially for those who are citizens by birth. The Bulgarian Constitution explicitly provides that no one can be deprived of citizenship acquired by birth​. In practice, this means that only naturalised Bulgarian citizens (those who acquired citizenship after birth) can have their citizenship revoked by state action. The conditions and procedures for losing Bulgarian citizenship are outlined in the Bulgarian Citizenship Act (1998, as amended)​, which implements the constitutional principles. The Act distinguishes between different modes of loss of citizenship, including voluntary renunciation (called “release”) and involuntary revocation by the state (“revocation of naturalisation” or “deprivation of citizenship”). Below, we focus on the revocation of citizenship in the involuntary sense – the cases and circumstances under which Bulgarian authorities may cancel or withdraw a person’s Bulgarian nationality – and how these compare to other jurisdictions.

Grounds for Revocation of Bulgarian Citizenship (Involuntary Loss)

Bulgarian law provides two main grounds on which the state can revoke a person’s Bulgarian citizenship without the person’s consent (applicable only to naturalised citizens):

1. Revocation of Naturalisation for Fraud or Misrepresentation. If a person obtained Bulgarian citizenship by naturalisation and it later emerges that the acquisition was based on fraud, false information, or concealment of important facts, the naturalisation can be cancelled. Specifically, section 22(1) of the Bulgarian Citizenship Act allows revocation if the person “has made use of data or facts… established by a court to be false” or “has concealed data or facts which… would have been grounds for refusal” of citizenship​. In other words, if the individual lied or withheld information during the citizenship application process – for example, using fake documents, false identity, or hiding a criminal record that would disqualify them – the granted citizenship may be nullified. This is an important anti-fraud mechanism and is similar to denaturalisation provisions in many countries. Notably, Bulgarian law originally required that such revocation occur within 10 years of the person acquiring citizenship​. However, recent amendments have introduced an exception: if the fraud or concealed facts relate to terrorism involvement, the state may revoke the naturalisation even beyond the 10-year limit (while still ensuring the person will not be left stateless)​. This reflects a growing trend to close loopholes in revoking citizenship from individuals linked to terrorism.
2. Deprivation of Citizenship for Serious Crimes Against the State. A naturalised citizen can also lose Bulgarian citizenship as a form of punishment for certain grave offenses. section 24 of the Act provides that a person “who has acquired Bulgarian citizenship by naturalisation may be deprived of it if he has been convicted by a final sentence for a serious crime against the Republic, provided that he is abroad and does not become stateless”​. In essence, if a naturalised Bulgarian is convicted of crimes like treason, espionage, terrorism, or other offenses threatening national security or the constitutional order (which are considered “serious crimes against the Republic”), the state may strip that person of their Bulgarian citizenship. This deprivation can only happen under strict conditions – the person must be outside Bulgaria at the time (so that deprivation would not be a disguised form of unlawful expulsion) and the person must have or be eligible for another nationality (to avoid statelessness). The requirement to avoid statelessness is expressly written into the law as a safeguard​, reflecting Bulgaria’s commitment to international norms that discourage creating stateless persons.

It should be emphasized that native-born Bulgarian citizens cannot be stripped of their citizenship under these provisions. The Constitution’s ban on depriving birthright citizens of their nationality means that these revocation and deprivation measures apply only to naturalised citizens​. For instance, a person who obtained Bulgarian citizenship by birth (e.g. by having a Bulgarian parent) would not be subject to loss of nationality for a criminal conviction, no matter how serious – whereas a naturalised person could be (under the conditions of section 24).

Additionally, Bulgarian law also allows voluntary renunciation of citizenship (termed “release from citizenship” in section 20) for those who wish to give up their Bulgarian nationality (usually upon obtaining another citizenship)​. However, voluntary loss is not a “revocation” by the state and occurs only by the individual’s request and with state approval. In all cases, Bulgarian policy is guided by the principle of avoiding statelessness and respecting individual choice (section 7 of the Act even states everyone has the right to choose their citizenship)​.

Procedure and Safeguards in Revocation Cases

Revoking someone’s citizenship in Bulgaria involves a multi-step procedure with checks and balances, although the ultimate decision is administrative (executive) rather than judicial. The process generally works as follows:

• An investigation or discovery of facts triggers the consideration for revocation. For example, if evidence of fraud in a person’s naturalisation comes to light, or if a naturalised citizen is convicted of a qualifying serious offense, authorities may initiate action. Bulgaria’s Prosecutor General is empowered to propose the revocation of naturalisation or deprivation of citizenship in such cases​. (The Minister of Justice may also directly make such a proposal if the legal conditions are met​.)
• The case is reviewed by the Citizenship Council at the Ministry of Justice, which includes representatives of various ministries and agencies (including interior and security agencies)​. This council examines the evidence and circumstances, and provides a recommendation on the proposed revocation.
• The Minister of Justice, after receiving the council’s opinion and ensuring legal conditions are satisfied, makes a formal proposal to the President of the Republic​. Under Bulgarian law, it is the President who has the authority to issue a decree to grant, restore, or revoke citizenship​. In other words, the final decision to revoke citizenship (or not) is made by the President, based on the proposal of the Minister of Justice.
• If the President signs a decree withdrawing someone’s citizenship, the decree enters into force immediately (on the day of issuance)​. The affected person ceases to be a Bulgarian citizen as of that date, and relevant institutions are notified (to update civil registries and to void the person’s Bulgarian identity documents, such as passport or ID card)​.

Bulgarian law mandates that these procedures occur within certain time limits to prevent undue delay. For instance, proposals to revoke citizenship for fraud generally must be made within 3 months once the case is prepared, or even faster (1 month) if terrorism is involved. These deadlines underscore the seriousness of such cases and aim for swift resolution when citizenship revocation is at stake.

In terms of rights and safeguards, it is important to note that a person facing citizenship revocation in Bulgaria does not have an explicit statutory right to appeal the President’s decree. Unlike an ordinary administrative decision, a presidential decree on citizenship may not be directly appealable in court (the law does not provide an appeal process in the Citizenship Act itself). Critics have pointed out that this is a gap in Bulgarian law – while most European countries allow judicial review of nationality deprivation decisions, Bulgaria’s framework effectively leaves the individual without a direct remedy to challenge the outcome in court​. (The individual might still seek indirect judicial review via constitutional or administrative law avenues, but there is no dedicated appeal as of right.) This lack of an appeal, combined with the severe impact of losing citizenship, has been highlighted by experts as a due process concern​. Nevertheless, the requirement that a court must establish any fraud (for section 22 cases) helps ensure that revocation for fraud is grounded in proven facts​, and the involvement of high-level officials (Justice Minister, Prosecutor General, President) implies that such cases receive careful attention at the highest level of government.

Cases and Application: Revocation in Practice

In practice, Bulgaria has used its revocation powers primarily to address instances of fraudulent naturalisations, including abuses of its investment-based citizenship program, and occasionally in high-profile cases involving criminality.

Bulgaria’s previous citizenship-by-investment program indeed saw multiple instances of revocations. In 2019, the Prosecutor General launched a series of inquiries into investors who had obtained fast-track citizenship but failed to fulfill the legal requirements, such as maintaining the required investments or providing truthful information. Within a span of a few months, authorities had moved to revoke the citizenship of at least eight individuals after finding “fraudulently obtained citizenships… citing instances of document fraud and failure to make the complying investments.”​

These individuals had their Bulgarian passports cancelled once it was determined that they either never made the promised investments or pulled out their investments prematurely in violation of the program’s rules, and in some cases had also concealed disqualifying facts about themselves​. For example, two investors were found to have “failed to maintain the investment that provided the grounds for their naturalisation,” and another two had “concealed facts that would have prevented them being granted citizenship”​. In each case, the legal basis for revocation was section 22 of the Act – essentially, that the citizenship was obtained under false pretenses or in violation of the prerequisites.

On the other hand, the deprivation of citizenship for serious crimes (section 24) appears to be invoked much more rarely. There have not been widely reported cases of Bulgaria stripping someone’s citizenship as a punishment for, say, terrorism or treason, but the provision exists. It is likely reserved for exceptional circumstances – such as someone who, after naturalisation, betrays the state’s vital interests and is safely outside Bulgaria (so the loss of citizenship would essentially bar their return). One reason it might be seldom used is that it’s often impractical: a person committing such crimes might already flee or be imprisoned, and revoking citizenship would in some cases complicate extradition or further legal action. Moreover, because Bulgarian citizenship gives the right of EU residence, authorities may weigh the benefit of deprivation (preventing the person’s return) against diplomatic or legal ramifications.

In any event, safeguards against statelessness are strictly observed. Both section 22 (in its new form) and section 24 explicitly condition revocation on the person not being left without any citizenship​. This aligns with Bulgaria’s obligations under international law (such as the 1961 Convention on the Reduction of Statelessness) and the general European standards that revocation of citizenship should not produce stateless persons. For example, in the investor cases mentioned, the individuals all had other citizenships to fall back on once their Bulgarian status was removed – a fact carefully verified during the process.

Conclusion

In summary, Bulgarian law permits revocation of citizenship in clearly defined cases: fraudulent acquisition and serious betrayal of the state by a naturalised citizen. These powers, while significant, are circumscribed by legal safeguards such as time limitations, the avoidance of statelessness, and high-level decision-making oversight. In recent years, Bulgaria has actively enforced revocation in cases of investment scheme abuses and undisclosed criminal histories, demonstrating a commitment to upholding the integrity of Bulgarian citizenship. However, it has refrained from using citizenship deprivation as a broad punitive or security measure to the extent seen in some other countries. The focus remains on exceptional cases where the grant of citizenship itself was tainted or where an individual has gravely undermined the state’s interests.

From a comparative perspective, Bulgaria’s approach is moderate – more active than countries that almost never revoke citizenship, but more restrained (and legally constrained) than countries like the UK that have made revocation a counter-terrorism tool. One potential area for improvement in the Bulgarian framework would be to introduce a formal avenue of judicial appeal for individuals facing loss of citizenship, to reinforce due process. Nonetheless, the Bulgarian Citizenship Act provides a comprehensive and structured basis to address revocation of citizenship, balancing state sovereignty and security with individual rights and international standards.