Organized Crime: A Complex Phenomenon with Far-Reaching Consequences

A recent report has shed light on the complexities of organized crime, highlighting its ability to influence policy-making and institutional frameworks in Bulgaria. The concept of organized crime is a powerful political formula for implementing legislative and institutional policies, but it also poses significant challenges for public administration.

Defining the Problem

Lack of Definition and Consistency

The report notes that the attempt to clarify the nature of organized crime as a phenomenon leads to conceptual ambiguity, making it difficult to define and address effectively. Different definitions emerge in the legislative and academic space, highlighting the need for context-specific approaches. The complexity of the problem stems from the clash between the concept’s abstract nature and its need to be brought into specific legal frameworks.

Institutional Inconsistency

The report also highlights the lack of consistency in institutional change, with frequent changes in institutional design not following a constant logic or vision. This has led to duplication of powers, poor interaction between structures, and inefficiency in the application of their powers. The notion of organized crime has a direct influence on the determination of subject competence, often resulting in institutions dealing with a larger volume of cases rather than concentrating on significant ones.

Progress and Challenges

Positive Trend but Qualitative Criteria Needed

Despite these challenges, the analysis of statistics shows a positive trend in the fight against organized crime, including an increase in identified groups, charges, convictions, and confiscated criminal property. However, this conclusion is based solely on quantitative criteria, neglecting qualitative considerations that are essential for evaluating policy effectiveness.

Sociological Questions Remain

The report raises important sociological questions about how institutional reality can function effectively in the face of a vague concept like organized crime. How should organized crime be thought and perceived to support the adequate formulation of institutional policies? The answer lies in finding a definition that corresponds to the Bulgarian reality, but this risks falling into a vicious circle of defining and redefining the phenomenon.

References

[1] Kolarov, T. (2012). Judicial Cooperation between the Member States of the European Union in the Fight against Cross-Border Organized Crime. Sofia, p. 14. [2] Krastev, D. (2019). Penal Policy of the European Union. S., p.45. [3] Manev, M., and team: National and International Security. S., 2005, p. 131. [4] Ivanov, Vl. (2005). The protection of state borders and the new world order. S., p. 76. [5] Filchev, N. (2015). Lectures on Criminal Law. Sofia, p. 235. [6] Krastev, D. (2018). Cooperation in the field of criminal policy in the realization of the EU. Scholars’ Press, p.29. [7] Pushkarova, I. (2011). Forms of organized criminal activity under the Criminal Code of the Republic of Bulgaria. S., pp. 54-73. [8] Paunova, L. Pl. Datsov Organized criminal group. S., 2010, pp. 73-97. [9] Velchev, B. (2014). Crimes against the Republic. S., p. 97.