Nature advocates warn the minister of environment Ivelina Vassileva: hidden privatization of Bansko ski area concession is running

Mar 20, 2015
951
Nature advocates warn the minister of environment Ivelina Vassileva: hidden privatization of Bansko ski area concession is running
This considers an analysis that reveals a large scheme for plundering of public property in Bansko ski area. These are newly established violations, in addition to the ones that were already announced. The scheme shows that not only the bank, relating to the concessioner, can be drained out, but also public assets in the concessional ski area can be grabbed illegally through offshore companies.

The legal analysis has been prepared on the basis of a report of the Audit office from 8 Aug 2013 and a Decision of the Oresharski’s government from 22 Dec 2014 regarding Bansko ski area, determining that the concession area contains 18 ski runs, 12 ski lifts and drags, one biathlon track and 51 buildings and technical infrastructure. According to article 15, section 2 of the Concession Law, these objects, located in the concession area, shall belong to the state since their origin.

In an examination of the recommendations execution of an audit by the Audit office in 2013, it has been determined that, in violation of this order and of the concession contract of Bansko ski area, part of these installations (i.e. 1 lift, 1 drag and 13 technical installations) are considered to be owned by third parties, instead by the state. Moreover, one year later, according to the decision of Oresharski’s government at the end of 2014, two more lifts and a drag have become property of third parties.
The most disgraceful act is the privatization of ski lifts “Chalin valog” and “Platoto”, built in 2007 and 2011, respectively. The latter has not even been foreseen in the concession contract. According to the report of the Audit office, the two lifts have become property of “Marengo Trading” EOOD, one of the shareholders in Ulen SA, owned by and offshore company “Marengo Trading Limited”, registered in Cyprus.

According to an examination of the Regional prosecutor’s office in Blagoevgrad and data of MEW, it is determined that ski drag “Chalin valog” owned by “Marengo Trading” EOOD is not foreseen in the concession contract and it has been constructed in violation of the Environment Protection Act. Although it is into the concession scope and into the range of the concession powers of Ulen SA, ski drag “Starata pista” is considered as owned by “Inter Sport Bansko” EOOD – owned by Maya Hristoskova – chief executive of Ulen SA.

In 2014, the hidden privatization of installations in the concession of the offshore company “Marengo Trading” has been supported by the minister Stanislav Anastasov (DPS), who let “Marengo Trading”EOOD to exchange 3-seated chair lift “Shiligarnika-Todorka” with a new 6-seated lift in violation of Ulen SA’s concession contract (letter No. OVOS-24/04.08.2014).

With this decision, the minister actually has conceded the offshore company with unlimited rights of construction within the territory of the concession and on territory with exceptionally state ownership. The 3-seated lift has been purchased in 2002 by Ulen SA without competition by “Akademika” public company at the Ministry of education. The aim is to execute the concession obligations, but it has been then resold to “Marengo trading” the same year.

Nature advocates focus the attention of the minister that the bottom station of the chair lift at Bansko to Banderishka polyana area is located outside of the territory of Pirin National Park, which questions the right of the state to acquire any ownership of the whole installation.

A fundamental reason for the illegal privatization of the ski installations of the concession of Bansko ski area is the fact that the state has not issued even one public act for state ownership of the constructed buildings, installations and infrastructure in the ski area yet. Since two years now, orders by the Audit office for undertaking actions for settling the state ownership of the installation in the concession have not been executed yet. In this regard, the latter are still considered in the actives of Ulen SA being part of its capital and by such they can be a part of different competent deals.

In practice, what happens with the concession of Bansko ski area is in comparison of, for example, if we sublet our house to Ulen SA. The company then constructs a porch, which then is considered as owned by the tenant and after the expiration of the contract, we are never being able to enter our own house without the approval of the ex-tenant.

The team of “Green Laws” and coalition “Let Nature Remain in Bulgaria” consider that, due to these illegal sales and the permitted constructions along the years, the executives at the MEW, the Direction for national building control and Bansko municipality have let the state to be harmed, whereas the concession contract to be violated repeatedly by the concessioner Ulen SA.

Therefore, the fundamental installations within Bansko ski area in Pirin National Park can remain an ownership by private companies infinitely, instead of owned by the state, as the Concession Law states. In this way, hidden “drain” of Ulen SA and de facto illegal privatization of territories of Pirin National Park has been accomplished.

The prepared “Analysis of the ownership by third parties in Bansko ski area” has been presented to minister Ivelina Vassileva during a working meeting, organized by the request of “Green Laws”. As a result of the meeting, a commitment has been taken that the analysis will be dispatched from the Ministry to the Interdepartmental working group at the Council of Ministers.

Nature advocates insist that the problem with the ownership of the ski installations and buildings within the boundaries of Bansko ski area’s concession is part of the engagements of the Interdepartmental working group. The issue shall be included into their final report, which to determine why the installations have not been questioned and if their resell to third parties is not a violation of the law, presuming a break of the concession contract.