VAGUENESS AS A TOOL FOR (NON-)ADJUDICATING: THE BULGARIAN EXAMPLE

This article examines how the Bulgarian legal system systematically refuses to acknowledge linguistic vagueness and broader legal indeterminacy, despite their unavoidable presence. Unlike most theoretical literature that treats vagueness in the abstract, the study analyses concrete legislative provisions and judicial practices in Bulgaria in order to show that the absence of a principled framework is not accidental but serves specific socio-political functions: it masks judicial discretion, preserves institutional authority, and prevents public contestation of judicial power. The article argues that this “meta-vagueness” paradoxically increases arbitrariness and undermines legitimacy. It concludes that openly recognising the constitutive role of vagueness would enhance predictability, accountability, and public trust.