Inside Police Custody 2 Transposition of Directive 2013/48/EC on the right of access to a lawyer is similarly problematic in the Bulgarian system due to the non-recognition of police detention as part of the criminal proceedings. Persons who are subject to police detention because of the existence of data that they have committed a criminal offence are deprived of access to a lawyer in practice. With few exceptions, they spend all their period of detention without an effective legal assistance. They are questioned for their alleged offences by field operatives in the form of “exploratory talks” as a rule without a lawyer. The information which they share can go indirectly into their criminal files through the testimony of the field operatives. The latter can become a basis for conviction. The right of access to a lawyer during police detention is ineffective in practice because the law does not prohibit “exploratory talks” if the detainee had asked to be assisted by a lawyer and because there is no obligatory legal assistance for vulnerable detainees. There is no system for contracting lawyers where they have been requested. The pressure on the detainees to waive their right to legal assistance also plays an important role in the lack of effective access to a lawyer during police detention. Recommendations Overall recommendations 1. In view of its non-compliance with European law, the Bulgarian criminal justice system and, more specifically police detention, are in need of a serious reform. It should start with recognising the applicability of the Roadmap Directives to the persons detained in police custody because there are data about them that they had committed crimes. They must be recognised as “suspects” under these directives. This is the first and the most important recommendation of the present study. 2. The standards of the Roadmap Directives should cover all types of police detention where the detainee may be held on suspicion of having committed a criminal offence. In addition to the detention under the Ministry of Interior Act, they should cover the detention under the Customs Act, The State Agency for National Security Act, The Military Police Act and the Prevention of Terrorism Act. 3. The scope of the Roadmap Directives should cover also minor offences proceedings, such as those dealt with by Decree No. 904 for combating minor hooliganism and the Law on Public Order at Sports Events despite the fact that they are not deemed to be “criminal proceedings” under the Bulgarian law. The rights guaranteed by the Roadmap Directives should apply from the initiation of these proceedings, usually at the police stations. 4. The overall reforming of the legislation and the practice should be based on a careful examination of the requirements of the directives and of the discrepancies between them and the Bulgarian criminal justice system. Recommendations on the right to interpretation and translation 1. For the actions conducted with the participation of the detained person during police detention it is mandatory to provide an interpreter/translator in all cases in which the person does not speak or does not understand the Bulgarian language. 2. Interpretation should also be provided for the contacts of the detained person with his/her lawyer. 3. Regulation should be passed to establish a mechanism for identifying whether the person who is suspected or accused of having committed a criminal offence speaks or understands Bulgarian at all stages of criminal procedure, including police detention. 4. The quality of the interpretation/translation provided to the detained person during police detention 67