Reasons for the establishment of the organisation

Following the set-up of the new government, the intention of the Minister of Interior was to establish an entirely new security organisation, based on the existing Protective Service of Law Enforcement Agencies, but with new philosophy and without any tradition.At present, when the executive bodies of state power – both domestic and foreign ones – suffered severe loss of face, when the corruption is widespread in public life and the press published articles about dubious cases of the police and secret services on a daily basis. It proved obvious that a new protective service had to be set up in order to play a significant role in changing the present situation for the better.

The divide between co-services, the unnecessary and costly duplication of efforts and the conflicts of interest clearly indicated that the relationship between the police and intelligence services required a modern and efficient approach to meet the professional challenges of the 21stcentury by setting up a transparent protective service, the National Protective Service (NPS).

The renewal of the service - inter alia - the unified control, the unified objectives and principles, new philosophy emphasising the protective feature of the activity, and well-defined responsibilities were the most important measures to be taken in order to be accepted by both the protected organisations and the public.

These professional ideas formed the basis of the National Protective Service on 1st of January, 2011, with a total of 500 personnel. Almost 100 000 personnel are enjoying its protection in the three professional fields: the civilian secret services, the law enforcement agencies and the administrative government agencies.

The legal guarantees of the activities of the NPS are the two-thirds law and the prosecutor’s supervision. Our main goal is to restore confidence: trust in the employees of the state by citizens.

Our goal is to protect the personnel of the organisations entrusted to us from dishonest colleagues, as a result of the damage they can cause of which the decent colleagues are prone to be ashamed, and as a consequence of generalisation, the protected organisations – representing thousands of employees – lose their credibility and what is more, the confidence of citizens. We have to fight against corruption together to which the law enacted by the National Assembly specifies the means for the NPS. 

Lifestyle monitoring is a tool for us, providing an opportunity to defend the staff under protection from those who do not belong to them. 

The integrity test – whose legal guarantee is the prosecutor’s supervision itself – does not mean the harassment of honest staff. We will apply this type of test when there are signals about problems that have arisen or may arise. We want to achieve – being aware that it will be a long way to go – that the organisations protected by NPS feel that they really are protected. As our famous poet wrote: “I am angry for you, not against you.”