It is generally considered common sense that when naming organisations or institutions, these names should bear some relevance to the actual activities of the organisation or institution in question.

A different, and not uncommon strategy, is to give in to temptation and create names that sound more important than the institution or organisation is, when judged by its activities.

Case in point is a Bulgarian governmental institution that goes by the misnomer of State Agency for National Security (SANS).

So far, the agency has, among others, been entrusted with investigations into who was the source of rumours about an imminent bankruptcy of First Investment Bank - which local media attributed to a chat on a Bulgarian online forum for pregnant women and young mothers - as well as the question of who had sent about 200 Romas, normally employed to clean the country's capital, on a sudden sea-side trip all on the same day, and who was financially draining the football club CSKA. All doubtlessly grave matters of national security that, if left unresolved, would result in chaos and lawlessness throughout the country, at the very least.

SANS never resolved any of these issues, though far be it from me to suggest that this has been the immediate cause of any chaos or lawlessness in Bulgaria. In early September 2008, however, chances turned for SANS when it successfully concluded one of its investigations.

After an intensive investigation period of all of five days, which allegedly included a seven-hour long interrogation of a journalist, SANS uncovered who were... the two owners of a website (1).

The website in question had allegedly published not only largely untrue rumours and gossip about Bulgarian politicians and businessmen, but also "elements of classified information in some of the anonymous articles published", SANS proudly announced.

Any half-literate lawyer would have done a www.who.is look-up for the domain name opasnite.net and seen that it was handled by a company in Los Angeles. One fax with enough legal grounds for court action would have been enough to receive a return fax with all the details of said owners.

But then again, as one Bulgarian blogger (2) noted, telling the company in LA that "these guys are publishing articles that my bosses don't like" won't fly.

To add insult to injury, along with the triumphant announcement of its success of uncovering the owners of the site, SANS, presumably hungry for more, seized the moment and stated that it was "ready to participate in a discussion on the removal of anonymity of internet sites on the territory of Bulgaria".

Dear Bulgarian members of Parliament, as this undoubtedly vital organisation is under your legislative control, I'd like to ask you: can't we just end this joke? It was funny while it lasted, but enough is enough. Really. Let's release these poor officials from their mandates and send them on early retirement, with a minimum pension for services not rendered.

When the job interviews to fill the positions at SANS were being held, one of the requirements was "must have experience in the field", which loosely translated as "should have been a member of the communist-era State Security".

But couldn't you at least have found one person who was not hellbent on implementing the State Security dream of total and permanent control at all cost? I guess that wishing for someone who would also know the difference between the front and backside of a computer and who would not make a total fool of himself with endless goose chases for website owners or make claims about authority over online anonymity where the decisions of local officials are really irrelevant would be too much to ask.

And, of course, if there were any organised crime in this country, then there would be something real for security services to set their teeth in.