Across the government has an obligation to comply with such a decision (otherwise the country is threatened with a reduction in European funding) and the institutions to demand it.
If it is indeed the case of the Supreme Court, headed by Ioanna Klapa, the least that should have been expressed was concern for what was found. The Supreme Court, however, chose to convene to applaud (clap-a, clap-a) Mitsotakis and his violations. The problem is much more serious than the interpretation that the leadership of the Supreme Court is simply returning the favor to Mitsotakis who chose it.
In less than from one month and two behaviors of the leadership of the Supreme Court, it has been proven that what is attributed to Greece for the lack of democracy is absolutely true. The prosecutor of the Supreme Court, when Maria Karystianou visited her as the mother of a victim in the criminal accident in Tempos to ask for justice, suggested prayer and repose. Days later, the country’s highest court convened, as it should not have, to challenge the decision of the European Parliament. Why bother about what needs to be apologized for when there is the metaphysics or the naturalness of their arbitrariness?
What other proof is it necessary for someone to admit that in Greece the rule of law has a problem, with the responsibility of course of Mitsotakis but also of the head of the Supreme Court? The historic decision of the European Parliament was accompanied by an unprecedented moral indecency as well as a violation of the separation of powers by the Supreme Court. Every citizen and of course every member of the Supreme Court has the right to have an opinion and to judge – even public – political decisions. Contrary to the practice applied by various associations and associations of judges who christen “interference with Justice” any criticism of a judicial decision or of their colleague, the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) has ruled with a multitude of decisions that criticism is not an intervention, but a right in the context of democracy (several decisions of the EDDA concern Greece). In this sense, every judge of the Supreme Court has the right to have an opinion on the decision of the European Parliament and (according to me) to express it. However, the leadership of the Supreme Court and the Areopagites have no right to use the plenary session of the supreme court to oppose a European institution and – to put it simply and directly – to wash away Mitsotakis.
Areos Pagos it is a court and its competence, if it does not try cases, is to make decisions and resolve legal issues. The meeting of the Supreme Court was not supposed to resolve any legal issue or to judge any case. It was convened in an anti-establishment and insulting way for Justice so that Mitsotakis could tell the adoring public that he is compatible with democracy and indeed with the seal of the Supreme Court, which decided that everything is fine with the operation of Justice.
They are real questionable because the Supreme Court did not recommend Kyriakos Mitsotakis to take refuge in the church and some blessed oil for consolation, as the prosecutor of the supreme court did to the bereaved mother, but went into the process of convening the plenum. It is significant that the convening of the cumbersome in other Supreme Court cases took place within just one week of the European Parliament’s judgment. Such was the fervor with which the leadership of the Supreme Court moved (the president and the prosecutor personally answered telephones and visited offices) that if it characterized even the least other procedures in the judicial system, Greece would not have any problem in the administration of justice .
Is the first time after the junta the country’s government sits on the bench for violating the rules of the rule of law and democracy. Europe did not accuse Karamanlis, Papandreou, Tsipras, or even Samaras of such deviations. But the Supreme Court has never since the era of the junta and Kollias so openly wanted to back a government for the violation of fundamental democratic principles.
Of course everything these are not impressive. I remind you that the previous prosecutor of the Supreme Court, Isidoros Dogiakos, tried to stop the surveillance investigation, while the plenary session of the Supreme Court decided that the impunity of the bankers who stole, which was established by the Mitsotakis law, was completely compatible with democracy and justice.
To the Areopagites who I know will read this text, I suggest they ask themselves: Why in Greece has the European Prosecutor suddenly become a hero and everyone is asking for his intervention in all matters, although he has competence only in a few? Why does the world not trust the Greek Minister of Justice and is looking for salvation from Europe as if we are in the era of the junta?
PS: My legal friends tell me that with what I write, they will not have good luck as many of my court cases reach the Supreme Court, but fortunately, to paraphrase the well-known saying, I believe that “there are judges in Athens”. Or even in Strasbourg.
#Clap #Areopagus #clapa #clapa
