A trench battle was given to the Institutions Committee of the Parliament by the opposition parties during the discussion of the demands of the “alliance of 5” after the conclusion – “rag paper” of the Supreme Court. Despite the precedent with the calls of Georgia Tsatanis and Vassiliki Vlachos to the same Committee, and the differentiation of Kostis Hatzidakis in the Plenary Session of the Parliament, the majority rejects both the request to call Achillea Zisi and Georgia Adelini and the transmission of the conclusion and all related documents, presuming institutional concerns and legal argument.
They ignited the blood with “good morning”
Tension prevailed at the beginning of the meeting between the chairman of the Commission, Athanasios Bouras, and the president of Free Shipping, Zois Konstantopoulou, who was asking for the reason to take a position on the procedure, after Mr. Bouras chose to give the rapporteurs just 7 minutes for placements. When the president refused to give the floor to Mrs. Konstantopoulou, she objected that “you have no right to do laundry.” “I could make the decision myself, but the Commission will make it,” was Mr. Bura’s unprecedented response.
“The request is manifestly unconstitutional”
Taking the floor to make a rejection proposal, Thanos Pleuris described the essentially common request expressed by the minority as “manifestly unconstitutional”, while he added emphatically that if such a request had been submitted by a first-year law student, he would not have been able to continue her studies.
He judged that summoning the prosecutors who handled the case to give explanations regarding the finding that it is against the Constitution and the Rules of the House. Afterwards, he cited the negative answer given to the Commission of Inquiry by the deputy prosecutor of the Supreme Court and head of the Anti-Money Laundering Authority, Charalambos Vourliotis, adding that “Parliament cannot rise above the judicial power”.
Regarding the request for the transmission of the conclusion, the rapporteur of the ND stated that there is no competence of the Commission that allows it to request it, meaningfully adding that it can be requested and received by “anyone who has a legitimate interest”. “In an open case, what will the Commission do? Will it replace justice” he wondered and criticized today’s front page of “EFSYN”, which “targets the prosecutor who did the investigation into the wiretapping”. “We cannot use the Commission for reasons of sensationalism and blackmail of justice” he concluded.
“They should have called Zisis – Adeline”
Immediately after, Theodora Tzakri argued that based on the provisions of the Rules of Procedure of the Parliament, the competent prosecutor should have been summoned and the Prosecutor of the Supreme Court should also have been forwarded the case file and the conclusion. The secretary of the SYRIZA Committee reminded that the then Appeals Prosecutor, Georgia Tsatani, was summoned to the Commission during the SYRIZA government, who filed Andreas Vgenopoulos with record speed.
“The Greek people and we have the right under article 10 of the ECHR to receive knowledge of the documents” he emphasized and underlined that it is “absolutely necessary” to study the legal arguments of both Mr. Zisis and Ms. Adelinis. “In any case, we do not control the judicial crisis, but we ask to be informed about it” he clarified, reminding that the European Parliament has condemned our country (also) for the wiretapping scandal, while the fact that “the conclusion is not given, is additional blow to the rule of law”.
“The prestige of justice has been damaged”
“The prestige of the judiciary suffers a very significant blow” said Panagiotis Doudonis from the PASOK side, pointing out that “the filing act is not an irrevocable judicial decision”, as “the file can be withdrawn”. He also criticized the argument of the coalition, according to which “the part (of the case) about private individuals prevents us from learning the part about public officials!”.
In addition, Mr. Doudonis recalled that when the investigation of the two First Instance prosecutors on the wiretapping matured, the file was taken from them to be given to Mr. Zisis. “We will not judge as a Commission on the finding, but we want to be informed” he clarified and added mockingly: “Unless we say that Mr. Zisis is uncontrollable”.
The PASOK MP wondered what the motivation was for monitoring the salary of the cabinet and the leadership of the Armed Forces, while he ended by saying that when the Prosecutor of the Supreme Court issues a Press Release she must come to the Parliament and answer the questions of the MPs.
“What would the Pope of Rome say?”
Nikos Karathanasopoulos from the KKE wondered if Ms. Adeilini positions herself with “such absoluteness”, then “what would the Pope of Rome say?”. “The announcement of the Prosecutor of the Supreme Court reveals the limits of judicial power. How independent is a leadership chosen by the respective government?’ he questioned and repeated the request submitted by the KKE to summon Mrs. Adeilinis and transmit the contested conclusion and all related documents.
“The Adelini announcement reminded me of the court verdict on the Lambrakis murder”
After the introduction of the rapporteur of the Hellenic Solution, Mr. Fotopoulos, the floor was taken by Anagnostopoulou from the New Left, who argued that the announcement of G. Adeilini reminded her of the court verdict on the murder of Grigoris Lambrakis. “No involvement of the government has been established” – as he said – was noted in the conclusion about the parastatal murder with the tricycle, while he added saying: “When the first thing that comes to mind for an average citizen is this, then we are in a very bad way.”
“Parastate action is defended by Georgiadis, Voridis and Plevris”
After the rapporteur of Niki, Giorgos Rountas, called the prosecutions against individuals a “scandal” due to the misdemeanor nature, the president of Plefsis Eleftheria described Th. Plevris as “advocate of his co-governors”, Mr. Mitsotakis and Mr. Dimitriadis. “It is clear that the government and Mr. Mitsotakis personally through his nephew who “decapitated”, as is done in criminal organizations, ordered and used the EYP to monitor political and military targets, as well as political opponents” he said and added:
“The government is using parastatal methods and the opposition is asking for transparency. The precedent is the assassination of Lambrakis and it is no coincidence who and with what origins come to defend this treaty. Georgiadis, Voridis and Pleuris came forward to defend the parastatal action”.
He called the finding a “cover-up” by G. Adelinis, judging that the Prosecutor of the Supreme Court “did not act on the basis of her prosecutorial duties”. He also dismissed Ms. Adeilini’s claim that there was an “unusual scope and in-depth investigation”, after recalling that K. Hatzidakis was not even examined, something he himself admitted in the Plenary Session of the Parliament.
“The conclusion is not a court decision” he noted and concluded that the government is interfering with the work of justice, stressing that it is “unthinkable to close the surveillance case without finding out on whose behalf the surveillance was done”.
Read also
“Confusio” with the Institutions Committee: On another “line” Hatzidakis from Maximou
Parliament: On Friday, the Institutions Committee meets without Adeline, Zisi and Supreme Court decision
#Committee #Institutions #rag #paper #Supreme #Court #Hammering #opposition #parliamentary #coup #Video
