At the moment when the AADE led by G. Pitsili imposed a new retaliatory fine of 161,000 euros on Documento, embarrassing for him and the government, with the aim of silencing and closing the newspaper, Maximou “pretends not to understand” the objective facts of this case, which directly hits the democratic circulation of ideas and the free press.
In particular, to a question from documentonews.gr regarding the new fine, which is an obvious SLAPP-type practice, with clear deception after the revelations of the newspaper exposing the practices of the Pitsili administration, with the support of Prime Minister Kyriakos Mitsotakis, the government representative said that “As you understand I cannot know the details of a fine. What I know is that AADE operates with objective criteria and does not impose vindictive fines. It is a given, however, that the affected person has the possibility to appeal, each time to the extent of jurisdiction that provides for a specific tax case, an imposition of a fine, to appeal to the administrative courts and find his right if he believes that a provision has been violated”.
In fact, he added that “I cannot prejudge the development of a potential appeal, nor can I have such a discussion from now on. But I am telling you what I know and I know very well from the results of these controls as a whole, without referring to this specific case, is that the AADE is anything but vindictive or discriminatory. She is trying to do her job better and especially the people doing the checks. So I can’t get into the specifics you’re asking me about.”
Pavlos Marinakis may be talking about an appeal to the administrative courts, but the purpose of the AADE fines with the proven different criteria is to bring about financial strangulation now, given that the fine is assessed and paid normally while the adjudication of the case is a very long process , so that the embarrassing documento for Maximou could not survive. So, when after years the vindictive fine is canceled by the administrative courts, the great damage to the free press and the free movement of ideas will already have been done. This is the clear purpose and that is why the practices of extermination fines are followed.
The Auditing Conference fully confirms Documento’s revelations about the unclear criteria of the audits
Because the government representative often makes frequent references to the Judiciary and its independence, he will certainly have in mind the report of the Court of Auditors for 2023. Now he spoke about objective criteria in the audits of the AADE, but without referring to the case of Documento, as he said, but already the report of the Court of Auditors points out the ambiguity of the criteria in the prioritization of the audits as well as the use of various arguments-stereotypes about this practice, confirming Documento’s previous revelations about Pitsili’s AADE.
The trick used by the sworn tax officers of the AADE is well known: they send an anonymous letter to their service and then prioritize the audit in order to either extort or suffocate a business. It is a mafia that operates in AADE and sends anonymous letters to its services, that is to itself. Documento is a victim for the second time of the same mafia because it revealed its activity, which among other things is covered by the commander of AADE G. A splash. All this has been recorded in successive Documento reports but now bears the seal of the Court of Auditors.
The same “trick”
Evidence of the two measures and stations as well as the treachery of the control and the exterminating fine is this: While the trick remains the same, and it is the arbitrary judgment that the discounts made to advertisers with percentages above 80%, are undeclared and hidden profits i.e. black money (without any proof of it), in the new check they did on Documento (for 2018) they left out some big companies…
Other discounts, of the order of 90% for example, consider them to be dealing in black money, while others of exactly the same order, consider that they are not related to black money. In other words, the same auditors in two audits, the National Bank (for 2017) show it to be dealing in black money in Documento, while for 2018, although it has the same discount, they exclude it!
Obviously, this is not fiscal schizophrenia, but a clear fraud. They fine Documento, but at the same time exempt entrepreneurs to protect them in the event that Documento requests that those who advertised with a large discount be investigated as money-lenders (as of course happens in all media).
In order to make the deception even clearer, it is indicatively mentioned that two companies that have given a discount of over 80% and were left out of the ones that allegedly paid Documento with black money. This is TERNA, which is connected to the minister G. Gerapetritis (through his father-in-law) and for MOTOP OIL of the Vardinogiannis family.
Read also
SLAPP via AADE: New fine of €161,000 on Documento in retaliation for our revelations
Documento employees on SLAPPs signed by Pitsilis: “AADE is trying to silence us with illegal fines”
!function(f,b,e,v,n,t,s)
{if(f.fbq)return;n=f.fbq=function(){n.callMethod?
n.callMethod.apply(n,arguments):n.queue.push(arguments)};
if(!f._fbq)f._fbq=n;n.push=n;n.loaded=!0;n.version=’2.0′;
n.queue=[];t=b.createElement(e);t.async=!0;
t.src=v;s=b.getElementsByTagName(e)[0];
s.parentNode.insertBefore(t,s)}(window, document,’script’,
‘
fbq(‘init’, ‘726515947549353’);
fbq(‘track’, ‘PageView’);
#Maximus #save #Documentos #retaliatory #fines #practices #AADE #purpose #silencing
**How can international organizations and media watchdogs effectively leverage diplomatic pressure and public scrutiny to encourage the Greek government to uphold press freedom and protect independent media outlets from potential abuses of power?**
## Interview: AADE Fines and Press Freedom in Greece
**Host:** Welcome to World-Today News. Today we’ll be discussing the recent €161,000 fine imposed on Greek newspaper Documento by the Independent Authority for Public Revenue (AADE).
Joining us are two distinguished guests:
* **[Guest 1 Name and Title]:** A legal expert specializing in media law and press freedom.
* **[Guest 2 Name and Title]:** A journalist specializing in investigative reporting and known for their work on government accountability.
We’ll explore the reason behind this fine, its implications for press freedom in Greece, and the broader context of AADE’s practices.
**Section 1: The Fine and its Context**
**Host:** [Guest 2], Documento alleges that this fine is a retaliatory measure for their investigative reporting on AADE and its practices. Can you elaborate on these allegations and provide some background on Documento’s previous reporting?
**Guest 2:**
**Host:** [Guest 1], the government representative has stated that the AADE operates with objective criteria and that Documento has the right to appeal. How do you assess this response, considering the argument of potential vindictiveness and the potential impact on press freedom?
**Guest 1:**
**Section 2: AADE Practices and Transparency**
**Host:** The article mentions concerns about inconsistent applications of audit criteria by the AADE. [Guest 2], can you share your perspective on these concerns based on your experience and reporting?
**Guest 2:**
**Host:** [Guest 1], how can greater transparency and accountability be ensured within the AADE to prevent potential misuse of its powers and safeguard the rights of individuals and organizations, including media outlets like Documento?
**Guest 1:**
**Section 3: Broader Implications for Press Freedom**
**Host:** This case raises concerns about the chilling effect such fines can have on investigative journalism and freedom of the press in Greece. [Guest 2], what are your thoughts on the potential long-term consequences of this situation for the independent media landscape in Greece?
**Guest 2:**
**Host:** [Guest 1], what legal mechanisms are available to protect journalists and media outlets from potentially abusive actions by government agencies?
**Guest 1:**
**Section 4: Looking Forward**
**Host:** What steps can be taken by civil society, media organizations, and the international community to support press freedom and ensure accountability in Greece?
**Guest 2:**
**Guest 1:**
**Host:** Thank you both for sharing your insights on this important issue. It’s clear that the case of Documento raises fundamental questions about accountability, transparency, and the vital role of a free press in a democratic society.
I encourage our viewers to engage in further research and discussion on this topic.
