It may be that the case of wiretapping, which was investigated by the judiciary for more than two years, cast and continues to cast, even after the end of the public prosecutor’s investigation, a heavy shadow on the political scene, causing cracks in the rule of law, but the minister Health, Adonis Georgiadis, says it clearly in his recent post on “X”: What if they say that his own mobile phone was also monitored?
“My ear didn’t even sweat.” This is the answer he gives in his institutional capacity, bypassing even the commission of the misdemeanor punishable acts that the justice itself detected by sending four private businessmen to the bench for violations related to the legislation on the violation of the privacy of telephone communications and personal data.
And in addition, with his same post, he does not mention a single word about the 28 – not one, not two – common targets, which in close time intervals had been put under surveillance through the predator malware and through the EYP with a prosecutor’s order for declassification.
The explanation of why the minister’s ear didn’t sweat is also impressive
“Because from the first day of this story in my first interview I said the following: ‘anyone who uses a smart phone and thinks it’s impossible to be tracked is a fool!’. So my basic position from the beginning was that only a naive person, if he had the position and the publicity that I have, would be shocked if he found out that his phone was being monitored. never tell you the truth. These are now so common knowledge that wherever you go on the planet, in serious meetings everyone, from all countries, leaves their cell phones out. Not even closed. Out”. The gentleman Georgiadis attempting to justify the surveillances he invokes modern technology which “unfortunately, it allows such actions much more easily than in the past”.
In this light, in his own judgment, such actions, even if they are bad or criminal, he considers them “usual”. “But, if they are criminal and there is an established violation of the Criminal Code, should the perpetrators remain immune, without having any legal consequences? Are such approaches suitable for the rule of law and in favored States, even from ministerial lips?” This is the jurists’ counterpoint to the gentleman’s position Georgiadis.
The “no cat, no damage” and “end of alarm”
Only like the master himself Georgiadis he mentions in the continuation of his post on “X” that all this – i.e. the wiretapping scandal – “in my eyes it was insignificant from the beginning”. And he goes one step further his thinking could be summed up in free translation “no cat, no damage” and also referring to the legal surveillance of Mr. Androulakis by the EYP, refers to his initial statement when the affair was revealed.
“Since the legal procedure was followed, it does not concern me as a fact” is the conclusion reached by the Supreme Court in the end, because that is how things are. One of the jobs of the Secret Service is to monitor phones. The only thing that interests the Republic here is whether or not the law and procedure have been followed, i.e. whether there has been an abuse of power. Here it was proven that everything had been observed, so no issue exists. The matter is known to the Common Opinion, evaluated by it in successive elections and to the Justice which recently issued its opinion at the highest level. Pausis expiring alarm have a good holiday”.
Apparently, the same legal sources object, the “expiration of alarm” does not apply to all victims of surveillance who from the beginning declared themselves present in the criminal proceedings. For the victims of eavesdropping who insist institutionally and using all legal weapons to find out who and why they were being monitored. Because all of them cannot turn a blind eye when the law is broken.
#interceptions #ear #Georgiadis #sweat
