Eleni Raikou at the Special Court: “Papagelopoulos didn’t want the Novartis investigation, but he wanted politicians”

The testimony of the former head of the Corruption Prosecutor’s Office began today and will continue next Monday, October 24, 2022. Eleni Raikoubefore the Special Court on Ministerial Responsibility, where the trial of the former Deputy Minister of Justice, Dimitris Papagelopoulos and the former head of the Corruption Prosecution, is being held for the 8th day, Eleni Touloupaki.

It is recalled that Mrs. Raikou was succeeded by Eleni Touloupaki, after the resignation-replacement of the former.

In more detail, in her testimony, Ms. Raikou stated, among others:

“In February 2017, I was a Corruption Prosecutor, we were investigating the Novartis case, and I was visited in my office by the journalist Gianna Papapdakou who claimed to have had a long-term relationship with Dimitris Papagelopoulos and said he was her close friend. He asked me about the research, if there is any evidence of political figures, and to my negative answer he wondered why I was unaware of it and argued that there was. A few days later, the defendant called me and I told him the same thing.”

As she explained, at the beginning of March 2017, she was visited again by the same journalist, bringing up the same issue. “When I said to her ‘there is nothing, why are you stuck with this issue?’ she told me that there is evidence of Venizelos and Pikrammenos. That Venizelos had an off shore with businessman Panagiotakis and that there was a video of Pikrammeno taking money. He told me he has evidence. I asked her to bring them to me. He didn’t bring them. A few days later, the accused (Mr. Papagelopoulos) took me and said: “You still haven’t sent the case file to the Parliament?”. I told him I can’t do it without evidence. He told me to send and they would be found, and I replied that I was not of that school. “Sit down and you’ll see if your school will be good for you” he told me and I felt worried and afraid as I didn’t know what would come next.

Ms. Raikou then referred to the events that led to her resignation, describing that on March 23, 2017, she was called by Documento newspaper and asked if she knows that investigator Iliana Zamanika claims that the Corruption Prosecutor was hiding evidence.

As the witness continued, “I told him that is not the case. A little later, colleagues took me and told me about the front page of the Documento newspaper that ‘an investigator accuses a well-known prosecutor’. It was ensured that my execution plan was in full swing because I refused. Only an afro under these circumstances would stay in my place. After that moment, disciplinary proceedings were initiated against me. By then I had 24 years of service and no disciplinary investigation. I suffered for three years,” noted Mrs. Raikou.

When asked by the president of the Special Court, Vasiliki Iliopoulou, if she had completed any of the disciplinary investigations, the witness replied: “They were all entered into the file.”

President: When did you meet Mr. Papagelopoulos?

Witness: In the year 2000 when we were serving in the Athens District Attorney’s Office.

President: When he became minister did you visit him?

Witness: Of course I visited him, as the head of the Corruption prosecution, as the prosecution’s office had a great need for expert scientists. I never went to see what he was doing or to have coffee with him, but to discuss business matters. When I went there was an opportunity for him to ask me about matters that interested him.

President: Did you visit another minister and often?

Witness: No. I had visited Mr. Kontonis for requests for legal assistance. I wanted to avoid the accused.

President: In Parliament you said that you had visited Mr. Kontonis several times. During one of these visits you discussed Giannos Papantoniou.

Witness: In March we received some information for an account in Switzerland and we were submitting a request for judicial assistance.

President: Legal assistance again? Why a corruption prosecutor to a minister for a case… Couldn’t you send a document?

Witness: We had sent documents earlier for experts to come. No one was coming to help.

President: You spent a year together in the same office as Mr. Papagelopoulos. Did you have the courage to call and ask for what you wanted? Were you intimate?

Witness: If I wanted to, maybe I could call him. Intimacy now… We had the case for three months. We had opened 36 accounts of natural and legal persons, we had made many moves. I remember Frouzi, Maniadaki, Voulidis. After my insistence, the American authorities had sent us some informational notes,” said Mrs. Raikou.

President: Did you give directions for political figures to the investigation?

Witness: From the first moment. We also had government officials in judicial assistance.

President: Did the accused say to you “you have and provide evidence”?

Witness: He told me “you have and provide evidence, send it and someone else will take care of it”.

President: How did you come to answer such a thing? Which school did you mean? I would hang up.

Witness: That’s how I reacted at the time. His tone was intense. I understood that there was a demand from him to fabricate evidence, because I combined it with the visit of the journalist Gianna Papadakou.

President: Did he ask you for such a thing?

Witness: No, he didn’t ask me. I am telling you that I understood that he asked me to fabricate data for Novartis.

President: Mrs. Touloupaki succeeded you. Did you consider it to be an instrument of the accused?

Witness: He influenced and guided Eleni Touloupaki. Papagelopoulos didn’t want the Novartis research, but he wanted political figures, and political figures don’t grow by themselves.

Mrs. Raikou received questions from the president of the Special Court about the petitions submitted by three KINAL MPs, regarding the non-invoicing of medicines by the then Minister of Health, Panagiotis Kouroumplis.

President: How do you take these 3 reports?

Witness: It was about Novartis drug pricing. Mainly. Apparently this is why the colleague (prosecutor Eleftherianos) related to the Novartis case file.

President: Do you take them as subpoenas? What offense was he referring to?

Witness: Yes, as indictments, and they related to the offense of disloyalty against the State.

President: Was he referring to the minister?

Witness: He wanted an investigation. It does not go directly to Parliament.

President: If you search on Google you will see who was the minister..

Witness: I don’t remember any ministerial responsibility arising. Liability may arise for the members of the committees that recommend drug pricing to the minister. Since the main part has to do with Novartis, Mr. Eleftherianos decided that he should be associated.

President: Is Mrs. Toulupaki justified in not sending immediately?

Witness: The minister was not directly denounced. He wanted research before.

At the same time, to a question by the district attorney Olga Smyrlis, whether the disputed phone call she received from Mr. Papagelopoulos was an interference in her work, Mrs. Raikou replied “Mr. Papagelopoulos should be questioned about this” and to a second question by prosecutor’s office if Mr. Papagelopoulos had any benefit from this intervention, Ms. Raikou, replied: “If someone intervenes, they will have some benefit.”

When asked by the member of the Special Court, State Counselor Panagiotis Tsoukas, regarding Mrs. Raikou’s opinion of Mr. Papagelopoulos, the witness replied: “He was an interventionist in many cases. It was a constant state of intrusive behavior, unprecedented for me.”

RES-EMP

Read the News today and get the latest news.
Follow Skai.gr on Google News and be the first to know all the news.