For an unprecedented intervention, due to which he should refrain from his responsibilities, constitutional experts are speaking to SKAI, regarding the position of Christos Tzanerikos on the amendment that the government is bringing to vote, in order to block the participation of the Kasidiaris party in the elections.

Charalambos Anthopoulos, professor of Public Law E.A.P. stated: “I am surprised by the rather aggressive style and nevertheless unexpected. A style of speech unexpected for a chief justice. And the argument that this has never happened before is not reasonable because neither has there been such a case and such a crisis until now A1, when declaring the combinations of the parties, operated in a completely epic manner as a rule. Therefore, this arrangement is justified due to the criticality of the issue, while Mr. Tzanerikos’ intervention seems unjustified to me.”

Panos Lazaratos, professor of Administrative Law at the Faculty of Law Univ. Athens said: “I consider it institutionally unacceptable for such discussions to be held, especially for the first time of the supreme judge at such a moment that if you want it leads him to self-exclusion, I think he will make a declaration of withdrawal from the procedure that is coming up in a few days. He is talking about a photographic treatment of his face. In my opinion, this is not the case, it is not a photographic regulation in any case, it is again a general and abstract regulation which equips this decision with much more guarantees”.

Evangelos Venizelos had stated earlier: “I consider it self-evident that Mr. Vice-President of the AP will make a declaration of abstention from any related procedure. It is the first time that an active judicial officer takes such a position, makes his judicial judgment publicly, before judging and before ruling.

Antonis Manitakis, professor emeritus of AUTH, Head of the Scientific Council of Law of Nicosia, emphasized: “At first sight, I do not see any constitutionally impermissible interference either in the work, in the organization or in the operation of the court. I believe that this increase that has been decided provides greater guarantees of objectivity and impartial and sound judgement. Since a double number of judges will decide. The regulation aims to ensure any decision of the Supreme Court against possible objections”.

The constitutionalist Costas Botopoulos stated: “The fact that this has not been done before does not necessarily mean that it is illegal anyway, indeed, and I said it when I said before that it was not necessary, this was an issue that constitutes interna corporis. In other words, the internal functioning of the court. But I say again, in my opinion, this legislative regulation by itself, even if it has the problems we said, that is, it is not necessary and constitutes bad legislation, I do not think it is illegal”.