By Elena Galaris

A public letter to the Prosecutor of the Supreme Court Georgia Adelini, the President of the Union of Greek Prosecutors, Achillea Zisi, the President of the Union of Judges and Prosecutors, Christoforos Sevastides and the President of the coordination committee of the Bar Associations of Greece, Dimitris Vervesos, were sent by the attorneys of Petros Philippides, on the occasion of the criticism leveled at the prosecutor of the Mixed Jury Court of Appeal, where Petros Filippidis is being tried in the second degree for two attempted rapes.

“On the occasion of the Prosecutor’s questions to the complainant, in the case of Petros Filippidis – the first instance decision is over 2500 pages – dissatisfaction followed from our fellow citizens, who do not know the case file, nor were they in the audience, so that they have a clear and full understanding of the facts,” state the defendant’s lawyers in their letter, with which they request that the state of law and the fair trial, which secure the rights of the victim and the accused.

The public letter in detail

Michalis Dimitrakopoulos, Kikis Pakirtzidou, Evas Bombolis, attorneys-at-law of Petros Filippidis.

TO

The Prosecutor of the Supreme Court, Honorable Mrs. Georgia Adelini,
the President of the Union of Greek Prosecutors, honorable Mr. Achilleas Zisi,
the President of the Union of Judges and Prosecutors, honorable Mr. Christoforos Sevastides,
the President of the coordinating committee of the Bar Associations of Greece, honorable Mr. Dimitris Vervesos.

In 1748 the enlightener Montesquieu laid the foundations of the fundamental principle of the separation of powers, which is explicitly provided for in Article 26 of the Constitution. According to the above existential principle for the Democracy, the judicial function is exercised by the courts and not by the respected movements, the panelists, the politicians. The decisions are issued by the judges after a prosecutor’s proposal and this will NOT change because this is a democracy. Judges and prosecutors are not influenced by the Minister of Justice and the Prime Minister, because this is a Democracy.

On the occasion of the Prosecutor’s questions to the complainant, in the case of Petros Filippidis – the first instance decision is more than 2500 pages – discontent followed from our fellow citizens, who do not know the case file, nor were they in the audience, so that they have a clear and complete understanding of the facts.
In particular, a new political leader publicly requested that the Prosecutor of the Supreme Court Mrs. Adeilini, the Minister of Justice Mr. Floridis and the Prime Minister of the country Mr. Mitsotakis TAKE A STAND on the questions raised by the Prosecutor in the PENDING criminal case!! Interference with the administration of Justice is NOT Democracy and “opens the door to a time cabinet of history”, which is dark, torturous, decorated with guillotines. Only in non-democratic regimes do the Ministers of Justice and Prime Ministers intervene in the judicial function. Fortunately, in our country, the executive power does not enter the judicial power, it does not share the views of the new politician.

Others, with a serious and composed pen, argue “that the Court should NOT question the credibility” of those who denounce acts of violence in sexual life, because in this way “gender violence is encouraged”. The investigation by the court of the circumstances of the commission of the offense according to the procedure constitutes “normalization of the offense and the collapse of the society of vigilance and solidarity”!! So here it is supported by organized personalities to abolish the Code of Criminal Procedure, which ensures fair trial and presumption innocence.

Some other outraged people, who also have a legal education, demand that disciplinary proceedings be brought against the prosecutor in the middle of the evidentiary process!! They do not realize that this is how the institution of the independence of the Judiciary is catalyzed!! Soon they will ask, before the court, that the judges and prosecutors be ordered to issue specific decisions to preserve social order! UNPRECEDENTED FACT !!

All the above forget that Petros Filippidis was UNANIMOUSLY ACQUITTED for two alleged rapes at first instance. If we were to follow the above opinions of the disaffected, Philippides should have been sentenced in one day for two non-existent judicial rapes and sent to the moral gallows. Justice should have AUTOMATICALLY accepted the “reliability” of a complainant, who had FORGOTTEN her rape and was REMINDED of it by her also “reliable” witness friend in the pre-trial! If we adopt their KENOTOME views, the Court MUST accept, WITHOUT EVIDENCE PROCEDURE, that a complaint of attempted rape after 11 years, without any evidence, is de facto true. The fact that in the Filippidi case the actress is a trusted friend of the complainant , who comes as a witness in court to testify about the attempted rape, at for some time she sends text messages with wishes “WHAT YOU WISH YOU WANT, I KISS YOU SWEETLY B.X” … to the “abuser” of her friend Petros Filippidis, it is not a major issue for investigating the credibility of the testimony!!! In other words, B.X knew from 2010 that Filippidis tried to rape her girlfriend and in 2018 she tells him that she “kisses him sweetly”!!

Today the accused is Petros Filippidis, tomorrow the accused may be the son and brother of a woman. How would this mother, sister feel, if the court were limited to questioning the complainant, if the accused tried to rape her, if she informed him of her non-consent, and after the expected affirmative answer of the complainant, proceeded to sentence, without further substantive investigation of the case’s thorny background? Surely the woman mother, sister would have the feeling of injustice, the lack of investigation of the charge.

This is how some envision justice in our country. The complaint is evidentiary, the Judge, the Prosecutor, the Advocate, who will think to question the quality of the complaint, are on fire. But we will fight in the courts for the essential tracing of the truth, without presumptions of guilt and credibility.
We have the honor to turn to you, TO ENSURE the Rule of Law, the Fair Trial, which secures the procedural and substantive rights of the victim and the accused, and FIRST, to ENSURE the INDEPENDENCE of Judges and Prosecutors in the exercise of their judicial duties” .