Announcement in which he clarifies the institutional procedures followed to assign the interrogation of the Tempe’s crash to an appeal was issued by the Supreme Court’s spokesman, Panagiotis Lymberopoulos.

The Areopagite, in a statement on the playing public debate on the railway accident, states, inter alia, that “the leadership of justice must, in any case, make the necessary updates”.

More specifically, Mr. Lymberopoulos’s announcement is as follows:

“Justice speaks with its decisions and its judicial actions. But whenever institutional bodies, political or non -political, through statements, publications in the print and electronic press and with internet posts, either distort them and abuse them either, with potential, other than immediate risk, disorienting citizens, who do not know or do not know them, the leadership of justice must, in any case, make the Necessary updates for anyone who is certainly interested in understanding the truth about its institutional actions. That is why we quote the following:

The Code of Criminal Procedure in Article 28 provides:

• The Plenary of the Court of Appeal in a Council is convened at the request of the Prosecutor of Appeals (or if requested in writing by one third of its members {as set out today Article 15 par. Law 4938/2022 and by identical wording was provided for in article 14 par.2a of the same Code as applicable By Law 1756/1988).

• He has the right (the plenary) to order the Prosecutor of Appeals to initiate criminal prosecution for crimes of exceptional importance.

• If the criminal prosecution has already been brought by the Criminal Prosecutor, the plenary has the right to order the documents to be submitted to the Prosecutor of Appeals.

• In any case, at the plenary session, the Prosecutor of Appeals shall also be present.

• The plenary appoints one of the appeals with its deputy, who fulfill the duties of investigator in the case.

• The Prosecutor of Appeals has all the rights and duties of the Criminal Prosecutor.

• The Council of Appeals has the rights and duties of the Criminal Court.

It is absolutely clear, therefore, that, with a process of full transparency (suggestion- conference- a decision-publication- publication), the strongest body of an Court of Appeal, the plenary of the Court of Appeal, dominates the assignment of the Mrs Appeal to the Court of Appeal. Important crimes only if it deems it appropriate and if the request has been submitted by Acceptable manner, as above.

Greek Justice has, to date, has aptly and justified, utilizing this provision, judging that they had to be investigated by superior and law -abiding crimes, because it was of great importance (as happened in a number of corruption cases, Greek and international terrorism in the case. of “Golden Dawn”, “Siemens”, “Vatopedi”, etc.).

Consequently, those who argue that the application of Article 28 of the CCI in the Tempe case are the result of dark processes should consider whether this can happen simultane Still president Appeal of the Court of Appeal, unanimously decided (Larissa Court of Appeal 4/10-3-2023) to assign the case to an investigator, who, as a natural judge, had to carry out the judicial duties assigned to him. The latter, after all, has been assisted since six (6) Larissa Appeals of Appeals, who, acting, strictly, in the context of the Code of Criminal Procedure, support the needs of the investigative procedure.

Anyone who has to offer evidence that all Judicial Officers of the Court of Appeal of Larissa, who have decided to appoint an investigator in the Tempe case is in the case of out -of -court powers, must immediately submit them to the competent institutional authorities and support them with the burden. of. Otherwise, with the dissemination of conspiracy and conspiracy theories, by morally morally judged, it directly against democratic institutions.

In the Republic, no one, in any capacity, is entitled to “terrorize” judicial officials if their decisions or actions do not apply. We must also inform that the promotions, placements, transfers, postings of all judicial and prosecutors, from the rank of Paradrion to the Areopagite and the Supreme Court of Justice are decided, based on the criteria set by law, exclusively. and only, by the Supreme Judicial Council, eleventh and fifteen -member (for the rank of President Appeals of Appeals and the Areopagite-Prosecutor of the Supreme Court), consisting of purely purely judicial and prosecutors of the Supreme Court, who are appointed, after drawing at least two-year service in the Supreme Court and meets the Supreme Court and meet with the presence of the Observer other points (see Articles 90 Syntagma, 59-63 Code of Court of Justice and status of judicial officers).

Finally, it should be noted that, in accordance with the provisions of the Code of Court of Justice and the status of judicial officers, the Supreme Court leadership (President) is not entitled to intervene in the judges’ judicial judgment or indicate judicial actions.

These to inform those who are either ignorant or self -sufficiently support the opposite, putting against the independence of judicial officials.

Citizens of the country must feel the confidence that the personal and functional independence of the Greek judges and prosecutors are completely guaranteed by the Constitution itself and the laws and with guarantees that are not answered in many legal classes of developed countries. They themselves remain faithfully dedicated to their oath, subject to thorough institutional controls every day, whatever the case they handle, of extreme importance or not, and despite the extermination, the lodgies, the insults and the threats that suffer on the occasion of any unpleasant decisions that they receive. Citizens of this country would feel better if all the factors that regulate their daily lives, at every level and space, did accordingly. “