“Consequently, with regard to the specific and confessed incident, the competent criminal justice bodies must act immediately,” emphasizes Mr. Venizelos.
“We are watching a whole model of centralized exercise of power reaching its limits with a lot of noise,” says Mr Evangelos Venizelos on the issue of monitoring telephone conversations of Nikos Androulakis after the message of Prime Minister Kyriakos Mitsotakis.
“The mixture of omnipotence and acrimony became uncontrollable. The model must therefore be changed immediately” emphasizes Mr. Venizelos.
“No one has the right to sink the country in sad aspects of the past, farthest and nearest. There are no comparisons in the issues of democracy and the rule of law, there is an absolute claim and an absolute obligation to respect. I was waiting for the Prime Minister to address this fundamental issue, but unfortunately he did not do so today,” says the former minister and president of PASOK.
At the same time, Evangelos Venizelos takes a stand against the ministers special and exclusive dutiessuch as the “EYP prosecutor”.
As he emphasizes, “there is not even basic legality when the privacy of MEP communications, which has the legal protection of the MEP at the national level, is violated, citing reasons of national security. (…) The Prime Minister’s position that the surveillance was formally legal but politically incorrect is an error of great proportions. Can political figures, parliamentarians and party leaders be monitored for reasons of “national security” if the respective prime minister weighs it and an appeals prosecutor approves it? Of course not. I am waiting for the Prime Minister to come back with a relevant clarification”.
“Consequently as to the specific and admitted event they owe for the competent bodies to act immediately of criminal justice who do not have to wait for any parliamentary procedure regarding the criminal liability of persons who do not fall under article 86 Comp. Obviously, the parliamentary control must be started immediately and effectively carried out, with the first step being the formation of a committee of inquiry or the transformation of the Institutions and Transparency Committee into a committee of inquiry”.
Venizelos’ post in detail
“Evangelos Venizelos, after the relative official position of the Prime Minister and based on the data that has become public knowledge so far, made the following statement on the issue of monitoring telephone conversations with the confirmed target of the President of PASOK / KINAL Mr. N. Androulakis :
We are watching an entire model of centralized exercise of power noisily reaching its limits. The mixture of feeling of omnipotence and acrimony turned out to be uncontrollable. The model must therefore be changed immediately. This is imperative for the present and any future Government. No one has the right to immerse the country in sad aspects of the past, distant and near. There are no comparisons in the issues of democracy and the rule of law, there is an absolute claim and an absolute obligation to respect. I expected the Prime Minister to address this fundamental issue, but unfortunately he did not today.
Next to the enormous chain responsibilities of political bodies that we will see arriving, there are equally enormous responsibilities of the judiciary in the form of prosecutorial officers with special and exclusive duties, such as the “EYP prosecutor”. It was preceded by the extremely challenging experience of the “corruption prosecutor”. The abolition of these special / privileged prosecutorial positions, which in any case harm the principle of the legal judge, is imperative.
The interception of telephone communications in violation of article 19 par. 1 of the Code, either by conventional or advanced technical methods or by the diabolical coincidence of both, is primarily a criminal act. There is not even elementary legality when the privacy of MEP communications, which has the legal protection of the MEP at the national level, is violated, citing reasons of national security. The parliamentary secrecy of article 61 par. 3 as a more special provision sets, directly from the Constitution, additional specific limits on the bending of telecommunications secrecy provided for in article 19 par. 1. Articles 8 of the ECHR and 7 of the EU Convention strengthen and do not diminish the guarantees. An MP or MEP and especially a party leader cannot be monitored for reasons of “national security” endogenous or much more “imported”. Such excuses are as bad and harmful as the act itself. The Prime Minister’s position that the surveillance was formally legal but politically incorrect is a gross error. Can political figures, parliamentarians and party leaders be monitored for reasons of “national security” if the respective prime minister weighs it and an appeals prosecutor approves it? Of course not. I am waiting for the Prime Minister to come back with a relevant clarification.
Therefore, with regard to the specific and confessed event, the competent bodies of the criminal justice must act immediately, which do not have to wait for any parliamentary procedure regarding the criminal responsibility of persons who do not fall under article 86 Comp.
Obviously, the parliamentary control must be initiated and exercised effectively, with the first step being the formation of an inquiry committee or the transformation of the Institutions and Transparency Committee into an inquiry committee. Not only for this specific case but also for the whole issue of the operation of the EYP and related services, with an emphasis on the privacy of communications. Parliamentary control of these services is an internationally serious institutional guarantee. It is obvious that the provision of the Rules of Procedure of the Parliament for the role of the Committee on Institutions and Transparency in relation to the EYP does not work effectively and as a deterrent. Immediate completion of both the law and the Rules of Procedure of the Parliament is required. Countries need the best possible and most effective intelligence services, but not at the expense of the guarantees of democracy and the rule of law.
Political responsibility is ultimately determined by election. I believe and hope that what is asked of the citizens is a Government capable of responding to the great challenges of the moment, international political, economic and social challenges, the first of which is the quality and resilience of liberal democracy”.
Read the News today and get the latest news. Follow Skai.gr on Google News and be the first to know all the news.
