The prosecutor proposed the discharge of Nikos Pappa to the Special Court

By Ioanna Mandrou

Her exemption of the former minister Nikos Pappa on the case of his handling of the television license tender suggested before the Special Court the prosecutor Olga Smyrlis. He also suggested and the dismissal of businessman Christos Kalogritsawho is being tried as an accomplice of the former minister in the crime of breach of duty.

As argued by the prosecutor, deputy prosecutor of the Supreme Court both defendants must be acquitted, as the charge against him did not arise.

In particular, as the public prosecutor pointed out, no evidence has emerged in favor of the guilt of former minister Nikos Pappa for his manipulations in the case of television licenses, speaking of “pulverization of the indictment”.

The prosecutor of the Special Court, evaluating all the evidentiary data (witnesses, documents, etc.), argued that the tender process for television licenses was carried out in full transparency and compliance with legality, and there was no intervention by the minister in question for favorable treatment of the company of Ioannis Vladimiros Kalogritsa who participated in the competition and emerged as one of the four winners in total.

“From no side, the prosecutor emphasized, there is no evidence of any act on the part of Nikos Pappas to favor Ioannis Vladimiros Kalogritsas until the end of the competition, for example more installments for payment of price or anything else.

After the end of the competition, Ioannis Vladimiros Kalogritsas, (son of the businessman Christos Kalogritsa) was among the four as the top contender, while the competent committee checked again the conditions for participation in the competition without finding anything wrong”.

According to the prosecutor, did not occur by witnesses or other evidence any intervention of Nikos Pappa in the competitionwhile he emphasized that the fact that the company of Christos Kalogritsa’s son was ultimately unable to provide the money and finally get the television license, is proof that in her opinion “destroys the indictment”.

“Nikos Pappas should not have carried out the control of the conditions for participation in the competition himself,” the prosecutor emphasized. On the contrary, he had an obligation to stay away. If he did the check himself, it would be completely contrary to the transparency of the competition and would raise suspicions of bias.

Moreover, the fact that in the end the Kalogritsa company did not receive a license, as it was unable to pay the price, completely refutes the indictment.

This is where we have to stop the investigation into the breach of duty for Nikolaos Pappa”, emphasized the prosecutor Olga Smyrli.

With regard to the much-discussed electronic messages presented at the trial by Christos Kalogritsa, Mrs. Smyrli suggested that they should not be taken into account, as well as the testimony against Nikos Pappas by Christos Kalogritsa’s businessman, stressing among other things that “from during the hearing, no evidence emerged to confirm the claim of the co-accused businessman Christos Kalogritsa that he was acting behind the scenes to carry out the plan to create the television station”.

The prosecutor spoke of a civil dispute between Christos Kalogritsa and the Khouri group for the 3 million euros (they were given for the letter of guarantee for Kalogritsa’s son to take part in the competition) stressing that “nothing emerges about a relationship between Nikos Pappa – Kalogritsa” pointing out that “the Special Court dealt with the civil dispute badly, saying ” we don’t care whether it’s virtual or real.”

The public prosecutor argued that Chr. Kalogritsas is attempting, with the trial before the Special Court, to overturn the conviction against him by the Arbitration Court which vindicated the Khouris and obliged him to pay the 3 million euros.

Regarding the complaint filed by the secretary of Christos Kalogritsa, Ethalia Diamantis, in the Court, for black money to the SYRIZA party, the prosecutor described the witness as “unreliable” and her testimony “unsupported”. “It was late and for reasons of political sensationalism” said the prosecutor.

Statement of Nikos Pappas

For “political case” and “political prosecution” says the former Minister of State during the SYRIZA government Nikos Pappas in his statement before the hearing – proposal of Prosecutor Olga Smyrlis before the Special Court.

The former minister who is on trial for breach of duty with the businessman Christos Kalogritsa as a co-accused in the case of the television license competition, in his statement states, among other things.

“I consider it my duty to present before you my assessment. My position on this case is clear from the beginning. It is a political case and I deal with it politically.
If it was born, it is obvious that this case was and is an attempt by my political opponents to hurt me personally as well as the Party to which I belong. This position of mine has been emphatically confirmed.

I was even accused by my political opponents of bribery in a tender that I ensured brought the Greek State hundreds of millions of euros, when the previous governments did not receive any amount for a public good. And for the first time in Parliamentary History, my political persecutors were forced to withdraw the said dishonorable charge, which they themselves fabricated.”

For his part, the MP Andreas Loverdos, who is defending businessman Christos Kalogritsa as a lawyer in the trial, pointed out in his statement that although he was an executive of his party for a specific case, he refused to participate in any political process (pre-investigation committee of the Parliament partisan process) so that there is no conflict between the qualities of a politician and a businessman’s advocate.

Andreas Loverdos referring to the statement before the Special Court of Nikos Pappa called it “an apology trial” that aims to politicize the trial and marginalize the breach of duty”.

Prosecution proposal

Until the completion of the tender process there is no favorable treatment on behalf of the company of son Kalogritsa who participated in the competition and was included in the four top bidders who were granted permission after the competitive process.

From no side, there is no evidence of any act on the part of Nikos Pappas to favor Ioannis Vladimiros Kalogritsas until the end of the competition, for example more installments for payment of price or anything else.

After the end of the competition, Ioannis Vladimiros Kalogritsas was among the four as the top candidate, while the competent committee checked again the conditions for participation in the competition without finding anything wrong.

During the proceedings before the Special Court, it was submitted that the area offered in Ithaca by the Kalogritsa side for lending by credit institutions was worth 100 million euros and was not “pastures”.

Nikos Pappas should not have carried out the control of the conditions for participation in the competition himself. On the contrary, he had an obligation to stay away. If he did the check himself, it would be completely contrary to the transparency of the competition and would raise suspicions of bias.

Moreover, the fact that the Kalogritsa company was ultimately denied a license as it was unable to pay the price completely refutes the indictment. This is where we must stop the investigation into the breach of duty for Nikolaos Pappa.

However, we must evaluate certain other aspects of the case, if they affected the tender process and for Nikos Pappa’s participation in actions to favor the Kalogritsa company.
Here we have a civil dispute between Christos Kalogritsa and the company CCC (of the Khouri group) that has reached the Arbitration Court.

The accused Christos Kalogritsas did not appear in court and was sentenced to pay 3 million euros to the Khouri group.

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