After taking over her duties, the new President of the Supreme Court Anastasia Papadopoulou said in a statement that “this position that the state trusts me is self -evident that I will serve with the utmost awareness of the enormous responsibility of this office, with dedication and dedication.”

At the same time, the new President of the Supreme Court, among other things, says:

“Responsible for ensuring his independence is the judge himself and the judicial system in general. In the face of powers, the judge must be able to maintain the necessary distance and avoid unnecessary association.

Independence also lies with the issue that is always returning to the forefront, criticizing judicial decisions and commenting on judicial actions.

The actions of justice are undoubtedly the subject of public democratic dialogue. The issue arises when attempted or seems to be attempted (and here let’s remember the theory of the ECtHR), the unfair influence of the competent judicial bodies. Mostly when the commentary concerns a pending case. The risk concerns the legitimization of the system that shakes the bases of the rule of law.

Indeed, the phenomenon of out -of -court persons has been observed lately, in excess of the limits of a benevolent peculiar criticism, to criticize the judges of the judicial investigations of the substantive, and even out -of -court criteria, attempting to make it out of court. Unbelievable, judicial crisis, ignoring that in the Constitution the consciousness of the judicial judge itself must constitute the only factor in the formation of the judicial belief.

And vice versa, however, how does the judge react to criticism of his decisions? The judge is a carrier. Judicial ethics requires the judge humility and superiority. His reaction to critical or unjust, acute or not, as a matter of view, must only be ensured by the prestige of justice. The dispute and much more involvement in legal disputes rarely satisfy this purpose. “