The Minister of Education, Religions and Sports Kyriakos Pierrakakis accused the opposition of using the Constitution as a fig leaf during the discussion of the unconstitutionality of the bill to strengthen the public university and the operating framework of the non-profit branches of foreign universities.

“Because we studied what the scientific committee of the Parliament wrote, I can say that this text solemnly refutes the bearers of the one and only truth about the unconstitutionality of the text. I think this is clear what it says? It says exactly what we said to the Committees. That there are two Schools of Thought, that we adopt that School of Thought and that at the end of the day this will be decided. We did not see anything written about vertical unconstitutionality, because at the end of the day it is absolutely insulting to the third branch of power, the Judiciary, to think that everything is decided by the opposition and not by the judiciary” emphasized Mr. Pierrakakis, referring to the opinion of the scientific committee of the Parliament.

The Minister of Education stated, addressing Mr. Doudonis, that “we, therefore, here choose to trust the opinions of leading Professors of Constitutional and Administrative Law – their names have been mentioned – having drawn from a great deal of the evidence contained in these opinions. Mr. Doudonis, it was a pleasure to hear you disagree with Mr. Venizelos, with Mr. Alivizatos, a pleasure, I’m sure they were listening to you too. Just here to say that when Mr. Androulakis said on 20.12 “we will not stand in the way of the establishment of non-state – non-profit Universities as long as the bill is not at the expense of the Public”, he was also aware of the constitutional opinions on which the bill is based. So you here are using the Constitution as a “fig leaf”, that’s what you’re doing. But it was perfectly understandable that your position today was a continuation of the arguments you had yesterday».

Mr. Pierrakakis emphasized “so, I think that over here, it would be good, because this is our common future, to be able to co-shape it beyond slogans because, when I referred to totems and taboos, I was not referring to a constitutional text as the editor of some in here wanted to underline. I was referring to the narrow and suffocating belief of the one and only truth that Greece must be the only country in the world which has a ban on non-state universities. Only us, and if I’m not mistaken, we are Cuba. I think that at this moment in compatibility with the constitutional text as said by certain minority opinions in the CoE in 1998 and as said by all those fundamental changes that have taken place since 1974 and since then, together with the opinion of leading professors that I mentioned before, they make us believe and consider that it is founded, that this step is absolutely solid. And I close with the following, if I may share with you two thoughts which are not of a legal nature».

The entire speech of Mr. Pierrakakis is as follows:

“Ladies and gentlemen colleagues,

I begin with the self-evident admission of my status. I am not a lawyer, I am not a Professor of Constitutional Law, I am not a Professor of Administrative Law. And, in that sense, I will ask for your indulgence in the legal arguments which, as a central signatory of this bill, I am going to articulate. With all due respect to both those who agree with the proposal we are submitting and those who disagree today.

I must, of course, begin with some self-evident answers to things that have been heard before, before getting into the core of our central arguments.

The first concerned what the President of the SYRIZA Parliamentary Group said before. I have raised a question from the Committees which has not been answered. In 2018, Mr. Gavroglou introduced a provision in Law 4521 of 2018 that recognized all degrees from international organizations located in Greece as completely legal. This provision was removed after a debate in the SYRIZA Parliamentary Group (Mr. Filis disagreed with it), but in any case it was submitted by my predecessor Minister of Education – it was submitted – do you renounce it? And how was it filed and based on which legal order if not cross-border, which concerns the right of establishment and not that of establishment as we say?

Because our claim is, ladies and gentlemen, that what we are doing is completely compatible with the constitutional text. Because as I mentioned before, it seems that this is exactly what the Minister of Education of SYRIZA believed when he submitted this specific provision. And, in fact, in a way that we would not file it because we also want the control mechanism of the domestic Independent Authorities to exist and when we file it again, with much stricter conditions than you did in ’18, we will call you to upvote it.

I continue by saying that because we studied what the scientific committee of the Parliament wrote, I can say that this text solemnly refutes the bearers of the one and only truth about the unconstitutionality of the text. I think this is clear what it says? It says exactly what we said to the Committees. That there are two Schools of Thought, that we adopt that School of Thought and that at the end of the day this will be decided. We did not see anything written about vertical unconstitutionality, because at the end of the day it is absolutely insulting to the third branch of power, the Judiciary, to think that everything is decided by the opposition and not by the judiciary.

We, therefore, here choose to trust the opinions of leading Professors of Constitutional and Administrative Law – their names have been mentioned – having drawn from a great deal of the evidence contained in these opinions. Mr. Doudonis, it was a pleasure to hear you disagree with Mr. Venizelos, with Mr. Alivizatos, a pleasure, I’m sure they were listening to you too. Just here to say that when Mr. Androulakis said on 20.12 “we will not stand in the way of the establishment of non-state – non-profit Universities as long as the bill is not at the expense of the Public”, he was also aware of the constitutional opinions on which the bill is based. So you here are using the Constitution as a “fig leaf”, that’s what you’re doing. But it was perfectly understandable that your position today was a continuation of the arguments you had yesterday.

I continue by saying that for us this particular approach includes and must recognize a series of fundamental changes which have taken place since 1975. Because in 1975 the constitutional legislator used Public Law Legal Entities as the dominant mechanism for exercising state supervision. But many things have changed since then. Cross-border relations have changed, our participation in the European Union has changed, the creation of the Independent Authorities has changed, especially the specific Independent Authority, ETHAAE, which certifies and controls Greek Public Universities and will also control the specific branches of foreign Public Universities and non-governmental.

And let me say that all of this is also done in connection with these fundamental changes and with our own internal jurisprudence, because the Council of State – Mr. Pleuris mentioned it before – for paragraph 4 of article 16 has decided that “the free” it was not about graduate programs based on the prism of the constitutional lawmaker, hence we have tuition fees in graduate programs. Let me say here for the devotees of free education in the Opposition that postgraduate programs with fees increased during your days Mr. Famelle, when SYRIZA was in power of course, postgraduate fees increased when you were in government, that’s what the numbers say, just as they also say that funding was reduced of public universities as well. I don’t say so, the numbers filed in the Minutes say so.

And I would add, in addition to this jurisprudence, which already exists, that what we are trying to achieve here, through these special type of Legal Entities, the dual entities as mentioned before, because they are dual in nature, include executive administrative acts, as they have and NPDDs, are sui generis Legal Entities, yes. So we consider on the one hand what concerns the establishment of branches of foreign universities, on the other hand what concerns the part that has to do with the special legal form that exercises supervision and with the cares that exist, there is a specific article e.g. ., for the non-profit, the license is withdrawn if it is not respected. I will add here, that many observations we received from the scientific service of the Parliament and specific observations that were heard before, I keep many of what Mrs. Konstantopoulou said and many others that you will make in the coming days, as happened in the Committee , even from those who disagree in a spirit of good will, we will incorporate them into this bill. Because, and I am saying this primarily to PASOK, because you referred to the report of the Scientific Service, to a very important law.. listen, Mr. Doudonis.. to Mrs. Diamantopoulou’s law, very important for its time, very important because it was also supported by PASOK and from the ND then. I submit the then report of the Scientific Service of the Parliament in the Minutes, which had too many reservations about too many articles and with much more intensity than is being formulated in this bill and in the process and some were cured during the debate with legal technicalities, and the Council of State itself, deemed the law constitutional.

So, I think that over here, it would be good, because this is our common future, to be able to co-shape it beyond slogans because, when I referred to totems and taboos, I was not referring to a constitutional text as the editor of some in here wanted to underline. I was referring to the narrow and suffocating belief of the one and only truth that Greece must be the only country in the world which has a ban on non-state universities. Only us, and if I’m not mistaken, we are Cuba. I think that at this moment in compatibility with the constitutional text as said by certain minority opinions in the CoE in 1998 and as said by all those fundamental changes that have been carried out since 1974 and since then, together with the opinion of leading professors that I mentioned before, they make us believe and consider that it is founded, that this step is absolutely solid.

And I close with the following, if I may share with you two thoughts which are not of a legal nature.

The first is something that I had the opportunity to report to the committees. At the leading law university in Heidelberg outside its library, there is an inscription in ancient Greek “The letter acquires, the Spirit quickens.” And this inscription is there, because I found it very interesting when I saw it, not only for students of theology, it is also there for students of law, precisely so that we can see things in the evolution and in the spirit of times. And as a non-lawyer, let me say again, and this is the last point, that when I was trying to study the opinions and understand what exactly are the parameters on which we judge that we should act, the story from the naval battle of Salamis and the oracle of the Oracle of Delphi which said that “the wooden walls will save the city” and the conservatives of the time wanted to interpret it literally, but Themistocles and those who won the battle interpreted the walls as ships and went out winners.

The fate of this country and the fate of its people, ladies and gentlemen, for us and for me is not the fear that some of you in this room bear as its censors.

It is to embrace the future and open to it without fear, with vigor, hope and boldness for tomorrow. This is what the Greek citizens want, this is what we will serve».