It seems that the debate on the Greek political scene is flaunting around the hot issue of legislative interventions.
In his speech, Dimitris Mantzos, his parliamentary spokesman PASOK – Change Movementdenounces the practice of “night” amendments and “photographic” provisions, outlining a gloomy image of polynomy and mischief that undermines citizens’ confidence in justice and institutions.
But what is the depth of these complaints and what specific aspects of government policy are the target of criticism?
Following is D. Mantzou’s speech in the draft law of the Ministry of Justice:
Polynomial and legislation process
Since the years we had been studying at Law Schools we had been confronted with the phenomenon of polynomial. But instead of correcting the situation, it worsens.
Changes on changes but the problem remains. Delay in the administration of justice and distrust of citizens. In other words, many modifications, few outcomes, even less confidence of citizens in the institutions of the state.
A complete vicious cycle: Polynomy produces mischief, and the poor in turn “supplies” the polynomial, as it creates the need for new regulations.
We legislate more.
Legislative authorizations are now concerned with ministerial decisions and not in presidential decrees -apparently by the fear of judicial audit, which would prevent many cases of unconstitutionality and future new modifications.
How do we expect to deal with polynomial and malice?
By provisions such as Article 3 of the first ministerial amendment?
Which legitimizes the concealment of interests of politicians through third parties?
Which seriously weakens the transparency control mechanism of politicians?
Not offset by additional control mechanisms, by reinforcing a “wherever you” statement or supervisory tools?
An amendment that introduces a dangerous retreat in the field of transparency and prevention of complexity!
And, finally, we ask you:
What do you legislate for? For whom did you deposit your night amendment?
How do we protect the credibility of the political system?
When the applicable law under Article 86 p. It remains five years without amending to abolish the deadline -and left the room for misinterpretation in practice.
Justice policy
In yet another plan lacking a reform vision for justice.
And it is sufficient for communication formalities for the administration of justice.
PASOK in its latest government had formed a policy on justice on three axes: Basic Legislation – Electronic Justice – Alternative Dispute Resolution.
But what about each field?
When the amendments to the codes are made in such a frequency and such a superficial way – without legal committees – they eventually create a lack of legal security.
The government sees the basic criminal codes as a field of obsessive exercises. It legislates on the basis of the Police Bulletin of the previous -legislative estate after any negative event and a special penalty on the basis of the timeliness -and no emphasis on prevention, as is the case in Europe.
When projects that were still designed in 2011 with the Action Plan for Digitization are still pending. And that today we are talking about thousands of applications – even for certificates – pending at the Athens Court of First Instance.
Really, do we know that the judicial map of the ministry was designed and implemented in absentia of digital infrastructure? And for Eleftherios Venizelos, it is understood that he cannot predict technological progress. But you who are his reincarnation, have you not found IT projects pending since 2011? Didn’t you know them? Why did you ignore them?
So how will everything be ready on September 15, at the beginning of the following judicial year -as we hear persistently saying. Deputy Minister?
Are you in the relevant Committees and Working Groups Specialists in Computer Technologies? Or do you legislate again in vacuum?
Or is it normal and should it be welcomed that the Ministry of Justice, with so many needs at the technical and building level, only shows 35% absorption in the resources of the Recovery and Resilience Fund?
Appeal
For criminal procedure, we have already implied it and we say it straight: any hot legislation without analysis, without a study, without sufficient consultation is dangerous. For many times.
A prosecutor of Appeals is positioned to appeal against the investigator and prosecutor. We would like to think about this provision more, to study what the pros and cons, what it will actually contribute, and what difficulties it will create for judicial officials who will feel the pressure from above. If you insist on providing the possibility of an appeal by the Prosecutor of Appeals, it may be probable to provide the other possibility, that is, the possibility of appeal by the Prosecutor of Appeals when he or she is in favor of the accused the correctness of the issuance of a restrictive terms or provisional detention order.
Selection of High Courts and Public Prosecutor’s Office
The debate on how to choose the leadership of justice has actually opened – and rightly, by reviewing Article 90 (5) of the Constitution. The request for the participation of judges and prosecutors in their leadership selection has, after all, been repeatedly formulated in both Council of Europe and European Commission reports on the rule of law.
We are not understood why a system that was adopted a few months ago with Law 5123/2024 – on the EU’s recommendations – there is already changes in the conditions of electorality and the borders of votes.
Why are you in a hurry? And do you not respect the dialogue that must evolve with the participation of judges, the legal world and the parties of the House?
Maternity
Its hypocrisy, during the other “liberal” government Mitsotakis, has already been revealed by public placements by the speeding minister himself.
The government gathers the right and conservative audience.
Identifies two distinct issues. Equality in political marriage and medically assisted reproduction.
Why? Because the minister identifies the problems of abuse of the law with homosexual couples.
The next step is to follow the legislation of the far -right Melon? You also meet with your relative.
Really what do your center voters think today?
And closes your eyes actually. That problems have been there for years. And illegal circuits and abuses of the law -from heterosexual couples.
The government regulates something that is not happening anyway.
Even if decisions have been issued, they have not proceeded because they refuse the centers of medical assist.
It introduces an unconstitutional distinction between homosexual and heterosexual couples.
With its intervention, the government is confident in condemning our country by the ECtHR.
Because it intensifies the contradictions already in the legislative framework.
And he doesn’t even tell the truth about legislative history. That the arrangement that today abolishes – for the home of the surrogate mother – in 2014 was then promoted by Minister Voridis!
Such vertigo.
So we, without blinds, tell the truth.
That yes N. PASOK 3989/2002 is a reference point. Which came from a committee by the best scientists -even a representative of the Church. That had been consensually voted on by all parties.
This means “good legislation”.
It has absolutely nothing to do with what the government is doing today.
So we want to enhance the legislation with guarantees.
To see the trafficking. Identify it at a cross -border level in cooperation with international organizations, UN, EU, Council of Europe and more.
The house to be proven in a specific way -tax statements for three consecutive years, not just leasing.
Require a copy of a criminal record for both the surrogate mother and for social parents.
Same with a psychiatric examination certificate.
And to inform the surrogate mother from the Independent Authority on her rights and obligations.
But this dialogue must be honest and unobtrusive. Without discrimination.
As it should be any discussion of the righteousness honest. With scientific knowledge in the spotlight.