The majority rejected in Parliament the objection of unconstitutionality filed by the SYRIZA against Article 18 of his bill justice ministry. The arrangement, as improved by the Minister George Floridisunder conditions the possibility of being excluded from a part or all of the elements of a criminal case, as long as they may put a serious risk of life in third parties or are linked to national security issues.
The government argues that the provision is in line with Directive (EU) 2024/1226 and the decisions of the European Court of Human Rights, while the opposition speaks of a blatant violation of the Constitution and the ECHR.
The attitude of the government
Justice Minister George Floridis rejected opposition objections, arguing that “the right to access to evidence is not absolute” and that Article 18 is shielded by clear judicial guarantees. As he pointed out, only judges and prosecutors can decide access restriction, the defendant has the right to appeal to the Judicial Council, and no restriction is provided in the event of a detention.
Addressing SYRIZA and the other parties that supported the objection of unconstitutionality, he described their attitude “hypocritical” and accused the opposition that “he cares more about the rights of criminals than to protect witnesses and innocent citizens”.
ND’s attitude
MP Dimitris Keridis recalled that a similar arrangement had been established in 2014 under Samara – Venizelos co -operation, noting that today’s article includes more guarantees. He accused PASOK of “canceling himself” with his attitude.
Opposition criticism
SYRIZA
The rapporteur Theophilos Xanthopoulos spoke of “limiting the right of hearing” and a breach of Article 20 of the Constitution and Article 6 of the ECHR. As he said, “the defendant must be able to express his views and refute every accusation”, while accusing the government of presenting the EU directive in a distorted way.
PASOK-KINAL
Dimitris Mantzos accused the government of affecting the rule of law and stressed that “there is no confidence after the spy cases”. He described the term “national security” indefinitely and pointed out that the Directive does not impose, but leaves discretion in the Member States.
KKE
Nikos Karathanasopoulos spoke of “enhancing repression” and “violation of the presumption of innocence”, insisting that the provision is turning against the popular movement.
New left
Dimitris Tzanakopoulos noted that German law only provides restrictions on the protection of research and not for national security reasons. He emphasized that Article 18 does not arise as an obligation of the Directive.
Greek solution
Konstantinos Chitas described the objection as “pre -emptive” of the parliamentary majority of the ND, bringing the issue of the absence of a constitutional court.
Sauce
Zoe Konstantopoulou spoke of “Guantanamo Courts” and linked the provision with the case of Tempi and espionage, arguing that “access exclusion will facilitate crime”.
Win
Aspasia Kouroupakis warned that the provision “affects the prestige of justice” and “converts the protection of rights into a dark mechanism of power”.