A fierce round of political and legal reactions was caused by the submission of former OPEKEPE President Gregory Varra to the House Inquiry Committee investigating the timeless pathogens of the Agricultural Aid Payment Mechanism. The witness reiterated the allegations against former Minister of Rural Development Maki Voridis by attempting to link his dismissal from the organization with checks he had ordered to “suspected” VAT. Mr Varras, without submitting tangible written evidence, charged a breach of duty to the former minister and estimated that his dismissal mandate was given by the organization’s technical adviser (NEUROPUBLIC company) and was executed by Mr. Voridis. At the same time, however, questions was raised by the witness’s choice to attribute to his possible inexperience the payment made on his days at 197 VAT which were controlled as “suspicious”.
However, Varra claims caused the strong reaction of Mr Voridis, who characterizes the complaints “theoretical construction without background”.
At the same time the administration of Neuropublic SA It characterizes the Varra reports “absolutely false and slanderous” and announces an appeal to justice.
Voridis: If he wanted to be honest, he would say why I asked for his resignation
The former minister, in his post shortly after the conclusion of the Varra Marathon, noted: “From the testimony of Mr Varra, we heard today that it was at the request of Neuropublic, Mr. Dimitris Mela and Piraeus Bank. Another theoretical construction, without real background. in order not to “disclose illegalities”.
I wonder: What illegalities? The technical solution he himself applied? The checks for which he testified that he had not informed me? Or the announcement of the technical adviser conducted on Theophanes Pappas, was offended by Neuropublic and was eventually found to be legal by justice? Are these, the “revelations” to which it is mentioned? “
Regarding the “illegal acts” attributed to him by the witness, Mr. Voridis notes: “As for my supposed” illegalities “, I repeat for many times: How can the implementation of a ministerial decision be considered illegal?
Mr Varra himself confessed that he applied the same technical solution to the temporary payment of 2020. My application is considered illegal, while his own legal? This is obviously a reasonable contradiction.
He also argues that it is a breach of duty that I have submitted observations on the notice of the technical adviser. If the supervisory minister, in the context of his responsibilities, makes legal observations and exerts supervision, is this – according to Mr Varas – a breach of duty? If you do not supervise and become wrong, you are guilty; if you supervise, guilty again. That logic just doesn’t stand.
Finally, a new argument, as the previous ones are obviously not enough: the 466 million euros that were supposedly “lost”. What about these amounts?
There were two rulings by the European Court of Justice, which have fined fines against Greece. Mr Varra argued that these amounts could be “converted” into acres of pasture. In exactly what way? How are court rulings converted to land fines? A question in which – from what seems – only he has an answer.
The reality is simple: out of € 466 million, money was offset with other debts and remained 170 million euros. This money was not lost. They were deposited – not in my days, but later – to the state account, for the benefit of Greek taxpayers.
That was not the reason I asked Mr War’s resignation. However, the reporting of both non -existent and technically inappropriate allegations could alone justify it.
The rest, and in full analysis, will be presented to the Inquiry Committee. ”
It should be noted that Mr Varras, submitting to the House Committee, defended the actions and decisions he made as president of the Organization from 2019 – 2020 while arguing that the reasons for the conflict that led to his dismissal from OPEKEPE were the content of the international competition. Elsewhere in his testimony, he agreed with the comment of Mrs Milena Apostolakis (PASOK) that “Mr. Voridis wanted the lawlessness to continue and” abolished you “.
Neuropublic: absolutely non -existent and slanderous
False, non -existent and slanderous is announced by Neuropublic SA what has been submitted to the OPEKEP Committee for OPEKEPE by former President Gregory Varra. The former head of OPEKEPE claimed during their testimony that “I was dismissed by Neuropublic and GAIA, with Borides performed”.
Neuropublic SA said in a statement that “it reserves the exercise of all its legal rights to restore the truth and damage caused by these slanderous reports”.
The entire announcement is as follows:
“Neuropublic SA categorically states that the recent reports and allegations of Professor Gregory Varra for our company, as stated in the” OPECEPE Note ” -which was sent on 15/6/2025 to the Deputy Minister of State and Prime Minister Mr. House on 6/10/2025- as well as its affidavit before the Commission on 7/10/2025 are completely false non-existent and slanderous.
These allegations offend the reputation, reliability and integrity of Neuropublic, which has been active for years with transparency and respect for customers and partners. The Company will refute in full and detail all Mr Varra’s untrue allegations during the examination of the company’s legal representative to the Inquiry Committee.
Furthermore, it reserves the exercise of all its legal rights to restore the truth and damage caused by these slanderous references. “
Tension with Varra request not to accept questions
It should be noted that Mr Varras, completing his introductory position before the members of the examination, asked to leave without asking questions as he said the answers were in the memoir of nearly 700 pages he submitted.
The request has sparked a strong reaction to all members of the examination who spoke of unacceptable behavior that refers to an attempt to conceal.
Indeed, Commission Chairman Andreas Nikolakopoulos warned the witness with the penalties provided by the Criminal Code in cases of refusal to interrupt the meeting in order for Mr Varra to make his final decisions. Eventually the witness was forced to fold.
He, however, responded to questions from ND MP Makarios Lazaridis, admitted that Borides’ complaints are based on his own theories confirmed by the facts.
M. Lazaridis: In the deposits you said that your resignation was requested by considering some reasons.
Gr. Today it turns out that I well considered what I thought.
The witness, however, hastened to clarify that the former minister did not intervene in his audit work and did not call for the release of suspected VAT. He added, however, that the then Secretary General of the Ministry George Stratakos invited him to request a clarification of a search carried out by the Services at the VAT ID of Mr. George Xylouris (Fraps).
Mr Varra’s most sharp answers were given during his examination by Mrs Milena Apostolaki (PASOK):
M. Apostolaki: What was this reason? In your memorandum you tell you that Voridis threw you because you did your job well and were unintentional. So Mr. Voridis wanted these lawlessness to continue and did you dismiss you, right?
Gr. Varra: Agree
M. Apostolakis: What did they gain from the situation and what did you miss out on your legality?
Gr.
M. Apostolaki: And what would he win with it?
Gr.
M. Apostolakis: Mr. Voridis’s “Agree” in the decision is “Agree” to illegal action?
Gr. Varra: Right.
M. Apostolaki: So I keep the decision was non -lawful
Gr. I say this because previous ministers of other governments did so
M. Apostolakis: You say in your note that some KYD had privileged access to the data and this was provided by OPEKEPE or technical advisor.
Gr.
M. Apostolakis: You said this to Borides and other members of the organization
Gr. Varra: I really don’t remember that.
Mr. Varras, elsewhere in his testimony, argued that “I was dismissed by Neuropublic and GAIA, with Borides’ performed”.
Question marks on ” suspected VAT ‘payments
However, answering questions from SYRIZA MP Vassilis Kokkalis said initially that he did not remember if he finally made a 19d VAT PA and suspected. “I might do it. I don’t remember,” he said, adding “I was a new president then and I had no picture of the procedures.” He noted, however, that recent controls have led to the confiscation of property owners of these VAT. “But you paid them despite the indications. But I accept as an excuse what you said you had no experience,” Mr Kokkalis replied