[ad_1]
The Union of Judges and English speaks of a “phenomenon without precedent in the long history of the Union, with the exception of the period of the dictatorship”, accusing the 9 members of the Board that, under the pretext of crowning, not set a date for elections in the Union.
“The 9 members of the Board of Directors do not want the elections to be held in any way so that their colleagues do not judge them,” said union members, interpreting the board’s refusal, although it was proposed to hold elections with all the media. caution. “In other words, they point to the coup d’etat of the administration of the largest judicial union,” they complain, among other things.
In detail, what the Association of Judges and Prosecutors complains about:
“This is the third time that the Office of the Union of Judges and Prosecutors presents the issue of setting a date for appointments. We remind you that according to the Statutes, appointments are made every two of May or June. In both elections Earlier, on February 6 and 27 (before the pandemic), most of the 9 members refused under the pretext of the prolonged electoral period. Today they refused under the pretext of the crown. As to whether the pandemic worked in This case as a pretext or if your concern is well founded, we put the following to the judgment of our colleagues: The main and main concern of the Presidency was to guarantee the health of the colleagues who will be called to vote. For this reason, we directed in time ( on 4-5-2020) a request to EODY presenting a voting plan and requesting their position and comments In this plan, we proposed, among other things, that the electoral process in Athens and Thessaloniki be carried out in distrit Separate constituencies according to each voter’s last name, so as not to create dangerous overcrowding even after all necessary measures have been taken. In fact, the E.O.D.Y. We responded on 11-5-2020 to our request by supplementing our plan with comments on the appropriate voting process. With the procedures proposed by E.O.D.Y. We will fully comply as stated to the Board. As the Presidency, we have proposed that elections be held on the last two Sundays of June, during which time all court hearings will normally take place, plenary court sessions for the holiday sections will have already taken place and the social life will return to normal. Alternatively, we proposed the first two Sundays in July. The 9 members of the Board (Lymperopoulos, Salatas, Steniotis, Nastas, Voulgaridis, Vergonis, Foukas, Kombolitis, Konsta) again refused to comply with the legal requirements and set a selection date even in accordance with the instructions of E. D.Y. The subjective criterion that challenged the position of the competent scientific body is a capital question without a logical answer. In fact, they had the audacity to immediately demand the handing over of the “keys” to the Union.
The true cause, the motivations and the goals are the essence of the problem. The first observation, therefore, is that the 9 members of the Board of Directors do not want the elections to be held in any way so that their colleagues do not judge them. The different excuses that are always made up are the easy part of your job. To achieve their goals, as discussed below, they have no doubts. The disregard for the fundamental democratic principle of free elections in a collective body, the brutal and manifest abuse of the Constitution, are unprecedented in the long history of the Union, with the exception of the dictatorship. Their shameful and premeditated decision is repulsive for another reason. Judicial unions are not just unions. They have constitutional registration and recognition (article 89 par. 5 of the Constitution). The respectful observance of all the rules of democracy in the organisms whose operation is provided by the fundamental State Law must be done with particular meticulousness and is guaranteed by the judicial body itself. Deviations and exceptions to democratic rules under any pretext of convenience should not be accepted by any democratic citizen.
They publicly and unequivocally confessed that their goal is to approve May 31 without announcing elections so far and then appeal to the courts for the appointment of an interim administration, hoping to overthrow the legally elected and widely accepted Presidency and form a different which will consist of the same. In other words, they point to the occupation of the coup by the administration of the largest judicial union. Their names will be written in black ink in the History of the Union of Judges and Prosecutors. Their plans are so predictable that during today’s discussion, the Board declined to commit to an election date for July or September, but reluctantly reiterated that they would reconsider the issue in October! The “interim administration” could easily become a “permanent” one by invoking a new wave of pandemics in the fall and the absence of proper conditions for holding elections. What contempt for the will of the Judiciary, such unprecedented immorality!
What is the position of the Ministry of Justice on this issue? Our Union, together with the BoD of the Court of Accounts of the Court of Accounts and the NSC Members Association, whose terms expired or expired immediately, has twice submitted an application to the Ministry of Justice (April 9 and May 4) to extend his mandate. Boards of directors until the decision to make appointments is made. The Ministry, which extended with several PNP and Laws the term of unions and employers’ organizations, sports clubs and associations, agricultural cooperatives, purchasing and pharmaceutical cooperatives, etc., sent today (what a coincidence!) A document to the Union with the that refuses extends the terms of the BoD until the day of the elections. In other words, it paves the way for the plans of the 9 members of the Board of Directors in order to overthrow the legal administration of our Union.
The Presidency of the Union has worked and is working with the sole objective of guaranteeing judicial independence in practice, criticizing legislation that is in direct conflict with constitutional requirements and guaranteeing the labor and economic rights of colleagues. In this sense, we have often had to face the executive branch, whatever it is. We observe, for example, our positions on private mediation, on the falsification of the right to strike, on the bill that imposes suffocating restrictions on the right of assembly, on political interventions and suggestions to judges and prosecutors in the exercise of their functions, for redistribution of positions in the Court of Appeals of the Country and the corresponding planning in the Appeals Trials, for the reduction of the judicial vacations and the negative consequences that it will bring. The criticisms we make are often upsetting to ministers of justice. However, we consider it necessary and it corresponds to our role.
Some obviously have other priorities and have emphatically demonstrated this in many cases. To be loved, useful, convenient. In the negative plans for Justice that are on the table and will be developed gradually, it is convenient for the Government to have a consensual Union ready to “understand the needs of the times”. An association that will initially consider reducing judicial vacations as a “conspiracy scenario” and will soon justify it as a temporary measure. A Union that will not “see” any political interference in the Ministers’ suggestions to the Prosecutors to give a different characterization to the criminal proceedings. A Union that applauds the government’s decision to redistribute the organic positions in the Court of Appeals at the same time as its General Assembly, the supreme collective body, would reject said legislative measure at a rate of around 80%. The way in which the Union is managed (with or without elections if they do not benefit) is quite indifferent, provided that the result and the appropriate correlations come to light.
Colleagues, in the perspective that emerges for a manipulated Union and totally subordinated to the will of the state power, to the plans for the abolition of the Republic and the elections, to the scenarios of overthrowing the chosen administration, you are the only mound. This is the first time since the coup that the Republic has been directly threatened by judicial unionism. The opponent is not invisible. It nests within the Judiciary and grows with indifference and the choice of “equal distances”. Find friends and allies. We are now announcing this unprecedented challenge to all political parties in the country. In all independent media. The voice of judges and prosecutors must be heard aloud in society: no more tolerance for such corrupting phenomena. Independent judicial associations. Full respect for democratic principles and constitutional requirements. The immediate announcement of elections is a damning request. “
