Once again in the House the existence of two worlds has been recorded. One invests in stability and the flight forward at the institutional level and the other in scandalism and the constant attempt to criminalise the political life of the country.
If one had the time – given that there are eight parties in Parliament – to follow the debate, one would see how it unfolded and where it was attempted to lead, with Kyriakos Mitsotakis positioning himself as to the rule of law and the situation in the country, and all the leaders of opposition choosing a denunciatory discourse, a rhetoric reminiscent of other times, perhaps even other decades in terms of the political scene.
Nobody learned anything new. No one introduced anything that justifies all the scenery that was attempted to be set up in the context of trying to formulate an agenda that is far from the problems and reality, possibly to avoid the need to submit proposals and analyze programmatic positions and solutions.
The opposition leaders wasted their time on a repeat of what they argue about the rule of law, spying and illegal Predator software, OPEKEPE, choosing high tones, extreme expressions and personal attacks on the Prime Minister, the government, the MPs and the ND party as a whole.
Characterizations extremeby all the opposition leaders who appeared to attempt to throw out the most catchy line, the one that could be played on social media and media.
However, when Kyriakos Mitsotakis got to the heart of the matter, namely the debate that will be opened on the constitutional revision, the statements were reminiscent of the phrase “throwing the ball into the stands”. For, when you raise the issue of the rule of law, you must, if anything, enter into a debate that will also involve institutional interventions in the context of the challenges of the times with which the constitution must also keep pace.
The “elections now” and “give up so that we can come in” must be accompanied by programmatic positions. Most importantly, it should be accompanied by a basic clarification regarding “we will come”, i.e. who are the people who are asking to take over the governance of the country and how any partnerships will be formed if there is no independent government.
If the opposition is counting on a coalition coming in for… cleansing, they are probably out of touch with reality. At a time when crises succeed one another and the facts change almost overnight, the key criterion for citizens is stability and perspective.
In a country that has gone through a over a decade-long crisis and then found itself, like all others, confronted with everything imaginable on a global level, to choose scandalology as an oppositional weapon shows that one is far removed from society itself.
Nobody questions the value of the rule of law and institutions. We just all need to see exactly how all of this is reflected. The country appearing on the verge of disintegration and destruction is hard to be believed by the majority of citizens.
