With clear answers and documented evidence from the floor of the Parliament, the Member of Parliament for the Kavala Prefecture of the New Democracy and former Deputy Minister of Rural Development and Food, Mr. Makarios Lazaridis, responded to the allegations leveled against him, clarifying that there wasno illegal act on his part and that the case concerns exclusively an administrative error by the agency.
Referring to his resignation from the government, Mr. Lazaridis emphasized that “it was a political act of responsibility, intended to prevent any shadow from being cast on the government’s functioning, and not an admission of guilt or acceptance of any unlawful action.”
Presenting a detailed account of the facts of the case, he emphasized that:
• There is no forged degree, false documentation, or deception of the administration.
• The Ministry’s administration itself, having his complete personnel file at its disposal, had classified him in the Secondary Education category prior to 2007. The error in question arose during the drafting of a subsequent hiring document by the competent department, which classified him as a “Specialist.”
• Pay stubs prove that he did not receive a single euro more than what he was entitled to based on his legal civil service classification.
All relevant documents and evidence were submitted to the Parliamentary record.
“There is no fake degree. There is no false supporting document. There was no deception of the administration. There was no financial gain. There is no illegal act attributable to me,” he emphasized.
Mr. Lazaridis noted that the facts of the case rule out any allegation of fraud or deception of management, as all information regarding his qualifications and employment status was known from the outset and documented in his personnel file.
“How could I have misled management regarding information that it itself knew and kept in my personnel file? How can there be any talk of deception when my actual qualifications were known and documented from the very beginning,” he asked.
At the same time, he described the allegations of financial gain as completely baseless, pointing out that his salary never exceeded the amount corresponding to his legal civil service rank.
Criticizing the opposition, he argued that an attempt was made to turn an administrative issue into a political scandal without any real evidence.
“They had no scandal and tried to fabricate one. They had no evidence and attempted to substitute it with shouting. They had no facts and tried to replace them with mudslinging. What is most alarming is that they did not hesitate to target not only me but also my family, believing that personal attacks can substitute for political argumentation,” he pointed out.
Mr. Lazaridis emphasized that in a democracy, political debate is legitimate, but the distortion of facts and the moral destruction of political opponents are not. As he noted, “ the truth is not shaped by shouting or by headlines. It is shaped by facts. And the facts, sooner or later, always restore the truth.”
Concluding his remarks, he stated:
“Today I addressed first and foremost the citizens of Kavala—the people who know me, who know my journey, who know my presence in our region. It is to them that I am accountable. It is to them that I must speak clearly. And to them I say: I will continue standing tall, with a clear conscience, and determined.”
The full text of Makarios Lazaridis’s speech to the plenary session:
Mr. President.
Mr. Minister.
Ladies and gentlemen.<
I am taking the floor today because I consider it my duty to speak out publicly on a matter that does not concern only me personally, but highlights a broader issue: how an administrative error can, after nearly two decades, be turned into a tool for political targeting and public discrediting.
My recent resignation from the position of Deputy Minister of Rural Development and Food was an act of political responsibility. It does not constitute an admission of guilt nor an acceptance of any unlawful act. In a state governed by the rule of law, guilt is neither presumed nor attributed in political terms; it is investigated by the competent authorities and adjudicated by the courts.
However, in my case, even before any ruling by a competent authority, assertions were made, verdicts were handed down, and attempts were made to morally and politically condemn me.
Let us, then, examine the facts—at the end, I will submit the relevant documents to the record.
In 2007, I was nominated by the late Marietta Giannakou for the position of her special advisor on youth issues. The relevant legislation did not require a college degree for this specific position. The administration already had my complete personnel file, as my collaboration with the Ministry had begun earlier, including all the supporting documents that had been submitted, among them my high school diploma and my degree from Southeastern College.
Based on this information, I had been correctly classified in the Secondary Education category. Nevertheless, when drafting the new hiring order, the administration classified me as a “Special Scientist,” a category that does not appear anywhere in the legal framework governing the organization of government offices, citing an unrelated provision.
The crucial question is simple: how could I have misled the administration regarding information that it already knew? How could there have been any deception when my qualifications were known and documented from the very beginning?
The facts lead to a clear conclusion: this is an administrative error on the part of the department that drafted the document, and not a result of any fraudulent act, misrepresentation, or false statement on my part.
The allegation of financial gain is equally unfounded. The payroll records prove that I did not receive a single euro more than I was entitled to. On the contrary, during the period in question, the compensation I received did not exceed that corresponding to my lawful civil service rank.
Therefore, let’s look at what is actually not present in this case:
There is no forged degree.
There is no false supporting document.
There is no deception of management.
There is no financial gain.
There is no illegal act attributable to me.
There is an administrative error, which for nearly twenty years no one had questioned and which is now being presented as a personal act of illegality.
In a democracy, political debate is legitimate. However, the distortion of facts and the moral character assassination of political opponents cannot replace public dialogue. The truth is not shaped by shouting and headlines. It is shaped by the facts. And the facts, sooner or later, always restore the truth.
What we witnessed during those days when I served as Deputy Minister of Rural Development was not an exercise in parliamentary oversight. It was not a search for the truth. It was not a defense of the rule of law.
It was an organized effort to politically exploit an administrative error, with the sole aim of creating a negative impression and politically destroying me.
The opposition was not interested in the actual facts, the documents, or the evidence. They reached a verdict first and then looked for charges.
And I repeat:
They spoke of a fake degree. There is no fake degree.
They spoke of deceiving the administration. There is no deception.
They spoke of illegal financial gain. There isn’t a single euro of illegal gain.
They spoke of a scandal. And they ended up exposing a mistake made by the administration itself.
So I wonder: will they apologize for the slanderous claims they spread? Will they retract the accusations they hurled so casually? Or will they continue to cling to lies because the truth does not serve their political interests?
Unfortunately, for some in the opposition, politics is not a clash of platforms and positions. It is the fabrication of guilt without evidence and the moral defamation of those they consider political opponents.
They chose to build a narrative based on speculation. But the facts are stubborn things. And today, the facts resoundingly disprove those who rushed to condemn me.
Because in a democracy, it is not enough to make accusations. You must also provide proof. And to this day, they have proven nothing.
Ladies and gentlemen.
What, in the end, has been proven by all this fuss stirred up by the opposition?
It was proven that there is no fake degree, no false documentation, and no illegal act on my part.
And yet, for weeks we heard bombastic accusations, moralizing, and feigned outrage from those who had already decided I was guilty before even examining the facts.
They weren’t looking for the truth.
They were looking for a culprit.
They weren’t interested in the facts.
They were interested in headlines.
They did not serve transparency.
They served their own political agendas.
The opposition built a case based on assumptions, insinuations, and half-truths. And when the evidence collapsed, their entire narrative collapsed with it.
Because the truth is simple and inconvenient:
They had no scandal and tried to fabricate one.
They had no evidence and attempted to substitute evidence with shouting.
They had no facts and tried to replace them with mudslinging.
And what is most alarming is that they did not hesitate to target not only me, but also my family, believing that personal attacks can substitute for political argumentation.
This is not responsible opposition.
It is political cynicism.
It is the logic of “slander, and something will stick.”
It is the logic of those who resort to character assassination because they are unable to engage in substantive debate.
And today, with the facts laid out for all to see, they must answer a simple question:
Will they have the political courage to admit their mistake, or will they continue to peddle lies even in the face of the facts themselves?
Because the truth does not change according to anyone’s political needs.
And the truth is that they attempted to turn an administrative error into a political arena of slander.
They failed.
Today, I addressed first and foremost the citizens of Kavala—the people who know me, who know my track record, who know my presence in our community. It is to them that I am accountable. To them, I owe it to speak clearly.
And to them I say: I will continue standing tall, with a clear conscience, and determined.
Thank you.
