The need for the upcoming Constitutional Revision to strengthen the role of Parliament and of members of Parliament in the functioning of the political system was highlighted by Notis Mitarakis, Member of Parliament for Chios from the New Democracy party, Notis Mitarakis, during his remarks before the Committee on Constitutional Revision Committee.
Mr. Mitarakis emphasized that “the Constitution must be more strategic, more concise, and provide guidance for the smooth functioning of the democratic system,” noting that the primary goal of the revision must be “further strengthening the role of the legislative branch.”
Referring to the functioning of Parliament, he noted that the House of Representatives must have a more substantial say in the legislative process, emphasizing that “amendments and bills must be put to a vote regardless of whether the minister accepts them or not,” since “it is ultimately the prerogative of the Parliament to legislate, not the executive branch.”
Mr. Mitarakis also proposed strengthening the rights of members of Parliament, so that they may submit bills that must be referred to the relevant committees, while calling for a review of the constitutional eligibility requirements and restrictions currently in place for elected officials of local government and other public figures.
He made special mention of the institutional and social role of the member of parliament, emphasizing that “the member of parliament is the citizen’s foremost advocate” and that they must remain constantly attuned to society and its problems.
At the same time, he expressed reservations regarding the establishment of alternate members of parliament, in the event that elected members assume government duties, noting that citizens must be represented by the person they themselves chose in the elections.
Finally, Mr. Mitarakis spoke in favor of selecting members of the government exclusively from the National Assembly, noting that in a parliamentary system, ministers must be drawn from among elected members of parliament.
“Greece’s system of government is a Presidential Parliamentary Democracy, and consequently, Parliament must play a more dominant role in how democracy is practiced in our country,” he concluded.
Below is Mr. Mitarakis’s speech in its entirety:
Thank you very much, Mr. President, ladies and gentlemen.
The Constitution must be more strategic, more concise, and provide guidelines for the proper functioning of the democratic system, of the Presidential Parliamentary Republic, achieving a balance—an optimal balance—among the branches of government. Executive, legislative, and judicial. The aim of the constitutional revision must be to further enhance the role of the legislative branch. On the one hand, this concerns the role of each member of Parliament in carrying out their parliamentary duties and engaging in political activity in general. And the parliamentary caucus must be the cornerstone of the democratic functioning of political parties. On the other hand, the role of the Parliament as a whole. But of course, after 14 years in the National Assembly, allow me to note that wherever the Constitution required consensus, the House, unfortunately, fell short of the occasion.
Recalling the failed election of the President of the Republic in 2014, the inability of the Conference of Presidents to select, with the necessary supermajority, the heads of the Independent Authorities; and here today, in our debate on the Constitutional Revision,the opposition parties’ outright refusal to vote for any proposal, regardless of whether they agree with it, and we have also heard the extreme stance from the official opposition, that if they make proposals and we support them, they will not vote for them.
Of course, Mr. President, a political conclusion is evident here: the opposition parties take for granted that New Democracy will win a decisive victory in the 2027 elections. I think this is a conclusion we can all reach.
As for the issues concerning the Constitutional Revision and the role of the member of parliament, allow me to highlight four points. First of all, the concerns raised by my colleagues who spoke earlier regarding the eligibility requirements for parliamentary candidates are valid. The way these requirements are currently outlined in the Constitution creates many paradoxes. For example, it imposes an eligibility restriction on a ministry’s Secretary General, but not on his political superior—who may well be a non-MP, such as the deputy minister or the minister. And there is this general prohibition on regional governors, which prevents them from returning to the political system at the central level, even if they resign, and I think we need to discuss this. When it comes to conflicts of interest, it gets even more complicated. Because, yes, there must be rules—clear rules regarding transparency and ethics for elected members of parliament—to prevent conflicts of interest. But these absolute rules enshrined in the Constitution—which permit actions that could potentially create conflicts of interest and prohibit others, such as the example cited by Mr. Oikonomou— where a businessperson who is also a member of Parliament can join a program—which is automatically selected based on objective criteria through a platform designed to support a business—in which they may also be a minor family shareholder. These are issues we need to address.
The most important issue we must address is the right of members of parliament to actively participate in the legislative process. The right of members of Parliament to submit bills that must be referred to the Committee. And if they do not secure a majority at the first session, the process is obviously halted there. The right of members of parliament to submit amendments—and I think we often confuse, Mr. Speaker, an amendment with an addition, or an amendment with a technical improvement to the wording. When we speak of an amendment, we are referring to a change in the wording of a draft bill or a bill that is under discussion in committee or in the plenary session. It is not a given that ministers have the right to have the provisions ultimately adopted as they submitted them or as they agree to amend them. Amendments and bills must be put to a vote regardless of whether the minister accepts them or not. Because it is ultimately the prerogative of Parliament to legislate, not that of the executive branch. We must secure both these provisions in the Parliament’s Rules of Procedure and the constitutional basis for them during the Constitutional Revision, which will be finalized in the next parliamentary term.
Third, it is important to clarify the role of the Member of Parliament and their political activities. I referred to this in my last speech in the Plenary. A member of Parliament is the citizen’s foremost advocate. It is the role of a member of Parliament to be close to society and to address society’s problems. Left-wing parties have always considered this their exclusive privilege. They claim to be out on the streets, close to the citizens. Wrong. All members of Parliament are out on the streets, close to the citizens, and each member carries out this political activity in their own way. And ultimately, that member of parliament is judged by the citizens. And this role of the member of parliament in the local community is something that must be reflected in the strategic guidelines set forth by the Constitution.
And this role of the member of Parliament, Mr. Speaker, ladies and gentlemen, in the local community makes it absolutely difficult, and perhaps even makes the idea of having alternate members of Parliament who would take a seat in the National Parliament when one of their elected colleagues is appointed by the Prime Minister to the position of minister, deputy minister, or undersecretary. There cannot be alternate members of parliament, because ultimately the citizen will be represented by someone other than the person they chose in the national elections. It must be the member of parliament who will represent Lesbos, such as Mr. Athanasiou. He was chosen by the citizens, and he must fulfill this role even if he is appointed to a government position—and many of us have been honored in the past with ministerial posts— that does not mean we stopped carrying out our duties as members of parliament—representing, in my case, Chios, or each of us in our respective constituencies.
Mr. President, ladies and gentlemen,
I’ll take this a step further; I’ve written an article on this very topic. I believe that in a parliamentary system, the members of the Cabinet—that is, the ministers and deputy ministers—must be selected exclusively by the members of the national legislature, by the elected members of Parliament. This does not mean that the current Chair of the parliamentary group that won the election—the Prime Minister—should not have the option to select additional individuals. That is why the national ballot exists; it allows each party, in advance, to give the public clear indications of the individuals it intends to appoint either to the Parliament, or in both Parliament and the Government; and from among these individuals, ministers can be selected—who will no longer be non-parliamentarians, but will be members of the National Assembly.
I repeat what I began with. Greece’s form of government is a Presidential Parliamentary Democracy, and consequently, the Parliament must play a more dominant role in the way our democratic system is exercised in our country.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
