“There was no fake degree, no false documentation, and no deception of the administration,” Makarios Lazaridis tells “Manifesto” Makaros Lazaridis.
The New Democracy MP for Kavala says that the goal of the opposition was to undermine the government and the prime minister, and he emphasizes that his resignation was a political act of responsibility and not an admission of guilt.
Nearly two months after the uproar over the controversy regarding your degree, your appointment, and your resignation from the government, you have returned to the floor of Parliament, armed with concrete evidence. What emerged?
Mr. Armenis, I was obligated—and had committed to doing so—to speak with evidence regarding a case that turned into “cannibalism” on the part of the opposition, in a completely unjust political and moral condemnation of me and “dirty blows below the belt,” all because of an administrative error.
During this time, I conducted the necessary research to defend myself, and I actually uncovered some extremely interesting findings, which I submitted to the Parliament.
According to my personnel file, I was listed as having been appointed as aspecialist scientist instead of a specialist associate, a serious error—as I proved—on the part of the Administrative Directorate of the then Ministry of National Education and Religious Affairs that drafted the decision regarding my appointment. It is now clear that this was not due to any dishonesty, malice, or deception on my part. There was no forged degree, no false documentation, and, of course, no deception of the administration.
Yes, but what about the difference in your salary? It’s one thing to be classified as having a Secondary Education (DE) degree and quite another to have a University Education (PE) degree.
And yet, in my case, this so-called financial benefit never existed. As can be seen from the pay stubs I submitted to the minutes, I did not receive any more money. On the contrary, as a DE, I was paid slightly more than as a PE for the nine months during which I was incorrectly paid under this system due to an administrative error.
The explanation is simple: As a DE, I received the so-called performance bonus and the additional allowance provided by Law 3016/2002, which I did not receive as a PE! Not a single euro more than what I was entitled to was deposited into my bank account.
So why did some opposition parties target you almost obsessively?
To undermine the government and the prime minister. Perhaps also because I, personally, was not one of those who, all this time, had left unanswered their baseless—and heavily laced with populism—narrative about a country that is supposedly collapsing.
In my case, even before any assessment by the competent authorities had taken place, assertions were made, verdicts were handed down, and attempts were made to morally and politically condemn me. What we witnessed during those days when I had assumed the role of Deputy Minister of Rural Development and Food was an organized effort to exploit an administrative error, with the sole aim of creating a certain impression and personally destroying me.
The opposition was not interested in the actual facts, the documents, or the evidence. It reached its verdict first and then sought the charges to support it. They went so far as to target even my family, believing that such attacks could substitute for political argumentation.
After the irrefutable evidence I brought to light, 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?
What I am asking for is the obvious: to be judged based on the actual facts and evidence, not on impressions. And those who rushed to slander me, to label me a “fraud” or a “crook,” will soon be called upon to prove their allegations before the Greek Justice, which I obviously trust and respect.
After all this, do you believe you resigned unfairly from your position as Deputy Minister of Rural Development and Food?
My resignation was a political act of responsibility, intended to prevent any shadow from being cast on the government’s operations. It was not an admission of guilt or an acceptance of any illegal action. I was clear on this, and I feel vindicated by how events have unfolded. Because the truth, even if belatedly, comes to light.
And a purely political question. Based on the latest polls, do you consider Alexis Tsipras as your main opponent in the upcoming election campaign? Has a new political dichotomy emerged to replace the New Democracy party’s previous absolute dominance?
The problems faced by citizens remain our constant adversary, and our sole concern is to address them effectively. We must remain reliable and honest, fulfill our campaign promises, continue to guarantee political stability in the country, and uphold the contract we have signed with society—without, of course, anyone claiming that we do everything perfectly.
As for Mr. Tsipras, he is a tried-and-failed formula, who has been judged by the people and is now attempting to make a comeback with the slogans and dogmas of 2015, 2019, and 2023. We are not interested in which party will come in second in the elections, but in how New Democracy will regain the trust of the citizens.
