The honorary deputy prosecutor Vassilis Markis decries the political exploitation of judicial decisions, warning of the danger of losing trust in the institutions.
In an intervention condemning the way the political system and public opinion treat judicial decisions, the respected former prosecutor, Vassilis Markis, expresses his deep concern about the targeting of the independent Justice.
Referring to the recent decision of the Prosecutor of the Supreme Court on the case of the watching, Mr Markis refers to a recurring phenomenon where judicial judgment is only applauded when it coincides with personal views or party interests.
The experienced legal expert points out emphatically that, despite the noise that has erupted, no substantiated legal objection has been heard so far on the Supreme Court prosecutor’s order itself. As he explains, the issue is purely criminal and procedural: the prosecutor was judging whether the evidence introduced in the first instance decision was indeed “new” and capable of leading to the case being withdrawn from the file.
According to Mr. Markis, the reactions that are expressed come mainly from political circles, who often express personal bitterness, instead of focusing on the substance of criminal procedure.
In response to complaints of hasty filing, Mr. Markis clarifies that in justice no case is hermetically closed. If in the future – whether in six months or later – new evidence actually emerges, the procedure provides for its re-examination.
He even called “not serious” the reports claiming that the prosecutor rushed to issue an order to prevent possible new testimonies of lawyers, stressing that the road to judicial investigation always remains open if there are new facts.
The most worrying element, according to the honorary deputy prosecutor, is the gradual poisoning of the ordinary citizen’s relationship with the judiciary. Mr. Markis warns that the instrumentalization of judicial decisions according to the “political convenience” of the moment undermines the foundations of the rule of law.
“The independence of judges cannot be judged by whether we like their decision or not,” he concludes, sounding the alarm.
