Fotini Arabatzi launched a fierce attack against PASOK, accusing it of communication games and an attempt to trivialise the democratic institutions.
A particularly sharp statement was made by the Member of the New Democracy, following the government’s official refusal to proceed with the establishment of a Investigative Committee for her and Spilios Livanos.
The Arabatzi argued that the opposition had moved without any substantive legal arguments, aiming solely at creating impressions. “PASOK knew it from the beginning. It knew that it did not have a shred of evidence or a single line of accusation that stood up legally. It chose, however, to turn the Parliament into a scene of smear and to use the most serious institutions of democracy as a tool of communication construction,” the former minister said.
She made it clear that the absence of any indication of criminal offence makes the investigation unnecessary, stressing that institutional procedures should not be used as a lever of political expediency.
In her statement, she stressed her readiness to be scrutinised, noting however that “no Pre-Investigation Commission is set up when there is no criminal offence. I had put myself at the disposal of the Parliament and every competent authority from the beginning and would have done so in a contrary decision. But when the slightest indication justifying the need for a judicial or further investigation is absent, constitutional institutions are not instrumentalized or trivialized to cover political expediency.”
Arabatzis’ statement in detail:
“I fully respect the decision of the government majority, which moved within the framework of constitutional, procedural and substantive legality and decided the obvious: No Preliminary Investigation Commission is set up when there is no criminal offence. From the outset, I had made myself available to Parliament and every competent authority and would have done so in the event of a contrary decision. But when there is not the slightest indication to justify the need for a judicial or further investigation, constitutional institutions are not instrumentalized or trivialized to cover political expediency.
PASOK knew this from the beginning.
It knew that it did not have a shred of evidence or a line of accusation that stood up in law.
It nevertheless chose to turn the Parliament into a smear stage and exploit the most serious institutions of democracy as a tool of communication construction.
In the same political contest, SYRIZA and NEAR.
They seek scandals where there are none, accused where there are no offences, oppositional identity where there are no arguments.
If they ever want to make a serious opposition speech, they must first respect Parliament.
Not blackmail it communicatively every time they run out of political discourse.”
</html
