Ioanna Mandrou <\/b> and Stamatis Zacharos<\/b> commented on the actions of the European Public Prosecutor\u2019s Office<\/b> in the case of OPEKEPE<\/b>, highlighting the need for institutional rigor.<\/p>\n
The challenges facing the European Public Prosecutor\u2019s Office<\/b> as well as the need to safeguard its role, were addressed by the respected judicial reporter Ioanna Mandrou<\/b>, emphasizing that the success of its work depends on the collective support of the institutions. As she pointed out, \u201cthis institution, the European Public Prosecutor\u2019s Office, requires support both from within and from without<\/b>.\u201d<\/p>\n
At this point, journalist Stamatis Zacharos<\/b>, who raised the issue of the internal accountability of the judicial officials themselves, given the institution\u2019s short history. \u201cBut it requires something else as well: because the institution is new, it demands the utmost seriousness<\/b>,\u201d the journalist noted pointedly.<\/p>\n
Ms. Mandrou <\/b>emphasized this point, then focusing on the specific procedural maneuvers that took place in the high-profile case of agricultural subsidies, which have raised serious questions in the legal community<\/b>.<\/p>\n
\u201cI agree. The Greek team handling the OPEKEPE case, by sending case files without first conducting an investigation to substantiate the charges, has indeed drawn a series of criticisms regarding these actions<\/b>,\u201d the journalist emphasized.<\/p>\n
In closing her remarks, Ioanna Mandrou<\/b> sent a clear message about how European prosecutors should proceed when targeting political figures, making it clear that requests to Parliament cannot be made in a haphazard manner. \u201cWhen someone requests the lifting of immunity, that lifting must be substantiated<\/b>.\u201d\u00a0<\/p>\n