Nikos Kaklamanakis: Court vindicates Olympic gold medalist – rowing federation’s €100,000 lawsuit dismissed

A multi-member primary session proved the gold medalist Nikos KaklamanakisAbout what he wrote on Facebook and what he spoke in Parliament about the federation in 2019. His revelations Olympic goldConsidered a precursor to his shocking confession Sophia Pecatoro “inspired” the Greek #Me too.

Greek Sailing Federation He deserves 100,000 euros in damages for personality and defamation against the gold medalist who found himself in the middle of a storm in 2019 through his public statements and his speech in Parliament. Amateur sport.

Court decision

According to dikastiko.gr, the multi-member court of Athens, numbered 2796/2022, rejected the federation’s charges (it was ordered to pay 2,000 euros in court costs).

“…Since there is no evidence of the defendant’s intention to cause damage to the plaintiff contrary to good morals, in the judgment of this court, his intention is to protect the plaintiff’s institutional role as an instrument for improving the sport of sailing by purifying every pathology established during its operation over time”.

In fact, the Olympian, through his positions developed by his lawyer Ellie Rousseau, said that it was “…a lawsuit that intimidates everyone to stop talking (astuta lawsuit) Strategic lawsuits against public participation is a rendering of the English strategic lawsuits. Against public participation (SLAPP) “, that is, non-governmental Lawsuits filed by a powerful person or organization (for example, a business or high-ranking official) against individuals or organizations, criticizing them over some social issue or political interest.

As noted, the purpose of such lawsuits is not to win a court case, but to intimidate critics through moral and financial exhaustion. Before the suit was filed, the board of directors of EOI had sent an out-of-court statement to retract what he had publicly said, but he did not do so because, as he said, it was dictated by his conscience and his principles. , for the safety of institutions, sport and our society.

what did he tell?

In November 2019 the “Son of the Wind” was invited as an expert by the Education Affairs Committee in Parliament, and spoke about the current local and systemic phenomenon of abuse of power in the administrations of sports organizations. Addressed by successive Greek governments. According to the lawsuit (presented by the federation through lawyer Costa Dalta) “The defendant said that the plaintiff federation engages in illegal practices, threats and intimidation against the athletes, including herself, as well as corruption within it (the plaintiff). Power and money fraud, she needs to manage and clean up.

On 11-16-2019, in a post on his Facebook website (referring to the case of Vassilia Karahalio, famous yachtsman and equally famous athletes Panagiotis Mantis and Pavlos Kayali), the defendant requested before a third party. , to tarnish the reputation of the plaintiff, with false and false knowledge in his claim, that corruption, misappropriation of public funds and abuse of power have been observed within its side, threats have been expressed and intimidation has been made against athletes”.

thinking

According to the court’s reasoning, “It can be seen from the entire text of the first text of 11-11-2019 and after the second references, the entire text of the post of 11-16-2019 of the defendant, that he did not refer to the plaintiff association, but to the persons who form its management from time to time, according to his allegations, long stay in the management and in control Using absences to engage in financial misappropriation and misconduct, including tactics of silence over athletes’ claims and bullying against athletes. does not refer to, but refers to, the Greek Olympic Committee, as is clear from his passage. The speech includes the above sentence (“All federations are by no means alike in I don’t think so, but I am well aware that everyone is sitting at a table, in a complete session. Everyone does what their neighbor knows, and I feel there are years to come, which saddens me beyond measure. At this time, for example, the law in Article AT and Phase 8 of the Hellenic Olympic Committee can be a regulator, not a purifier and a balancer in the direction of truth.”), as well as by his request to clarify whether what he said in his speech applies to all Greek sports federations or only to the plaintiff. was invited. In which he decided and the allegations related to what he believed was going on within the Hellenic Olympic Committee”.

In fact, when this case was discussed on 7-10-2021, the decision of the National Transparency Commission was published in September of the same year, where 79 serious violations of the duties of the EOI Board of Directors (the decision was noted) established by the relevant legislative framework in the management of federations: “…of the above-mentioned wrongdoings Due to the number and seriousness, the audit report was sent to the Athens Appeals Prosecutor. Criminal responsibilities of persons associated with the management of the plaintiff. The recommendations included in section E. of the above report (in relation to the plaintiff’s numbers 41 and 42) for the recovery of the identified violations and operation – Recommendations, Investigations and Control Division are that Notably, the plaintiff has done so in accordance with the existing law and not because the said company did not find serious misconduct, as the plaintiff unsubstantiatedly alleges, that the misconduct was fire. If not, the report would not have been sent. The Athens Appeals Prosecutor for the investigation of the commission of criminal offenses …Of course, the commission of specific criminal offenses (fraud, betrayal) is not proven, however, the defendant said before a third party that the plaintiff was fraud or betrayal. , though these accusations are untrue, they do not know them to be false, because the aforesaid offenses not only in regard to Idios being a rowing athlete, but also in the opinion of other persons engaged in rowing (see above-mentioned articles) therefore, reasonably created in the defendant the belief that treachery and fraud were actually being committed in the plaintiff”.

As the decision states, “… the plaintiff is the Pan-Hellenic Sports Federation, but of global scope, which excels in championship rowing, training the most talented Greek athletes and organizing their participation in the Pan-Hellenic, Pan-European and World Championships. , receives large grants from the Greek government and private individuals (such as KNIPS “Stavros Niarchos”) for this purpose. Therefore, since its action is about public opinion, the sharp expressions in the above post of the defendant refer to it (“Another defamatory action of the EIO”, “EIO its illegality admits”, “the unethical EIO”, “The EIO’s “monster”), although they are unfavorable characterizations, they are justified, insofar as they criticize its work, and more so, they come from an established champion in the field of sailing, namely the defendant , who in the sport in question Limbic is a gold medalist, so naturally takes a keen interest in Greek sailing. After all, at the end of his post, the defendant talks about sanitizing Greek sports so that the athletes (he means sailing) the federation (he means the plaintiff) they deserve. From the above, it can be concluded that the respondent, through his above post, did not intend to harm the personality (reputation, prestige, trust) of the Federation, but to severely criticize the persons involved in its management. The opinion is responsible for the plaintiff’s attitude towards Vassilya Karahalio, but also towards him and Sofia Peccatoro”.

Reasonable interest

According to the decision “… the defendant had a legitimate interest in exposing his position as Olympic champion in sailing, 09-11-2019 and he considered it to be true when necessary. Since certain exaggerations in his disclosures were insufficient to establish the civil offense of willfully spreading false defamation against the plaintiff, Due to the latter’s role and function, the limits of tolerable criticism of him are not exceeded in the relevant statements. Wider than the concern of an ordinary citizen, because the plaintiff is a legal entity, which is concerned with public opinion, and therefore inevitably and consciously its actions and movements, especially the famous sailing sport like the defendant. Exposes itself to thorough scrutiny by players.

Kaklamanakis: Revoking the Donation

The court categorically rejects the claims that the Olympian sought benefits by being involved in the management of the federation (he had no such right, he says) and that he was actually responsible for the return of his 520,000 money (through his statements but the pressure he exerted). The euro donation of the Stavros Niarchos Foundation to the Federation: “… the aforementioned in the extended document of the “Stavros Niarchos” Foundation, at a time unrelated to the time when the document was drawn up, the defendant claimed, through his controversial statements, the opacity and irregularities behind the plaintiff’s financial management, as well as the plaintiff’s administrators misbehaving with the athletes. Conduct (after the abuse of Sophia Pekatoro, according to her statement. , which was not specifically denied by the defendant in early 2000), and these establish the defendant’s reasonable interest in the disputed statements related to them. With somewhat bad words within the plaintiff’s tactics, rejecting the latter’s claims to the contrary.

It follows that since the allegations in the suit are not proved, for the reasons stated above and with the foregoing distinctions, the suit must be dismissed as substantially without merit as to each allegation, depending on the facts examined each time. The plaintiff , due to its failure, has settled his related claim (Civil Code Articles 176, 191 par. 2), for the court costs of the defendant, as contained in the present order”.