The Trial of Fxifani-Athanasio: With the “ally” of the Financial Prosecutor’s Office, the ex-minister is fighting for a change of seat.

A new judicial scandal is taking place on the sidelines of the Kostas Vakshfanis trial, after a lawsuit filed against him by former Justice Minister Charalambos Athanasio. The journalist and publisher of the Documento newspaper is on trial, among other things, because he published evidence of the testimony of Alexandros Avatangelos, implicated in the armaments case, who was denounced at the time by his lawyer, and who requested an exorbitant sum of money to finance the associates of Charalambos Athanasiou in order to assist in his release from the prison.

Although the court has long requested the submission of the aforementioned testimony, which is crucial to the outcome of the trial, the relevant prosecuting authorities, namely the Office of the Prosecutor for Economic Crimes, did not hand it over, as lawyer and journalist Yannis Montzouranis affirmed, at least the crime of breach of duty. At the same time, the prosecuting and police authorities did not find two key witnesses, and an order was issued to bring them in forcibly. One of them was Alexandros Avatangelos and the second was the lawyer Asimakis Asimakopoulos, who, as the first lawyer, had received money from him that he embezzled.

Charalambos side Athanasiou and personally the former minister who, despite being only a witness, constantly interferes with the process, asking for the trial to be adjourned. The purpose of this request is definitely to start the process from scratch with a different configuration. Hearing this request, Kostas Vakshvanis intervened and pointed out that the accused did not want the current configuration, which he had already placed from the beginning of the process before his responsibilities, and asked leading questions.

I read about it: Faxifani-Athanasio Trial: Remember, on the second day, the former minister asked for a postponement

“Mr. Athanasiou is trying to get a reprieve.”

Documento’s publisher side asked for the trial to be suspended, to show the required documents which, for unknown but strange reasons, were not sent from the competent public prosecutor’s office. “The financial prosecutor must obey the courts. He is not the Vatican. It is not an independent state. It is an oath of Greek justice. He must send the document that has already been requested,” he commented on the perceived delay. At the same time, the request was repeated to bring the two key witnesses by force, who, as Yannis Mantzourakis pointed out on behalf of the defence, were not even sought by the authorities.

“Mr. Athanasiou is constantly trying to postpone the trial. He didn’t like the court’s questions, and he didn’t like the prosecutor’s questions, so after every motion, he asked for an adjournment,” Kostas Veksifanis commented. He added, “It is not possible for some authorities to be late playing to get those who want a delay. There is a game at the moment by public prosecutors, who in a few minutes can find the required document, but they don’t. They are playing the game of Mr. Athanasius.” Do not give in to the attempt to postpone the trial, because Mr. Athanasius does not like you.”

The side of Kostas Veksifanis also requested that the public prosecutors before whom Alexandros Avatangelos testified, namely L.N. Tulupaki, H.; Tsouras, and J. Manolis. The court ultimately decided to deny Athanasius’ request to postpone the trial, and the testimony of the former Minister of Justice continued.

I read about it: Athanasiou’s inconsistencies on the first day of Faxivani’s trial – how the prosecutor pressed him

The testimony of Athanasius continued

One of the three advocates of Documento’s publisher, Vangelis Georgakopoulos, was the first to ask questions. The criminologist first referred to the part of the indictment relating to the publication of the Documento on the change in the penal code during Athanasius’ ministry, which, according to the Supreme Court, was unconstitutional, since it granted amnesty to state offenders. Charalambos Athanasiou commented that the Supreme Court’s decision is incorrect.

“When the Areopagus unanimously says that there is pardon in disguise, what is slander?” Vangelis Georgakopoulos returned, and the former minister replied that Kostas Vakhshfanis had accused him of deliberately changing the law in favor of certain people. Doesn’t the disguised phrase pardon make you think of pardoning criminals? Defense attorney request. “No,” the current deputy speaker of parliament answered. However, the side of Costas Vexiphanes pointed out that there was a convicted embezzler from the state, who at that time submitted a request for release from prison, on the basis of the new Athanasius law, which was rejected because the law ruled an effective amnesty. convict. The ex-minister, infuriated, turned to the defense attorney, telling him that he would not answer any questions again.

Referring to the concessions he signed, which are detailed in another Documento post, Charalambos Athanasiou said he has done a good job. In fact, the former minister also made comments on the press investigation, saying that in 2017, when the publication in question was published, he was no longer a minister. Of course, this very report has been published in Hot Doc since 2014 and repeated three years later in Documento in the context of a new investigation into the works and days of Mr. Athanasius at the Ministry of Justice. At the same time, Charalambos Athanasio repeated the claim that the President of the Republic gives favors. The President of the Republic commented, “The President of the Republic signs what the Minister of Justice proposes to him.” “A journalist should refer to jurisprudence,” Charalambos Athanasio argued, to which the president replied that he is a journalist, not a lawyer. However, Vangelis Georgakopoulos noted that one of those convicted – and in fact for drug trafficking – who had been pardoned, escaped and was rearrested abroad. Despite this, Mr. Athanasiou proposed a commutation of the sentence, which led to his parole.

“I don’t answer, we’re done!”

When the minister was immediately asked about Avatangelo’s complaint, he literally said, “I will not respond to this case unless the accused proves the existence of the testimony.” “We’re done,” he added, repeating emphatically, “I don’t answer.”

Finally, the court adjourned on February 22, 2023.