The wiretapping case had a “happy ending” for the National Security Service and the government of Kyriakos Mitsotakis, since the Supreme Court announced that it will only prosecute four private persons for misdemeanours. Here are all the steps that the investigation failed to take.
by Eliza Triantafillou / Tasos Telloglou
Part 1
On July 30, the Prosecutor of the Supreme Court, Georgia Adilini announced what was the widely expected archiving of the case of illegal wiretapping, regarding the part which concerns the National Intelligence Service and any other state agency or authority.
Apparently, in the course of merely three working days, Adilini was able to read the 300-page report compiled by the Deputy Prosecutor of the Supreme Court, Achilleas Zisis, who has been conducting the preliminary examination of the case for the past nine months. The two prosecutors of the Court of First Instance –Angeliki Triantafyllou and Konstantinos Spyropoulos– were suddenly dismissed by Adilini in October 2023.
Apparently, in the course of merely three working days, Adilini was able to read the 300-page report compiled by the Deputy Prosecutor of the Supreme Court, Achilleas Zisis, who has been conducting the preliminary examination of the case for the past nine months. The two prosecutors of the Court of First Instance –Angeliki Triantafyllou and Konstantinos Spyropoulos– were suddenly dismissed by Adilini in October 2023.
Achilleas Zisis started drafting the legal part of his report last April. At that point he had not collected all the witness statements (the last ones were made in June); a few days ago he mentioned to some of the parties involved that he would continue taking statements until September.
The finding was eventually filed at the end of July and the Prosecutor of the Supreme Court decided to file misdemeanour charges against certain legal representatives and beneficial owners of companies, for the crime of violating the confidentiality of communications. The charges will be brought directly before the court to verify whether or not they are well-founded. This means that there will be no further investigation.
According to the statement made by Adilini, no Greek state agency ever used Predator to monitor –among others– several ministers, the Chief of the Armed Forces, opposition officials, journalists and businessmen – despite the fact that according to our investigation the Predator software is exclusively available to state actors.
The question then arises: who needed the personal data and communications of all these people? Is it not breach of duty to not identify the person or persons who were behind the interception of personal data and confidential communications of so many people, many of whom are related to the country's state security? This is espionage since –according to the Supreme Court– the spying did not come from within the state.
Source, links:
Comments
Post a Comment