Irini Charalambidou responds to the reports made about her by the General Prosecutor, George Savvidis, during of his cross-examination by the attorney of the Auditor General, in the trial for the termination of Odysseus Michaelidis, due to inappropriate behavior.
It is recalled that on Friday, June 14, much was said to the Court about important issues that occupied public opinion, while references were also made to Michalis Katsounotto and the refusal of the Attorney General to prosecute him, as was the recommendation of the president of the Independent Authority against Corruption.
“Strangely,” said Mr. Savvidis, “two days before the receipt of Mr. Michailidis' objection, MP Irini Charalambidou registered an issue in the Parliament for the Authority, and the eff. Citizen, wrote about the Authority's decision to prosecute Mr. Katsounotos”.
Ms. Charalambidou in her announcement states that the Attorney General “is now confirmed to be hunting ghosts and developing conspiracies about the criticism received by his service, while the absolute responsibility belongs to him and his handling”.
He clarifies that the issue in the institutions committee was registered long before and that the agenda of the committee is circulated a week before the meeting. “This is the usual procedure and the Secretariat of the committee can confirm it”. two days before the receipt of Mr. Michaelidis' objection, MP Irini Charalambidou registered an issue in the Parliament for the Authority, and the eff. Citizen, wrote about the Authority's decision to prosecute Mr. Katsounotos”develops conspiracies about the criticism of hisservice, while the ultimate responsibility lies with him and his manipulations. As is the case here.
The issue in the institutions committee was registered long ago and I invoke @dmdemetriou. The agenda of the committee is circulated a week before the meeting. This is the usual procedure and the Secretariat of the committee can confirm this.
The information we had and was confirmed by the Transparency Commissioner was that while there was a decision not to prosecution of Katsounotos by the Chief Prosecutor, he did not publicize his decision, while in a letter as revealed to the committee, which the NY classified as confidential, it communicated its decision to the Anti-Corruption Authority. They dropped the ball to the Authority binding it and with confidentiality.
That is why I registered the matter with the committee for purposes of transparency and accountability.It was the only way to be informed by the Anti-Corruption Authority, since the N. Service was playing hide and seek.
Before the Institutions committee meeting, the Anti-Corruption Authority clarified that it was a matter for the Prosecutor to notify himself the decision of the thing he did not do.
As I mentioned above, the agenda of the committee is circulated a week before the meeting, so the journalists knew it. As far as the newspaper @politis_news is concerned, let them put themselves, as well as the journalist who signs the front page, why and how they got involved. However, they did not have any contact with me.
Under my journalistic capacity, the front page they took out is self-evident. The Attorney General had the courage to announce his decision transparently and not to send confidential letters. Transparency and accountability is a practice that urgently needs to be embedded in the culture of the Legal Service to strengthen the Rule of Law
