The undertaking of the “crusade” by the former director of technical control of the Audit Service Andreas Hasapopoulos on Facebook to support Odysseas Michaelides is anything but spontaneous, selfless and much more accidental. It is, in fact, an initiative of the Auditor General himself, who for obvious reasons could not lead a graphic online self-help gathering. On the other hand, A. Hasapopoulos “owes” to Michailidis Street his non-prosecution for the case of Spyros Elenodoros (as president of the Union of Larnaca Communities). Despite the fact that the Council of Ministers had requested the disciplinary investigation against A. Hasapopoulos, Odysseas Michailidis refused. It should be noted that this case has also been included in the file to be presented to the Supreme Judicial Council to document the misconduct of the Auditor General.
Confusion in the mind
The whole case concerned the tender 1/2010 of the Union of Larnaca Communities for the installation of water meters in seven communities. The investigation of the tender by the then director of Technical Audit of the Audit Service Mr. A. Hasapopoulos ended in August 2011 in the complaint of the then president of the Union of Communities and former mayor of Voroklini Spyros Elenodoros for failure to provide true information from the informant. Almost 6 years after the court (case 7280/13) acquitted Mr. Elenodorou of the charges with a decision that directly challenged the spiritual balance of A. Hasapopoulos. It is noteworthy that in the case of water meters, the Audit Service through A. Hasapopoulos was involved to support a competing company against the one that had won the tender for the meters. In fact, together with Mr. Hasapopoulos, as the first witness in the trial, representing the competing company, Ms. Alexia Kountouri, a lawyer in the office of Tassos Papadopoulos and Associates DEPE, had testified.
The court, evaluating the testimony of A. Hasapopoulos, realized that something was wrong with him. The decision states, among other things: “It became clear that there was a confusion in the mind of Mr. Hasapopoulos. While acknowledging that the Association of Larnaca Communities did not have any obligation to inform the Auditor General before the start of the investigation, he also claimed that the Audit Office had not been informed about the implementation of the pilot system and this was considered concealment. Since there was no obligation, how could it be considered concealment. There was no obligation, so there was no question of omission. “
Out of jurisdiction
As it was recently revealed in the Cypra case, so in the case of water meters, A. Hasapopoulos, despite the fact that he had no jurisdiction, insisted on changes in the terms of the tender, which would favor specific companies. This does not escape the attention of the court either, which states in its decision: “There is a contradiction in his position (A. Hasapopoulos) that the Audit Service expresses only opinions. Through the correspondence of the Audit Office with the Union of Communities, it became clear that there was a demand for a change of conditions and not a simple suggestion. It was pervasive during the extensive re-examination of Mr. Hasapopoulos that the biggest problem in the whole process was the obsession of the Union of Communities of Larnaca Province in the specific system of water meters with the specific specifications for the justified reasons “. The court found out much more about Mr. Hasapopoulos and recorded them in the decision. Evaluating his testimony, he stated that during his testimony, Hasapopoulos did not have a stable position and changed it during the cross-examination “with the ultimate goal of succeeding the accusation against the accused. But that approach was fatal to the case. “
Interview Pr. Anastasiadis in “P”: The situation with the auditor general is constantly deteriorating
The Council of Ministers, after the court decision, in its session on April 5, 2017, asks Odysseas Michailidis to appoint an investigating officer for a disciplinary investigation against A. Hasapopoulos. The response of the Auditor General to the Council of Ministers was at least deplorable, since he not only rejected the suggestion for disciplinary investigation against A. Hasapopoulos, but also attacked “P” for our relevant publication. O. Michailidis, defending the man for whom confusion was found in court, spoke of “an obvious attempt to damage the credibility of a specific excellent executive of the Audit Service, by using in an elliptical, selective and misleading manner some reports made District Court in its decision in a criminal case, in the context of which the official had appeared as a prosecution witness “.
In fact, Od. Michailidis, commenting on “P” publications, wrote in his announcement: “This immoral attack against our official, with conscious efforts of which a large number of scandals and irregularities have recently emerged, neither in terms of substance, nor in terms of time, be considered inexpedient “.
Opinion born prosecutor
Michailidis Street, in order to prevent an investigation against A. Hasapopoulos (who was acting under his direction), had invoked the opinion of the Attorney General, which he never presented. At that time, his friend Costas Clerides was the Attorney General and his opinions were almost “established” for Odysseas Michailidis. Today, when the Attorney General is George Savvidis, the Auditor General with the greatest comfort throws his opinions in the trash and gives his own opinion on the naturalization files.
The. Endless list of requests of Sizopoulos for Budget