In an additional comment to Mr. Mitsotakis Trilogy Evangelos Venizelos continued.

In particular, he notes that “Mr. Mitsotakis, with his trilogue, wanted to convey to Parliament the opinion developed in his article on 9/8 by Minister of State Professor G. Gerapetritis, according to which the Constitution does not directly apply if it does not repeat the relevant provision of the executive legislation “.

“According to this unprecedented point of view, which overturns the hierarchy of legal norms and undermines the normative status of the Constitution, neither parliamentary immunity, nor the special status of the responsibility of ministers, nor the constitutional provision for the responsibility of the President of the Republic is valid, since law 2225/1994, as amended to date does not directly refer to these specific constitutional provisions. The law does not do this because it is not necessary,” he adds.

He continues: “What the science of constitutional law teaches and is taken for granted by every lawyer is the obligation to interpret the law in accordance with the Constitution, not to interpret the Constitution in accordance with the law.”

“If Mr. Mitsotakis really wants some kind of institutional consensus to overcome an unhealthy climate, he must abide by the elementary rules of constitutional interpretation. Otherwise, he will not be able to find a legal basis for a regulation that will apply the Constitution and allow him to shake off the charge that all political figures are under the threat of supposedly legitimate “interference” in their telephone conversations, ”he concludes. Mr Venizelos.

Mitsotakis trilogy video

Venizelos: Why was the AA case different?

Statement on the speech of Kyriakos Mitsotakis in Parliament on surveillance was made by Evangelos Venizelosafter the Prime Minister’s report to him.