Next Thursday, the draft law “Procedure for removing the secrecy of communications, ensuring cybersecurity and protecting personal data of citizens” is expected to be submitted for consideration by the plenary session.

In the Committee on Public Administration, Public Order and Justice, the discussion and processing of new provisions takes place in the shadow of revelations and publications about surveillance.

During today’s first meeting, the speeches of the speakers and special buyers of the parties, as well as the intervention of the Minister of Justice, monopolized the interest.

The Data Protection Authority, the Association of Judges and Prosecutors, the Hellenic Prosecutors Association, the Plenum of the Hellenic Bar Associations and ADAE are invited to submit their views to the parliamentary committee next Monday.

The discussion of the principle of the bill was planned to be broadcast live from the website of the parliament, but this did not happen during the speeches of the first two speakers, Messrs. Euripides Stylianides and Dimitris Tzanakopoulos, as well as the intervention of the Chairman of the Committee Maximos Charakopoulos himself.

“This government dares to correct the errors in the institutional structure that has arisen, to fill in the gaps and, above all, to form a structure as modern as possible, which will be served by conscientious and properly trained public officials,” said in his Intervention, ND speaker Euripides Stylianides and added that the new structure seeks a balance between national security and the protection of personal data and individual freedoms.

The legislative initiative of the government is the first one that is so boldly manifested in the European space, and it is possible that it will become a landmark in other Member States, said the MP. He also stressed that the bill being debated in Parliament today is the result of “substantial prior consultations” that resulted in 50% to 70% of proposals for each chapter of the bill being passed. At the same time, both the European Commission and the PEGA of the European Parliament were informed in a timely manner.

Euripides Stylianides said the term “national security” is being specified for the first time in legislation and that only EYP and the Anti-Terrorism Service can request removal if they meet strict documentation requirements. Additional rules are set when the removal concerns political figures, in which case the prior permission of the Speaker of Parliament is also required.

“Although we were provoked, we did not get bogged down in the swamp of fruitless micro-party confrontation. We did not seek to cover up the absence of a convincing alternative government proposal with noise, fanaticism and sensationalism, as the opposition does. We did not impersonate others, we did not slander, we did not mislead. We respected Parliament, we trusted the Greek judiciary to shed absolute light responsibly on all cases, and today we institutionally respond with an institutional initiative that puts us at the European vanguard to face the challenges of a new unpredictable era,” said the ND speaker.

All opposition parties have said they will vote against the bill. An exception to this relationship is the declaration by the Greek Decision that it is reserved for the plenary.

Opposition parties are mainly led by:

• “uncertain” – “broad” national security value for allowing declassification, as indicated by a majority of opposition MPs
• a provision by which the person under surveillance can learn of his surveillance after three years.
• provision that material recorded in the attachment system is removed from the system for reasons of national security after 6 months from the date of termination of the prosecutor’s order to remove the confidentiality of messages, for reasons of national security
• the role assigned by the AIAEA bill, which the opposition parties regard as extremely limited.

SYRIZA rapporteur Dimitris Tzanakopoulos stressed that today the parliament is discussing the wiretapping scandal because “this bill appeared because of revelations, because of a huge scandal related to the monitoring of politicians, businessmen, journalists, political opponents, political friends, or through official connection by EYP or using illegal predatory software, which, apparently, and despite government and EYP assurances to the contrary, was controlled by EYP itself.”

Dimitris Tzanakopoulos mentioned in an article in the newspaper “Vima” that the newspaper has in its possession the names of six police officers – first and last names – who were assigned to KEFAK to deal with the Predator. “No one denied, no one gave answers. On the contrary, Mr. Mitsotakis refuses to come to Parliament during the Prime Minister’s time for five weeks, although it is his institutional duty, not to mention his legal duty, to attend the Prime Minister’s Hour to answer the continuous and consistent questions of the official Leader of the Opposition,” Mr. Tzanakopoulos said, adding that Parliament would not debate the bill “unless Mr. Mitsotakis is exposed and held accountable for watching almost everyone who speaks Greek “.

Regarding the content of the bill, the SYRIZA rapporteur said that the proposed provisions “exacerbate the situation”, although the existing framework was absolutely enough to prevent us from being driven to acts of violation of the law and the constitution, as happened with completed offenses by the government itself, which violated the law. “Nobody is saying that improvements in terms of EYP are not required, but that is not what we are dealing with here. What saw the light of day was not due to the inadequacy of the institutional framework. There was no reason for national security in EPM surveillance of Mr. Androulakis. There was no national security reason to monitor Mr. Koukakis, so this surveillance was also illegal,” Mr. Tzanakopoulos said.

“The bill proposed today by the government and the ruling majority does everything that is legally possible, that is practically possible, to prevent control over abuses in the EPM, as well as control over the acquisition and distribution of malicious software,” the message says. PASOK Purchasing Specialist Haris Kastanidis. The MP noted that the European Court of Human Rights, in its solid case law, argues that the concept of national security should be clearly defined. “Although this bill corrects the river of ambiguities in the bill, during the consultations, the concept of national security remains completely vague, general and unclear,” said Haris Kastanidis.

The PASOK special buyer, referring to the three years defined by the bill as the period after which the person under investigation can be informed, indicated that in order to be informed, there must be a request, i.e. the controlled must somehow know that his request will be resolved by a committee of three, two of whose members signed a waiver of its confidentiality. “The decision to inform should only be the decision of the President of ADAE. No one else and without a preliminary application,” said Haris Kastanidis.

Source: RES-IPE