A bunch of arguments in favor of the constitutionality of recent legislation that raises barriers to entry into parliament convicted former leaders A.A. for a criminal organization, contains many pages of reasoning Supreme Courtwho forbade electoral descent into his party Ilias Casidiaris. The vast majority of supreme judges, nine out of ten, who voted for the party’s ban, analyze the reasons for the ban on the participation of the “Greeks” party in the elections.

The arguments of the judges are of great political and constitutional and legal interest, as they are based not only on factual data, but also on constitutional and essential approaches from a legal and political point of view. “The Hellenic Republic must,” is the conclusion of the judicial reasoning, “not allow its noble enemies to use the institutional guarantees it provides to their detriment.” The Chief Justices base the ban on the Constitution, looking for fundamental reasons to defend the democratic state. As for Ilias Kasidiaris, the motivation for the decision includes harsh political and legal formulations. An excerpt from the decision of the Supreme Court is indicative:

“Ilias Kasidiaris incites violence, promotes policies that do not respect democracy and aim at weakening and destroying the democratic state and the institutions of the rule of law, in particular by using violence or inciting violence or justifying it, promoting totalitarian ideologies, spreading racist and intolerant ideas and xenophobia, approval of crimes against humanity, hatred against individuals and groups, actions and statements that threaten the peaceful coexistence of social groups in the country.”

The decision details the reasons that led to the ban on his participation. Kasidiaris party, because of his conviction for a criminal organization, but also because he is the true leader of his party. There is also an extensive reference to Ilias Casidiaris’s many years of political activity in AA, with the important remark that he himself played a decisive role “in turning it into a criminal organization.”

What is the Supreme Court’s reasoning, and what does the decision say about the imprisoned former AA?

For his part, prisoner Ilias Kasidiaris, through his lawyer Vassos Pantazis, announced yesterday his intentions for the next day. As stated in his statement, Il. Kasidiaris declares his intention to run for a second election (in July), while making it clear that he will not support any party or political formation, referring particularly negatively to Anastasios’s EAN party. Kanellopoulos. His statements are of interest in terms of the legal action he is expected to take. Both will like it Supreme Special Court (the so-called Electoral Court), but also at the European level, at Court of Human Rights (Strasbourg). In fact, in his European address, he states that he will demand compensation from the Greek state for the deprivation of his rights, and it is extremely interesting that he calls on his followers to do the same.

EAN decision

And although Ilias Kasidiaris partially declares his intentions, it follows from the decision of the Supreme Court that in the end there was not enough evidence to liquidate the EAN party, founded by the honorary deputy prosecutor of the Supreme Court. Anastasios Kanellopoulos. As stated in the rationale for the decision, despite the fact that PASOK in its memorandum requested, by presenting all the evidence in its possession, that a thorough investigation be carried out in relation to a particular party, it did not appear that Ilias Casidiaris was its real leader.

However, the motivation for the decision of the Supreme Court, in addition to the upcoming elections, will become a “rug” for the judicial crisis, which will also take place in the second election, as everything shows that it is extremely difficult to form. government from the May 21 elections.