National Transparency Authority (NDA) inspector who initially conducted the investigation into the “ghost” contract 717 ERGOSE.aimed at restoring the operation of signaling and telemechanics systems, was replaced a few months before the conclusion and submission of the report.

Her case was removed, and she submitted her resignation and left the independent body in a negative atmosphere. Earlier it was reported that his investigation revealed criminal liability for failure to comply with a contract signed in 2014, which still remains unfinished. The final opinion was submitted in September 2021. It was signed not by the inspector who led the investigation for at least the previous two years, but by two other experienced EAD auditors. They formulate a number of proposals and recommendations, but without defining criminal liability for non-execution of the project. But something the retired inspector is said to have preferred.

Based on the final findings of the review conducted by EAD, the financial prosecutor who ordered the investigation decided to close the case. However, the tragedy in Tempe and the realization that if the alarm and remote control systems had worked, the terrible event could have been avoided, in a dramatic way again drew attention to the problem of Convention 717. In fact, the investigation of the case in recent months was carried out not by domestic, but by European prosecutor’s office to determine whether there was a waste of European funds.

Since 2012

But let’s take the data from the beginning. Since 2012, former member N.D. and then from the Independent Greeks, Nikos Nikolopoulos presented a series of questions to Parliament, as well as a petition advising the Prosecutor of the Supreme Court on the subject of ERGOSE contracts for the implementation of projects along the country’s railway network. These contracts include the famous 717 for the restoration of the SCBD system on the railway network, which, due to insufficient maintenance, has ceased to operate since the beginning of the 2010s. In November 2018, for example, independent MP Nikolopoulos stated in his question infrastructure and transport to Christos Spirtzis: “We have once again returned to the scandal with the aforementioned contract, because the indifference that you showed as a competent minister to protect the public interest and send a competent ERGOSE to the prosecutor’s office led to them continuing their illegal actions, ignoring the consequences failure to fulfill a vital contract for road safety.”

According to court sources, the prosecutor of the Supreme Court intervened in the case by forwarding complaints to the prosecutor’s office for corruption for further investigation. The corruption prosecutor’s office, in turn, ordered a preliminary check in the prosecutor’s office of first instance to establish whether there were indeed signs of offenses against public officials. In the context of this process, the prosecutor of first instance, in turn, instructed the Board of Inspectors and Auditors of Public Administration (SEEDD) to investigate the actions of the administration in relation to complaints. Among them, the progress of the implementation of the contract 717. The investigation was entrusted to the inspector, who was the head of the department of the GEEDD, responsible for monitoring the implementation of state orders. After the creation of the National Transparency Authority in 2019 and the subordination of the Public Administration Audit Authority to it, the said employee took charge of investigating the known ERGOSE contract.

The woman who resigned allegedly claimed that the results of the audit should lead to conclusions about criminal liability. The case is now being investigated by the European Prosecutor’s Office.

Raid

From the documents in the possession of “K” and included in the correspondence between the EAD and ERGOSE, it follows that the inspector led the investigation until at least the spring of 2021. The same documents also testify to the fact that a few months earlier, a sudden raid control was carried out by the EAD echelon at the offices of ERGOSE. “In connection with the ongoing audit,” one of the documents says, “and as a continuation of our investigation from the departure of the audit link to the offices of your company, please send us the following information in paper or electronic form.”

Below is a list of financial and technical data that EAD requested from ERGOSE regarding the project, such as decisions to reduce letters of guarantee, updates on the progress of the audited contract, etc. The final opinion of EAD was submitted four months later, in September 2021 . However, there is no inspector’s signature on it. The first signatory is the EAD Auditor, who has previously assisted the Inspector in audits, and another Independent Body Auditor.

“K” contacted the inspector, who is now working on behalf of the European Commission in Brussels. He declined to answer clarifying questions, explaining that he is bound by confidentiality and non-disclosure agreements, which remain in effect. However, undeniable sources confirmed that she voluntarily left the investigation and that her case was withdrawn at the initiative of her superiors, which forced her to resign. Contacted sources at the National Transparency Authority said the inspector was exempted from the investigation due to her workload, as she was on another particularly serious case. Mr. Nikos Nikolopoulos refers to this issue in his new memorandum (dated March 10, 2023) to the Prosecutor of the Supreme Court, Isidoros Dogiakos, and the Head of the European Prosecutor’s Office, Laura Kovesi. “And after a three-year investigation and shortly before criminal cases were initiated against the ERGOSE employees who managed the 717 contract, the inspector-auditor of the National Transparency Authority, aware of all the mismanagement, violations of the 717 contract and occurring in ERGOSE in this contract with a waste of public money “.

The final conclusion of the EAD continues with recommendations and proposals for the implementation of the project, focusing more on technical and procedural issues. Like, for example, that “OSE SA ensure that the stations are properly staffed” or that “OSE SA ensure that work permits are issued in a timely manner in order to ensure the smooth implementation of ongoing projects.” The philosophy of the conclusion, like that of the Ministry of Transport and Infrastructure leadership, was to complete the project and not be at the epicenter of a judicial investigation.

In his recent written response to “K”, EAD states that among its proposals were the initiation of disciplinary proceedings against ERGOSE officials, as well as the issuance of a negative invoice (fine) of 1.3 million euros for the replacement of specific equipment. The conclusion was sent to the financial prosecutor, who, after the abolition of the Prosecutor’s Office for Corruption in 2020, received the relevant case from Ms. Eleni Tulupaki. “This was the last case I dealt with before the abolition of the Prosecutor’s Office for Corruption,” Ms. Tulupaki told her interlocutors. Having studied the content of the conclusion, the prosecutor decided to close the case. However, the path taken by the European Prosecutor’s Office is the opposite: contract 717 is 85% financed from EU funds. In May, a few months before the fatal accident at Tempe, a complaint about the said contract was filed with the prosecutor’s office of European countries. According to K’s information, a first procedural investigation followed, and in October a decision was made to open a criminal investigation into the case. It would not come as a surprise if one of the first European prosecutors to call to testify is a retired EAD inspector.