Home Politics Article by Penelope Fundedakis in “K”: Ban the gang, not the party

Article by Penelope Fundedakis in “K”: Ban the gang, not the party

0
Article by Penelope Fundedakis in “K”: Ban the gang, not the party

When former Golden Dawn MP Ilias Kasidiaris announced the formation of the Greeks for the Motherland party on June 4, 2020, the Golden Dawn trial was not yet over. On October 7, 2020, Kasidiaris and six other top executives were found guilty of running a criminal organization, while another nineteen people were found guilty of joining a criminal organization. I.K., former No. 3 of the organization of Nikos Michaloliakos, was sentenced at first instance to thirteen years and six months in prison and sent to prison.

On February 8, 2023, in view of the end of the term of parliament and the inevitability of early elections, the government justifiably amends the electoral law, according to which a party with a leadership (formal or real), whose members are not allowed to participate in the elections, were convicted of criminal offenses, including for the creation of a criminal organization. SYRIZA introduces its own amendment that excludes a party from participation in elections if it contains “legislative provisions or ideological declarations or political action incites, provokes, incites or incites to act or act that may cause discrimination, hatred or violence against a person or groups.” persons identified on the basis of race, color, religion, ancestry, national or ethnic origin, sexual orientation, gender identity, gender characteristics or disability…”. The broad scope of this provision is, in my opinion, incompatible with the right of political parties to operate freely.

The real issue at the present time and in this place is the ban on the participation in elections of a party that is a criminal organization. And, obviously, this is a feature of the Greek case. Can a party controlled by a gang run in an election? Beyond any ideological quest to the right or left, it is certain that such a formation does not “serve the free functioning of a democratic state” as stated in the Constitution. Therefore, the norm of the legislator does not contradict the logic of the Constitution and is appropriate and necessary for the protection of the state.

Further question (more general): Can a political party be outlawed under Greek law? In my opinion, the prohibition of a party is unacceptable, both because there is no competent authority to decide on it, and because it may be contrary to the principle of proportionality.

A criminal organization certainly does not serve the “free functioning of a democratic state” as stated in the Constitution.

Of course, the prohibition of a political party as such is not contrary to international human rights law. The German constitution allows under strict conditions to ban political parties. But this has been going on since 1956. The unwillingness of the German legal order to proceed with the prohibition of parties that are anti-systemic, extremist and clearly opposed to a democratic state testifies to the inexpediency of such a measure. It is not enough for a party to be extremist or anti-systemic, it should be considered dangerous to the existence of the state and democracy and be defiantly ready to use violence to achieve its goals. Far-right parties that are not associated with violence participate in the political and parliamentary life of their countries in the European Union without any questions about their ban.

Today the dividing lines are very fuzzy and mostly concern issues of gender identity (identity politics), immigration, energy sources and environmental issues, euroscepticism. The war in Ukraine has exacerbated the pro-Russian bias and the authoritarian paradigm against the liberal West in parties or formations on both the extreme right and the extreme left.

Conclusion: The diversity of ideological contradictions and the fragmentation of political and social movements create an environment in which the ban on parties seems outdated and inappropriate. Instead, exclusion from public funding and/or exclusion from participation in elections are more lenient but clearly effective measures of state protection.

Ms. Penelope Fundedaki – Professor of Constitutional Law, Vice-Chancellor of Panteillon University.

Author: PENELOPIE FUNDEDAKIS

Source: Kathimerini

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here