Greece – Athens – New C.C.F. trial, Session 4, Monday 29/10/12


Translated by Act for freedom now/bubourAs
New C.C.F. trial, Session 4, Monday 29/10/12 Athens.
This session also began with the announcement of the names of the accused comrades and their advocates by the chairwoman of the terror-court M.Tzanakaki. Absent were comrades G.Tsakalos, C.Tsakalos, Olga Economidou, G.Polidoras and H.Hadjimihelakis, present were comrades G.Nikolopoulos, M.Nikolopoulos, P.Argirou, D.Bolano, Th.Mavropoulos, K.Papadopoulos, A.Mitrousias, G.Karagiannidis, K.Sakkas and S.Antoniou.
However, were also absent the advocates of the first three present comrades and of D.Bolano who was absent. The court was informed that D.Bolano will not accept to be represented by another advocate and that the two appointed advocates will arrive at 10.30.
Thus, the court was interrupted and re-started the session with a discussion about the formal admissibility of the civic prosecution statement. The advocate of T.Mavropoulos, G.Fotopoulos, extensively argued his disagreement concerning the formally admissible statement by the prosecution. Specifically, he claimed that the statement suffers of vagueness and cannot be completed afterwards. On the other hand, prosecutor S.Bagias had the opinion, that by law the statement of the prosecution has all the elements to be considered formally acceptable.
The terror-court decided to accept the civic prosecution statement. Afterwards, the prosecutor read the summaries of the three referral indictments. At this point, advocate Fr.Ragousis informed the chairwoman, that the advocates of G.Tsakalos are absent and he does not accept to be represented by anyone else. The chairwoman interrupted the session for ten minutes while saying: “Lets get a move on though, we are tired and we are not getting any work done.
We are not saying we like to work, but in any case… ”. After the short break, we came into the ‘main course’ of the session, which was when the prosecutor read out the summaries of the three referral indictments. Defence advocate S.Fitrakis pointed out to the prosecutor and the court, that after the reading of the summaries there should be an analytical reading of the enacting ordinances of the three referral indictments by the secretariat of the court.
However, after the completion of the reading of the summaries of the indictment by the prosecutor, the chairwoman called for those of the accused who are present to state if they have something to say concerning the indictments, something which was obviously going to cause the immediate reaction of all defence advocates. F.Ragousis demanded for article 171 par. D of the code of criminal procedure to be applied, not in the form of absolute invalidity, but for the better information of the accused and the defence of their rights. As he characteristically said,: “we are not saying that the court is breaking the law by not reading out the enacting ordinances of the referral indictments”, but the demand is made and is not connected with the invalidity.
S.Fitrakis said he heard his colleagues opinion, but considers that there is an absolute invalidity of the procedure, when the accused ask for the enacting ordinances of the referral indictments to be read and the court refuses to read them. He concluded by saying: “If you accept the oppressive model, you will refuse them the read. But if you accept an in between model, then I tell you to read the indictments”. The other advocates, except A.Paparousou, stated that they agree with the application by F.Ragousis.
The terror-court accepted the demand to read the referral indictments, which will take place tomorrow Tuesday (Oct. 30th).

Leave a Reply

Required fields are marked *.