More than a thousand cases have been referred to the European Public Prosecutor's Office by the Anti-Corruption Prosecutor's Office following investigations by the financial police. These probes began last summer after authorities entered OPEKEPE (the Greek Payment Authority for Common Agricultural Policy Aid) and extracted data from Integrated Administration and Control System (IACS) declarations and OPEKEPE payments.
Did they suddenly wake up?
At first glance, this might lead to the conclusion that the financial police and the Anti-Corruption Prosecutor's Office suddenly became highly effective after essentially being in a deep sleep for years. However, this is only the first reading. The second reading leads to different conclusions, and the reasoning behind them is simple. When the Anti-Corruption Prosecutor's Office finds evidence of misappropriation of EU funds, it cannot conduct a preliminary investigation and must transfer the cases to the European Public Prosecutor's Office, which has the primary jurisdiction. Its only power in these instances is to proceed with the freezing of accounts.
A bombardment of case files
Through this method, a specific situation unfolds. Individuals who are not necessarily guilty become trapped, while simultaneously the European Public Prosecutor's Office is bombarded with case files. This occurs because every time it receives a case from the Anti-Corruption Prosecutor's Office, it is legally obliged to form a criminal case file. This effectively creates conditions that paralyze the operation of the European Public Prosecutor's Office, which faces a massive volume of files requiring processing while simultaneously running its own major investigation into OPEKEPE.
Bot attack tactics
To describe this schematically, it is like a server under a bot attack, where machines generate millions of visits in a short period to cause a crash, allowing hackers to achieve their goal by putting it out of operation. Whether this is done intentionally or out of excessive zeal—given that the Anti-Corruption Prosecutor's Office lacks substantive jurisdiction—is a question that perhaps needs no answer, as the result remains the same: the indirect obstruction of the European Public Prosecutor's Office. Furthermore, as seen in the Anestidis case, people are trapped and slandered, essentially "using" the European prosecution to execute character assassinations against anyone who causes trouble.
They have been noticed
It appears that the European Public Prosecutor's Office has realized what is happening, even if delayed, and a reaction that will expose individuals and situations is expected soon. In any case, well-informed sources state that the European Public Prosecutor's Office is fulfilling its obligations regarding the opening of case files, but it is also finalizing its own independent investigation into the OPEKEPE scandal. This is material that was not simply accepted at face value from corrupt OPEKEPE employees who remain in their positions. This may not last much longer, regardless of how "useful" they are to certain parties who will also be revealed sooner or later.
Nikos Karoutzos
nkaroutzos@gmail.com
www.bankingnews.gr
Σχόλια αναγνωστών