Government rejects ministerial inquiry in OPEKEPE probe

The authorities will cull absorption demands to found a preliminary probe committee into ministers Spilios Livanos and Fotini Arabatzi regarding the OPEKEPE/EU‑farm subsidy scandal, spokesman Pavlos Marinakis said, citing a deficiency of grounds aft reviewing the lawsuit file.

Speaking to governmental reporters, Marinakis said the reappraisal recovered nary indications “that would pb us to judge immoderate of the requests,” adding there are “not simply nary facts [but] not adjacent indications,” and concluding, “the reply will beryllium negative.”

Officials said the determination followed a reappraisal play requested by the authorities and reflects an effort to halt what they picture arsenic the “criminalization” of governmental life. A source said there was “no chance” the connection would beryllium accepted, describing the temper arsenic “an extremity to self-flagellation.”

Marinakis accused absorption parties of instrumentalizing an contented “for which there is nary evidence,” arguing they question to turn the state into “an endless court” marked by exaggeration and harsh rhetoric. He besides stressed that Article 86 governing ministerial work should not beryllium conflated with procedures for lifting parliamentary immunity.

According to sources, Livanos has nary nonstop involvement, while Arabatzi faces accusations tied to parliamentary questions she had raised. Both, Marinakis said, were portion of efforts to code the underlying problem.

Opposition parties reacted, accusing the authorities of a cover-up. PASOK said that aft “five days of blameworthy silence,” the authorities would again artifact justness from investigating ministers linked to a corruption ungraded involving OPEKEPE.

SYRIZA said the refusal constitutes “another cover-up operation,” citing a European Public Prosecutor’s record that records indications of offenses and governmental responsibility. New Left accused the authorities of treble standards, while the Communist Party called the refusal “provocative,” alleging an effort to shield a ungraded benefiting enactment affiliates astatine the disbursal of struggling farmers.