The Board of Directors of the Athens Bar Association (DSA), following public statements and reactions following the release of Dimitris Lygnadis, characterizes those who claim to be a rapist as “criminal populists”.
The full DSA announcement reads:
“Criminal populism” and the administration of justice – Public attitudes towards justice – Criticism of court decisions – Presumption of innocence – 497 paragraph 8 of the CPD – Resolution DSA.
Board of Directors DSA., in connection with the public attitudes and reactions that emerged after the recent criminal cases, which disturbed and disturb the Greek society, published the following announcement:
1. Board of Directors DSA. considers it reasonable and expected the increased interest of public opinion in the development of cases of serious crimes, especially when they are committed against minors, as well as the expression of opinion and criticism from citizens.
2. The crown of European legal culture in the field of criminal law is the presumption of innocence of the accused. He is presumed innocent until a final conviction and this basic principle must not be violated by anyone for any reason.
3. In a democratic and privileged state, justice is administered by the courts in accordance with established substantive and procedural rules, which should apply to everyone, without any discrimination. Any attempt to influence the judicial decision in current cases is reprehensible, especially if it comes from persons playing an institutional role.
four. The public attitude to justice, as it is subjectively perceived, cannot prejudge the outcome of a judicial decision, apart from the legality underlying it. It is also unlawful to incite the phenomena of criminal populism, as, unfortunately, we have repeatedly stated from the relevant legislative initiatives of the government.
5. Judicial decisions are obviously open to criticism, but this cannot lead to a general discrediting of the judicial function.
6. The provision of Article 497 para. 8 of the CPC, which is valid until today after its last amendment by Law 3904/2010, is moving in the right direction and its application depends solely on the sovereign decision of the court. It is noted that the courts for petty criminal offenses were deprived of such an opportunity after the recent change of part 6 of article 187 of the Criminal Code.
7. A guarantee of the security of a judicial decision is the control over the case by several judicial instances.”
PS The court passed (the case was dragged on for more than 2 years). A sentence was passed under a serious article – repeated rape of minors. The defendant’s lawyers filed an appeal. The convicted criminal was released on bail, thanks to “justice”.
But it turns out that he is not yet a criminal. Can you remind me if there are criminals who don’t appeal? Some immediately, some after 5 years or more. Or not consider him a criminal until he is released?
It’s good to be stupid….