The decisions of the Police on the basis of which Menios Fourthiotis took the police guards were announced by the law firm representing him in a press release. These are many different decisions that could not go unnoticed!
As detailed in the Press Release:
«In the last few days a merciless war has been unleashed against our client Minandros Fourthiotis, which had its origins in the leak of documents of a strictly personal and highly confidential nature by the Greek Police, for which our client has already turned to all competent authorities in order to find those responsible.
Before any further reference, it should be pointed out that the reaction of the public is, if anything, reasonable, as with the methodical misinformation that has taken place and even in a massive way, the false image that our client is supposedly guarded by numerous police officers and vehicles (14 in number were heard!), combined with the also misinformation that there is no reason to guard this person.
In order to restore reality, we must point out the following, which, it should be noted, are not the result of leaks and unconfirmed information, but are confirmed and certified by a series of documents issued by the competent authorities and which, although they are strictly confidential and constitute sensitive personal data, we are obliged to disclose them for the defence of our client.
More specifically:
The following decisions have been issued by the relevant Vulnerable Targets Service, which is the service responsible for the custody of all persons likely to be targeted in chronological order:
On 26-5-2020, the Order of the Service for the Protection of Foreign Officials & Vulnerable Targets was issued with the protocol number 3001/4/46-third, forwarded to all competent bodies and authorities, pursuant to which the decision of the Headquarters of the Hellenic Police under Order No. 1519/20/1065888 of 25/5/2020 was forwarded and it was decided to allocate to our client one (1) police officer to cover the needs of his escort security for a period of three (3) months and to review his protection measures.
On 14-8-2020, the Headquarters of the Hellenic Police issued the Decision of the Hellenic Police Headquarters with the protocol number 3001/4/4/47-ree, pursuant to which it was announced that the Hellenic Police Headquarters, by its Order (AP1519/20/1733061 of 13-8-2020), decided to continue the deployment of one (1) police officer for the personal security of our client and to review the measures before the expiry of three (3) months.
Subsequently, on 2-11-2020, the Order of the Service for the Protection of Foreign Officials & Vulnerable Targets was issued with the protocol number 3001/4/48-ele, to be forwarded to all competent bodies and authorities, by virtue of which it was determined that it was decided by the HQ of the Hellenic Police under the decision number 1519/20/2393846 of 2/11/2020 with protocol number 3001/4/48-e of 2/11/2020 to allocate two (2) police officers for the personal security of our client and to review the measures before the expiry of three (3) months.
Subsequently, on 14-01-2021, the Order of the Service for the Protection of Foreign Officials & Vulnerable Targets, with the protocol number 3001/4/49-l’, was issued and forwarded to all competent bodies and authorities, by virtue of which it was determined that it was decided by the HQ of the Hellenic Police, pursuant to the decision number 1519/21/94148 of 13-01-2021, to allocate three (3) police officers for the personal security of our client, to allocate one (1) official motorcycle and to review the measures before the expiry of three (3) months.
Finally, on 19-03-2021, the Order of the Service for the Protection of Foreign Officials & Vulnerable Targets, with the protocol number 3001/4/49-xa’, was issued, to be forwarded to all competent bodies and authorities, pursuant to which it was determined that it was decided by the Headquarters of the Hellenic Police, by virtue of the decision number 1519/21/566825 of 18-03-2021, to allocate four (4) police officers for the personal security of our client, to allocate one (1) official motorcycle and one (1) car, and to review the measures before the expiration of three (3) months.
It should be noted that the police officers work in shifts and therefore our client had one (1) officer per shift to guard him, while as it is clear from the above decisions, our client never had 9 police cars at his disposal, as has been falsely spread.
The following events have been certified to have taken place against our client that constitute violent acts against him and certify his exposure to maximum risk:
The severity and danger of the situation is determined by: a) the attacks already committed against the physical integrity and life of our client, for which he has filed criminal charges of attempted manslaughter with the use of weapons before the competent police and investigating authorities and against those responsible, and which have been brought to the attention of the criminal justice system and investigated (which have been brought to the attention of the competent authorities who took the decisions in connection with the custody and guarding of our client and we will not make any further reference to names). It should be noted that an arsonist murderous attack against our client has taken place at his home, for which he has submitted criminal charges before the competent police and investigative authorities on 12/8/2020, as well as an arsonist attack outside the television station where he works on 10-1-2021 (as is also evident from the Book of Offences and Incidents of the Security Sub-Directorate of the North-East Attica Police Department with no. 1027/1/839-a, as well as from a relevant extract from the incident book of the Fire Service). At the same time, an explosive device had been placed outside the television station, where our client works as a presenter, as is evident from the report of the police officer, no. 1020/2/13-a extract from the Rapid Action Unit dated 2-1-2021, while criminal proceedings are pending for the crimes of burglary, attempted robbery and damage to foreign property that took place in the residence of our client b) the constant threats he receives from various persons at the expense of his life, (c) the generally vindictive and dangerous behaviour of the people affected by the journalistic investigation and reacting to it with homicidal intent, which is of course known to the competent authorities and has been common in recent years.
All the above facts, which are presented in a purely fragmentary, indicative and not exhaustive manner, have been dealt with by the competent authorities, while all the documents proving them were brought to the attention of the competent services which issued the relevant decisions on the guarding and custody of our client.
Court decisions have been issued which also certify the existence of elements of risk and urgency in relation to the exposure of our client to maximum risk and the need to take appropriate security measures. By way of illustration, we refer to a decision issued in August 2020 by the Athens Single-Member Court of First Instance which prohibits the defendants from approaching our client within a distance of five (5) meters and from communicating with him by telephone.
Our client, apart from being a journalist and presenter at a private television station entitled «NEO EPSILON», is also the owner of the radio station «PARTY FM» and the newspaper «APOKALYTIKA NEWS». At this point we must point out that special security measures are provided for television stations and for newspapers , security measures which, especially with regard to the newspaper, in violation of the current provisions, have not been taken. More specifically:
According to the provision of article 3, paragraph g’ of the PD100/2012: «It is mandatory to guard g) The legally operating national television stations, for which up to three (3) policemen are assigned, as well as the national newspapers, for which one (1) policeman is assigned.».
Furthermore, the conditions laid down by P.D. 141/1991 paragraph 4 of Article 70, as replaced by P.D. 100/2012 in Article 2 are:
Paragraph 4 of Article 70 of Decree 141/1991 shall be replaced by the following:
«4. Criteria for determining the type of protective custody of vulnerable targets are:
α. The property of the target.
β. The degree of risk.
c. Existing information on the threat and in particular on criminal activity against the target. The sources of information and intelligence shall be assessed on the basis of the assessment codes provided for Europol (Article 12 of Council Decision 2009/936/JHA of 30-11-2009, L 325/11-12-2009).
δ. The origin of the threat and its relationship to the target's current or former status and official function.
ε. The nature of the threat and in particular whether it is directed against the life, physical integrity, personal liberty or property of the vulnerable target.
f. The impact of the threat on the social, economic and political life of the country.
ζ. Any previous threats or illegal acts committed against the target or other persons with the same official function and which are causally linked to the target's present or previous official function or official duties or general public activity.»
Therefore, it has been judged not only once, but already since 26-05-2020 multiple times by the competent Services and Authorities that all the above statutory requirements set by the P.D. 141/1991 paragraph 4 of article 70, as replaced by the P.D. 100/2012 in Article 2, for the allocation of personnel of the Greek police for the guarding of our client and in no case can any kind of responsibility be attributed to our client for the decisions taken by the competent bodies after evaluating all the information that had been brought to their attention.
In relation to the car that is falsely presented as an allegedly armoured vehicle of the National Police and that our client is allegedly driving it, allegedly misusing state resources, it is in his possession legally, as he has been granted the use of it by the company of his interests «PARTY FM RADIOPHONIKI SA», in which our client has the status of President and CEO. All of the above is evident both from the notice of the General Registry of Commerce and Industry (see item IC of the relevant notice), No. 1997427/1-7-2020, as well as from the registration certificate of the above mentioned car. For all of the above, of course, there are documents that prove the unprecedented falsity of the above postings and we refer specifically to the car's registration certificate and the relevant legal documents of the above company.
What is certainly a reality is that on 19-03-2021 the competent authorities, with a specially reasoned decision, considered that our client is a vulnerable target and ordered the taking of custody measures for at least three months, with a re-evaluation of the situation after the three months, i.e. on 19-06-2021. All of a sudden, on 31-03-2021 and even in the evening, our client was notified of the lifting of the detention measures, without any justification, by letter no. 3001/4/49-rapc’ of the Service for the Protection of Foreign Officials & Vulnerable Targets. Our law firm has requested that a copy of the relevant Order of the Headquarters of the Hellenic Police with No. 1519/21/652839 and dated 31-03-2021, which suddenly lifted all the detention measures, be provided to our client as having a special legal interest, in order to determine the validity of this reasoning, a reasoning that must be in full accordance with the reasoning of the decision of 19-03-2021. It should be noted at this point that a public prosecutor's order has been granted in order to obtain a copy of the opinion-recommendation of the competent committee for the decision of 19-03-2021.
It should therefore be clear from the reasons for the decision of 31-03-2021 what intervened between 19-03-2021, when it was decided that there was a need to guard and guard our client with specific measures, and 31-03-2021, when all of a sudden it was decided that there was no need and the relevant measures were taken altogether.
As is understandable and in view of the very short period of time between 19-03-2021 and 31-03-2021, coupled with the fact that there was no actual incident in such a short period of time that differentiated the state of affairs with respect to the existing risks against the person of our client, the decision to lift the measures is bound to suffer from a manifest lack of reasoning, will be challenged in its administrative context and a stay of execution will be sought, given that the continuation of this situation poses the greatest risk to the life and physical integrity of our client. We would point out that this risk has been maximised by the competent authorities themselves, who have systematically leaked to the press confidential official documents relating to the safety of our client, thereby making it known inappropriately that he is a vulnerable target. These dangers are magnified by the fact that the relevant services, having leaked the fact that our client was a vulnerable target and the relevant documents relating to the relevant security measures, then took steps to ensure that the information was leaked and became public knowledge, making it one of the first news items on all the television stations and flooding the internet with numerous reports that the measures were taken in their entirety, thus making our client's exposure even greater.
It is understandable that apart from the administrative framework, criminal and civil responsibilities will be sought against the persons who acted in breach of their duties, exposing our client to maximum risk based on all of the above.
On behalf of our client,
The law firm power of attorney»
