With the votes of the Southwest, the “fundraising” bill that was debated in the plenary on Tuesday and passed shortly after midnight was approved.
The Southwest declared in favour of the principle of the bill. All opposition parties declared against the principle of the bill.
Article 60 on the national pension for expatriates from Albania and the former Soviet Union was voted for by the New Democracy, SYRIZA, the Movement for Change, Hellenic Solution and MPA25. «Present» said the KKE. The opposition parties, however, insisted that the conditions set by the provision on the national pension for expatriates need improvement.
Article 80 on afforested fields was voted for by the Southwest; SYRIZA and MERA25 voted against. The Movement for Change, the KKE and Hellenic Solution declared «present».
On the amendment on the responsibility of the press, «yes» was declared by the Southwest; «no» was declared by SYRIZA, KKE, Hellenic Solution and MPA25. The Movement for Change declared «present».
The responsibility of the press
The amendment tabled by the government on press liability was the focus of interventions just before the start of the vote.
The opposition must explain why it is voting against the amendment on press liability, Interior Minister Makis Voridis said, wondering whether in the minds of the opposition parties «freedom of the press is the impunity of insult and slander? Is it vulgarity? Is it mud?».
«Does it make sense to you, and as freedom of the press protected by the constitution, that there is a publication that does not tell us who publishes it? Is that normal? No. I hope we say no. Does it seem reasonable to you that someone says ‘a company publishes a publication for us’ and when I go to find the legal representative of the company, that person is a foreigner, overweight, not having of course the only personal assets in his possession? Does this seem normal to you? I am aggrieved. Not me. Any citizen. You need to explain to the citizens what you're doing, what you're voting against. You should come out and explain it to us and tell us what you mean by freedom of the press,» Makis Voridis said and added: «Does this procedure affect the freedom of the press? Does going to the courts to protect the personality affect the freedom of the press? If the court's decision to use the court's jurisdiction to impose a judicial review of the freedom of expression does not violate the freedom of expression? Because here we have constitutionally protected values. On the one hand freedom of the press and on the other hand the protection of personality. Both are protected by the Constitution.».
«The amendment on daily and weekly newspapers of national circulation obviously does not want to abolish the free press, nor does it even think of doing so. All it wants to do is to make visible the identity of the owner and the director of the medium, so that they take any responsibility for what they write,» said the rapporteur of the Southwestern Democratic Party, George Kotronias.
«You are obviously aware that with these provisions you could drive many businesses in the industry to the brink of closure. We always support any regulation that contributes to transparency and we are particularly sensitive to the issue of media ownership. But what you are bringing is a half-measure,» SYRIZA rapporteur Dionysis Kalamatianos said: «If you really want to reflect the ownership, why didn't you proceed with the nominalisation of shareholders or holders of company shares? If you really want to enforce transparency, why did you rush, as soon as you took over the country's government, to abolish the mandatory filing of «behind-the-scenes» by shareholders of television stations and press distribution agencies?» The MP stressed that his party stands against slander but it must also protect the Constitution and freedom of the press.
«PASOK wants the media to operate in terms of transparency, without straw men and without hiding,» said the special rapporteur of the Change Movement Evangelia Liakoulis, who noted that the government submitted the amendment to the Parliament while it had not even discussed it with the HESIEA. At the same time, she pointed out that the amendment only covers the printed press, and does not refer to the electronic media. «We want regulation that ensures parity and proportionality. In no way can we defend straw men, but we want to have uniform rules for everyone,» Evangelia Liakoulis said, adding: «You would find an ally in us, you would find an ally in the Movement for Change faction, if you were still not in a hurry, if you were still not in a hurry. And even if you had the choice not to discuss with anybody, with the HSEA you would have to discuss, if nothing else, to bring us an opinion, an informed opinion here.».
Against the provisions on the civil liability of the press, KKE's special rapporteur Manolis Syntycheakis called on the government to explain why the provision is limited only to the press and not to other media and the internet. He also denounced that the ERC, «a disreputable body, a government mouthpiece, which does nothing to violate the equal or even proportional representation of parties in the media, is now taking over as a middleman in imposing fines.» Manolis Sintifakis also pointed out that «journalists are not responsible or do not have the main responsibility and should not be tried», «but the owners and managers have full responsibility» and «as the first violins of the owners, they cannot participate in the same unions, in the same unions that the working journalists participate» because «they are the people of the employer par excellence, their interests are with the employer against the interests of the workers’.
Earlier, Hellenic Solution's special rapporteur Konstantinos Hitas had referred to the amendment commenting: «Kim would vote for this amendment. The government, Mr. Economou, should explain to us why he is bringing this amendment and why he is bringing it only for the printed press.» He also called on the government, «because it is interested in the media» to explain what will happen to the NSC and the «national drone that leads it», when it will do its job, because at the moment, it is only handing out fines to «little channels in the periphery».
MP25«s special rapporteur Maria Apatzidi accused the government of trying to terrorize and silence the publications that oppose it. The MP spoke of provisions of »Hun origin« and unconstitutional provisions that affect the freedom of the press and provisions that abolish, through fines, the freedom of the press. Like the KKE, MP25 raised the issue of the new role assigned to the NCR: »The amendment arbitrarily gives the power to impose fines to the National Broadcasting Council. But this is not in line with its constitutionally prescribed mission, as Article 15(2) of the Constitution refers only to radio and television as areas of exclusive competence of the National Broadcasting Council," Maria Apatzidi said.
