Another Vordis, Another Avgenas: Government Considering Preliminary Investigation for Only One of the Two Former Ministers

in

Time is running out for the government to make a final decision regarding the parliamentary investigation into the OPKEPE case. Politically, the Maximos Mansion believes that responsibilities have already been assumed through the resignations of Minister Makis Voridis and three deputy ministers—Stamenitis, Chatzivasileiou, and Boukouras. However, on the criminal side, particularly in light of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office indictment concerning OPKEPE, the handling remains pending and, in fact, hangs in the balance.

Government spokesperson Pavlos Marinakis emphasized that not every case can be treated the same way, referring to the so-called ‘Tembos model’—a fast-track procedure used previously for other officials. He clarified that while the government will take a stance at the appropriate time in Parliament, it will not rush into decisions without proper legal basis.

Voridis has made it clear that he does not intend to follow the path of Triantopoulos and Karamanlis, who requested immediate referral to the competent court via a preliminary investigation committee. The government insists that political resignation does not imply criminal liability. According to Marinakis, ‘The political resignation of certain individuals does not mean they are linked to the issue under investigation by OPKEPE. We must not confuse matters. The resignations were politically motivated, not criminal.’

Meanwhile, former Minister Lefteris Avgenakis finds himself in a more precarious position due to recent leaked conversations allegedly implicating him. As a result, the government appears to distinguish between the two cases—one being politically sensitive, the other potentially criminal.

The PASOK party is expected to submit its proposal for a preliminary investigation committee next week, targeting both former ministers. Whether the government supports this move will depend on the findings of the ongoing judicial inquiry and the strength of evidence presented.