ALMA Movement Representative Eirini Charalambidou, in a letter to the Speaker of the Parliament and the members of the Conference of Party Leaders.
SEE ALSO: Blunder with Asset Declarations: Declarations Temporarily “Taken Down” from the Parliament’s Website | AlphaNews
ΣΧΕΤΙΚΑ ΑΡΘΡΑ
In the letter, she emphasizes that sections of the declarations were posted on the Parliament’s website that the law explicitly prohibits from being made public: personal data of spouses and minor children and information concerning them, as well as tax reconciliation statements, all of which are submitted to the Tax Commissioner and undergo a thorough review.
The information, he adds, was reproduced by all media outlets. Despite the Parliament’s announcement that the declarations had been withdrawn, they remained posted until late on the evening of October 20—a minor detail.
As he notes, this is legislation that was passed by this very House, with attention to detail, precisely to promote transparency without sacrificing the rights of third parties. The law clearly defines what is to be made public and what is to be protected. Its provisions were not followed by the very institution that enacted them.
“No one can claim oversight or time pressure. The deadlines were known, the procedure was known, and there was all the necessary time to prepare. When an institution has the time, the resources, and a clear legal framework, and yet violates it, the issue is not a technical one. It is a matter of accountability,” she continues.
According to Ms. Charalambidou’s statements, “The consequences are clear. Parliament has been compromised. Individuals who were under no obligation to have their information made public—spouses and minor children—found their personal data exposed to the public.It should be noted that anyone can file a complaint with the courts and the Commissioner for the Protection of Personal Data regarding serious violations, and this possibility directly concerns the Parliament.”.
This matter, he continues, “cannot be resolved with a simple apology or a general statement of accountability. Responsibility that is not accompanied by an investigation, specific individuals, and specific measures is not responsibility.”
For these specific reasons, Ms. Charalambidou requests that the Leaders’ Meeting:
- That the issue be included as a separate item on the agenda of the next session of the Conference.
- That the Parliamentary Service submit a written report detailing exactly
how the violation occurred: what procedure was followed, who approved the
posting, what checks were conducted beforehand, how long the information remained
publicly available, and why it had not been removed by late in the evening of October 20
, despite the relevant announcement. - All affected individuals should be notified in writing regarding which of their
personal data was made public. - The Commissioner for the Protection of Personal Data should be notified,
if she has not already been informed, and the relevant
correspondence should be submitted to the Committee. - Measures to limit the further dissemination
of the information that has already been reproduced should be taken and documented. - A written review protocol should be established prior to any future posting, with
a clear division of responsibilities.
Ms. Charalambidou concludes by stating that, “Recently, actions have been observed in Parliament that do no credit to anyone. This particular incident, however, crosses every line, because it strikes at the very core of our credibility
: our obligation to be the first to properly enforce the laws we pass.”
