On 21 September 2001, the First Appeals Court of Athens postponed the hearing on Sotiris Bletsas' case until 18 December because of the absence of all three prosecution witnesses. The appeals trial had previously been postponed on 4 July. This was also due to the absence of the prosecution witnesses. Although Greek law states that these witnesses could be held in contempt and punished, especially when they are present at the beginning of a hearing and then fail to appear for court, the court has not invoked this law.

In the answer to a previous parliamentary question, the Commission considered this topic to be of high importance and said that it was following it carefully. Has the Commission asked the Greek government to provide a copy of the sentence and any other information related to this matter ? Does the Commission share the deep concerns raised by several associations, political parties and academics?

Does the Commission consider this attitude compatible with the European values of freedom of expression and opinion, and cultural and linguistic diversity?

Could the legal services of the Commission analyse if Article 191 of the Greek penal code is in accordance with the spirit of the principles of liberty, democracy, respect of human rights and fundamental freedoms, and the rule of law recognised by the Treaties?

In strict legal terms, does the Commission consider that the Greek state should investigate the improper summons which contributed crucially to the postponement, as well as the necessity of the postponement itself ? Will the Commission investigate if this attitude might violate the right to a fair trial ?

(1) To be typewritten and sent to the Activities of Members Division, Office 02B031, Schuman Building – Luxembourg

(2) Maximum length: 10 lines for questions for 'Question Time' (Rule 43); 25 lines for oral questions (Rule 42) and written questions (Rule 44 and 44(5)) - Enlarged Bureau decision of 25 and 26 Feb. 1986