Meimarakis Proposal: Changes to the Constitution from a non-revisionist House as well

Meimarakis Proposal: Changes to the Constitution from a non-revisionist House as well

 

By Spiros Sideris – Athens

Intervention in view of the constitutional revision made House Speaker Evangelos Meimarakis, proposing the House to be able to revise by increased majority the number of constitutional provisions, regardless of whether or not it has a revisionist character.

Speaking at the opening of the exhibition of the Foundation of the House for the seven years, 1967-1974 and the dictatorship of the colonels, he said:

“We need to rethink some views that we had, in order to deal with things according to the current data and corresponding to the criticality of the circumstances and conditions, since ultimately, these institutions were serving a calm period of different economic and political conditions, which has changed, especially with globalization and now during the crisis we must coordinate and form a team to tackle the crisis”.

The proposal of Meimarakis to amend non-fundamental constitutional provisions (eg liability ministers), regardless of whether the House is revisionist or not, under order of the previous one (House), but with an increased majority of 3/5 or 4 / 5 of the total number of MPs.

“Personally I have mentioned a similar proposal before, so that we can avoid the dysfunctions and I bring it again now, according to which I ask that non-fundamental constitutional provisions to be able to be modified irrespective of whether the House is Revisionist or not, with an order from the previous one to a much increased majority, “he said and wondered: “Do we accept that the Parliament is the dominant body in a Parliamentary Democracy or not?”.

He added: “So if there is a consensus or 4/5 or 3/5 of the House, depending on the subject and we agree to the change of a provision, such as the Law on the Responsibility of Ministers, why not allow a more flexible Constitutional status and instead have to wait five or ten years for its amendment?”.