Archive note: This text comes from the old archive of Nomika Epilekta and is preserved with care for historical and informational reading.

Even the last Greek citizen has understood that we are passing through a period of extremely acute economic and social crisis. The devaluation of the entire political class is now a given, just as the profound institutional crisis is both given and unprecedented.

The recent verbal attacks against the President of the Republic, the violent interruption of the military parade in Thessaloniki, the harassments and acts of violence against members of parliament, the uninterrupted strikes, the constant mobilizations, the occupations of public buildings, the road blockades, the demonstrations of guilds, the unthinkable chasing away of tourists and even the work-to-rule strikes of judges and prosecutors show that society is in maximum ferment.

The turmoil and the course toward chaos, followed with mathematical precision, are fueled by the so-called populists, with certain journalists, opposition figures, labor bosses, professional trade unionists and genuinely indignant people in misery at the forefront.

The confusion, insecurity and anxiety of citizens are intensified by the pressure of the Germans and the other powerful actors of Europe, and by the passive and apathetic stance of the government and the prime minister.

This tragic situation should have rallied the political forces into a single and unbroken front of common struggle to overcome the crisis, guided by common sense and the so-called national interest [Nomika Epilekta: elections].

Yet instead of rallying, joining forces and making a common effort, politicians continue a purely party tactic and factional logic that divides and intensifies the economic and social crisis. The sufferings of past divisions, which ended in national disasters and tragedies, do not make them wiser.

Following the same party logic, the prime minister, trying to escape from the dead end into which he led himself, his party and the country, announced the holding of a referendum for the approval or rejection of the new loan agreement.

With this proposal he recalled the late Archbishop Christodoulos, who had vainly requested a referendum on the issue of identity cards, with the support of the then main opposition and the signatures of several million citizens.

It does not seem, however, to be an announcement of moderation and prudence, but one more party maneuver.

We note that in referendums voters are called upon to answer the question posed with a YES or a NO, without having other possibilities of decision and judgment.

For the first time a prime minister decided to resort to a referendum instead of becoming serious and dealing with the crisis that is leading society to unrest and chaos.

Various constitutional law specialists have already appeared on the referendum and its constitutionality, not to explain, but to increase the confusion.

Some support constitutionality and others oppose it, according to their party affiliations and not their scientific positions.

According to article 44 para. 2 of the Constitution, as that article was revised by resolution of 27.05.2008 by the eighth revisionary parliament, the authority to call a referendum belongs to the President of the Republic, who is incompetent in all matters and institutionally irresponsible, only in two cases, by issuing a presidential decree.

The first case for calling a referendum is provided for critical national issues, after a decision by the absolute majority of the total number of members of parliament, taken following a proposal by the cabinet.

The second case for calling a referendum by the President of the Republic, to which the prime minister referred, concerns voted bills, before they are published in the Government Gazette, that regulate a serious social issue, except for fiscal matters, provided this is decided by three fifths of all members of parliament, as specified by the rules of parliament and the relevant law. In this case at least 50% of voters must vote for the referendum to be valid, while in the first case only 40% of voters is sufficient.

It is pointed out that no more than two proposals for referendum are introduced in the same parliamentary term.

With his sudden statements of 31.10.2011 about calling a referendum, the prime minister referred in substance to the new agreement on the so-called haircut of public debt. Yet he did not clarify which points of this new agreement he would bring to referendum. Thus in this case too the statement is not clear but deliberately cloudy, enigmatic and riddle-like. Whoever understood, understood...

It was nevertheless understood that the preliminary announcement of the referendum was made for the serious social, economic and national issue of the debt haircut, which, however, has a purely fiscal object and therefore is absolutely excluded from becoming the subject and object of a referendum under the specific constitutional provision.

It is nevertheless likely that the issue will be framed in such a way that it appears constitutionally flawless. After all, that is why constitutional law specialists of various shades and party affiliations are paid and exist: to overcome the reefs and make the weaker argument appear stronger, as the timeless sophists did.

According to the Constitution, the surrender of national sovereignty is absolutely prohibited. For this reason it is not possible to call a referendum whose subject will be the surrender of national sovereignty. This is regardless of the fact that Greece has already essentially lost its sovereignty through its complete economic enslavement.

However, according to article 28 para. 3 of the Constitution, Greece freely proceeds, by law voted by the absolute majority of the total number of members of parliament, to limitations on the exercise of its national sovereignty, provided this is dictated by an important national interest, does not affect human rights and the foundations of the democratic form of government, and is done on the basis of the principles of equality and on condition of reciprocity. This is the article that formed the foundation for the country's participation in the process of European integration and cannot have any other application in any case, on the basis of the specific interpretive declaration included in the Constitution. Thus, the Treaty of Lisbon has already been in force in our country since 01.12.2009.

If the new loan agreement limits national sovereignty and, much more, if it surrenders national sovereignty, the referendum cannot be called.

We have noted, however, that there is a possibility of formulating the question in such a way as to overcome the constitutional obstacles, invalidities and inadmissibilities. Everything depends on the maturity and above all on the patriotism of Greek citizens, which must now be shown whether it exists and to what degree.

The calling of a referendum completes the destructive course that politicians, both governing and opposition, chose to follow, and vindicates popular suspicion, which, however, is not enough to prevent the dominance of chaos in the country.

For the sun of justice to rise again in Greece and make the dark crisis disappear, referendums are not needed, but immediate rallying and action by all healthy social forces that remain inactive.