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

If a poll were conducted now on the opinion citizens have about the quality of the justice administered by the Greek courts, its results would have particular importance and value and would constitute a reliable guide for further thoughts, judgments, concerns and proposals.

The poll should be conducted on two levels: one that will include non-lawyers, and a second that will include questions inviting those who have legal education in general and, more specifically, legal professionals (judicial officers in general, lawyers, notaries, legal advisers) to state their opinion honestly.

If we take into account the crisis of institutions that afflicts modern Greek society, it will certainly be found that a corresponding crisis also exists in the state mechanism falsely called “Greek justice”, that is, the mechanism through which an attempt is made to resolve the various disputes between citizens, the disputes between citizens and the state, and to prosecute crime by punishing offenders of the criminal laws, which, under another name, we know as “Greek courts” of various levels, competences and functions.

It is rightly argued that there is no Greek justice, French, English, German and so on justices, but only one Justice, toward which all courts of the countries of the planet must constantly be oriented, which they must serve with devotion and exclusively respect, so that social peace, social cohesion and the prosperity of citizens may be secured.

Those who wish and consider themselves capable of posing critical and appropriate questions, which the respondents should answer, are invited to formulate the questionnaire for the poll.

The purpose of the poll will be to investigate whether citizens trust the manner and speed with which disputes are resolved by the courts, as well as whether and how much they trust judges, prosecutors and lawyers. In addition, each respondent should state whether he has sought judicial protection, whether he has been involved in court disputes, as well as whether he has been criminally prosecuted and for what reason, and what his impressions and findings were from the relevant experiences and corresponding lived events.