Kostas Tsoukalas, the press spokesman for PASOK – Movement for Change, gave an interview on OPEN’s “Now Together” programme, hosted by journalists Christos Tsigouris and Chrysa Foskolou.
Speaking after the withdrawal of Article 23 from the bill on private debt, Mr Tsoukalas blamed the government and raised questions with Finance Minister Kyriakos Pierrakakis about the provision.
“The government was caught red-handed trying to deceive the Greek people with a provision unprecedented in legal history. Withdrawal is not enough. Mr Pierrakakis must tell us who drafted it and who approved it. Does Mr Pierrakakis not know? As Finance Minister, does he not see the provisions in the legislation his ministry submits?”, he said.
What the provision meant for borrowers
PASOK’s press spokesman described the consequences the provision would have had for debtors, as he saw them.
“This article said that if there was a bilateral agreement and one party was the fund, while the other owed it, for example, 100,000, the debtor could not challenge the debt and had to sign the agreement. And even after making payments for four to five years, if an instalment went unpaid for four months, the fund could seize assets without obtaining a payment order and without the debtor having the right to lodge an objection. It could even take the guarantors’ home”, he said.
Mr Tsoukalas argued that the provision was, in effect, an attempt to strip away all the protections set out in the Code of Civil Procedure.
He explained that until now, if a debtor defaulted on an arrangement – in the fund’s view – the loan would be called in and a payment order issued. The debtor could lodge an objection or seek a stay, appeal and apply for interim measures, and could then challenge the auction proceedings.
“Yesterday, the government tried to abolish all these legal remedies I have mentioned as means of defence, in a single article”, he said.
“The government must answer for this”
Mr Tsoukalas accused the government of trying to take citizens’ property and questioned why it withdrew the provision after facing a backlash.
“The government must answer for this. It tried to take citizens’ property in the dead of night. When Nikos Androulakis called for the provision’s withdrawal and exposed your intentions, why did you rush to take it back?”, he said.
The 15% upfront payment for a bilateral debt settlement
Finally, PASOK’s press spokesman also referred to another provision in the bill, concerning debtors seeking a direct, bilateral debt settlement with a bank or servicer and setting a limit on the upfront payment.
“And to avoid any misunderstanding, in another article the government is voting for a provision that says, for example, that if a debtor owes 200,000, they must pay 15% of that within a month to avoid an auction. Is that feasible? Can someone find 30,000 in a few days? Previously, there was no statutory limit”, he concluded.