Political turmoil and reactions have erupted after “Proto Thema” revealed that protected witnesses in the Novartis case shared €56 million. Given the witnesses’ personal gain, as disclosed by the article, it is now necessary to lift their protected status and remove their anonymity. The critical question remains: who prompted them to make the allegations that fueled the Novartis conspiracy?

The report has sparked rapid developments that may lead to unmasking those involved in the Novartis scandal.

Following the revelations, Health Minister Adonis Georgiadis posted on the platform “X,” asserting there is no longer any reason to maintain the witnesses’ protected status. He emphasized the need to identify those who persuaded the witnesses to make false accusations. In a subsequent post, he explained that Greek law prohibits protected witnesses from having personal gain, making legal action unavoidable.

“The law explicitly states that a Public Interest Witness cannot benefit personally,” Georgiadis noted. He highlighted that the provision is clear and indisputable, binding for prosecutors. He specifically mentioned that one of the protected witnesses, Mr. Filistor Destempasidis, was also a Public Interest Witness in the United States, which is illegal under Greek law. Destempasidis is currently imprisoned for another fraud. The dispute between Mr. Velopoulos and Member of Parliament Mr. Sarakis revealed the exact amounts received from the U.S. after Novartis settled with the U.S. government. Therefore, Destempasidis’ protected status should be revoked so he can be summoned to court and questioned about who prompted him to lie. Georgiadis expressed confidence that the truth would soon emerge and praised “Proto Thema” for its investigative reporting.

Former Prime Minister Antonis Samaras, Bank of Greece Governor Yannis Stournaras, and former Minister Andreas Loverdos submitted a new request last week to the Financial Crime Prosecutor to revoke the protected status of “Maximos Sarafis” and “Aikaterini Kelesi,” accusing them of false testimony and defamation.

The recent Penal Codes introduced by Floridis and Bougas allow the prosecutor to revoke witness protection if the reasons for its implementation no longer exist. According to the requests of the four politicians, the protection reasons have ceased since their allegations were deemed false and after the financial gains of the “hooded” witnesses from their cooperation with U.S. authorities were exposed.

Experienced legal experts assert that the new legal framework and facts necessitate the re-evaluation and revocation of the protected status of those who acted as instruments in the Novartis conspiracy. The evidence points to three main conclusions:

1. Their claims about bribing 10 politicians were false as the entire indictment collapsed.
2. They sought and recently received financial benefits as they were also witnesses for U.S. authorities in the same case.
3. They proved to be at least questionable in reliability, with “Sarafis” being imprisoned as the leader of a criminal organization involved in financial fraud