Tag Archives: Pola Roupa

Athens, Greece: Involuntary hospitalization of Nikos Maziotis and Pola Roupa

Revolutionary Struggle members Nikos Maziotis and Pola Roupa are on hunger strike since November 11th 2017.

The two imprisoned comrades are fighting against isolation measures; against specific provisions of the new correctional code aimed at repressing them as high-security prisoners; against the proposed detention of high-security prisoners in police stations; against the intended reinstatement of the type C prison regime. They also demand an immediate end of the solitary confinement imposed on Nikos Maziotis (since July, the comrade is kept isolated from other prisoners by a decision of the justice ministry); an extension of visiting hours based on the frequency of visits a prisoner has; appropriate visitation rooms for incarcerated parents to meet with their children.

They made it clear from the outset that they only receive water. They have repeatedly asked to be granted unhindered phone communication with their six-year-old son before being transferred from Koridallos prisons to any hospital.

On December 2nd, Nikos Maziotis and Pola Roupa were transferred to a hospital outside the prisons due to the deterioration of their health condition. However, the next day both comrades asked to be sent back to the prisons because eventually they were not permitted unhindered phone communication with their child.

On December 4th, Nikos Maziotis burned and destroyed the B’ isolation section in the basement of Koridallos women’s prison, where he has been held in solitary confinement for 5 months. He was then moved to the prison infirmary because of the fumes, and was threatened with further isolation – this time in a disciplinary unit of Koridallos prisons.

In the early hours of December 5th, hunger strikers Nikos Maziotis and Pola Roupa were forcibly transferred outside Koridallos prisons. The prison prosecutor ordered their involuntary hospitalization. They are currently being kept at the General State Hospital of Nikaia, both threatened with force-feeding. As of yet, the hospital doctors have not succumbed to the prosecutor’s order.

Nikos Maziotis and Pola Roupa continue their hunger strike. They have stated they will not accept serum, and will act against involuntary treatment and force-feeding (torture) in every possible way.

Athens, Greece: Involuntary hospitalization of Nikos Maziotis and Pola Roupa

Greece: Revolutionary Struggle Prisoners Pola Roupa & Nikos Maziotis Refuse Hospital Transfer on Day 20 of Hunger Strike

rs

STATEMENT OF POLA ROUSA AND NIKOS MAZIOTIS, MEMBERS OF REVOLUTIONARY STRUGGLE IN RELATION TO HOSPITAL TRANSFER

On the 20th day of our hunger strike, the prison doctors have referred us to an external hospital.

Over the last few days, we have stated that in order for us to be transferred to a hospital, the prison authorities must allow us to have telephone communication at the hospital with our child, since on previous occassions when we were hospitalized we were denied communication.

Since the prison authorites have not replied to our request, we refuse to be transferred to hospital.

It should also be noted that the Justice Department have so far ignored our request for them to withdraw Article 11 from the new prison code, which basically reintroduces Type C Prisons. The prison authorites also refuse to reply to our demands regarding the right to have visits with our child for 3 hours and visits between us for 2 hours when we have no other visitors and for Nikos to be moved from isolation.

Pola Roupa – Nikos Maziotis

members of Revolutionary Struggle

Greece: Pola Roupa and Nikos Maziotis, imprisoned members of Revolutionary Struggle on hunger strike

November 11, 2017

THE ROTTEN SYSTEM AND THE ABSENCE OF RESISTANCE ARE THE REASONS FOR THE ROTTING OF SOCIETY

Almost 10 years after the outbreak of the crisis with the collapse of the financial system, bank bankruptcy, and seven years after the commencement of the era of the memorandum and the monitoring of the country by the troika (IMF, EC, ECB), the social base in this country has suffered the strongest blow since the Second World War.

Greek puppet governments have definitively delegated substantial economic and political governance to EU supranational organizations and indirectly to the capital markets and are imposing new measures of social euthanasia for large sections of the population in this country, they are now insignificant for their added value to capitalist wealth. That’s why it does not matter if they disappear. This condition of condemnation is also a prerequisite for the survival of the system itself, for the preservation of the political regime, for the perpetuation of capitalism.

The government’s propaganda to overcome the crisis and return the Greek economy to a recovery path is a common European lie to showcase the supposed success of the programs and memoranda, to allow the EU to be removed from the obligation to continue to financially support the Greek regime and to let the capital markets take the lead from the EU in the recycling of Greek debt and speculation through it. A debt that regime agents already admit that if not drastically reduced in the immediate future will force the Greek state to declare bankruptcy. Not least that the exit to the markets of the Greek state will further exacerbate the already exaggerated Greek debt, which now exceeds 180% of GDP.

The message, however, that the world’s powerful have taken from these years with the rescue policies of the system by the central banks and governments that have put the whole weight of the crisis that the rich created on the backs of the peoples: whatever they do they have their pack animals, the social base, to bear the crisis and produce profits. And the usual practice of enrichment through the swelling of global debt and its financialization continues until the next collapse. But the people have already suffered a huge blow. The social base in the country counts millions of poor, marginalized and desperate. It counts thousands of deaths from hunger, illness and suicide.

The SYRIZA-ANEL government’s minister, Kontonis, argued that it is a government success that people do not eat from the rubbish. People still do eat from the trash, but they no longer show them on television. This is why it is a universal political priority to support the “success story” of the memorandum by all parties and the media.

The theft of any surplus wealth left to the social base continues with unabated tension by the government with wage and pensions cuts, the abolition of public insurance, the taxation of the most economically weak, all while poverty is rising, on the orders of the EU the banks will throw thousands of borrowers onto the streets, and there is no chance to persuade the government to get out of the crisis.

The only success of the government is social passivity and the defeat of struggles. Because the basic precondition for imposing these criminal policies in the country that threw thousands of people to the margins, which killed thousands, was and is political normality and the absence of a strong social reaction. Because the smaller the resistance of society, the more ruthless the system becomes.

The social reactions to the memorandums somehow came to a standstill as the regime was determined to impose the memorandums at all political expense. But the reason these memoranda were imposed was the absence of an expanded and powerful revolutionary movement that could be an obstacle to the social euthanasia policies. Upon the defeat of the resistance SYRIZA stepped in to climb to power. The SYRIZA-ANEL government has also been the last sparks of reaction to the system and policies to overcome the crisis.

Today, the social base is rotten, while the economic and political lords of the country have secured their wealth in tax havens and in foreign banks. The Paradise Papers come to recall what everyone knows: That the economically powerful and their political aides are not touched by any crisis and it does not concern them that any measures are imposed. In a “legal and moral” (sic) way they will continue to enrich themselves while millions of people die of hunger and poverty.

Nowadays, the social base is rotten because this rotten system is killing to survive, because it kills social solidarity and cohesion and pushes it into crime. The war of all against all is the beginning of capitalism and the economic freedom of the rich to do whatever they want with the support of governments. It is the beginning of the absolute competition that has dominated the planet.

Their own creations – the crimes among the social bases – are nowadays the politicians’ number one issue. “Order and security” is the common slogan of the political elites to deal drastically with these phenomena which the regime itself gave birth to. One of the most popular aspects of propaganda is crime among the social bases today. It is the phenomenon that the regime itself generates and nourishes.

And, on the other hand, the great criminals, the real terrorists and the bandits that make up the economic and political power, remain immune.

Society rots and turns into cannibalism as there is no political way out of the social conditions that the regime itself shapes: Because it creates poverty and want, marginalization and despair. This drowns the youth with drugs, it dissolves social solidarity. This creates the conditions for a cannibal society. This is the crime.

Prisons are full and more and more will pass through their doors as the political and economic conditions for increasing all forms of delinquency exist and will continue to exist.

And prisons are now being targeted by the left-wing totalitarianism promoted by the government with the new punitive code, which aspires to turn prisons into crematoria for thousands of prisoners.

REVOLUTIONARY STRUGGLE IS THE TARGET

At the top of the government’s priorities, and other regime parties, is always the political representation of Revolutionary Struggle and our political view. And the attitude that the regime has always reserved for us was analogous to its view of the political threat represented by Revolutionary Struggle but also by us personally. And they never hid it.

Because Revolutionary Struggle was a political threat to the policy of the Memoranda, an important factor of resistance, an organization that promoted the overthrow of the system and the revolution, the change of society in order to tackle the crisis at its root.

Because Revolutionary Struggle and we personally struggle for social solidarity which can triumph with the overthrow of the criminal regime that promotes social decay and social death. And the triumph of social solidarity presupposes the creation of a society of economic equality and political freedom for all.

And because they condemn us as enemies of democracy, those whose political system disdains and mocks with its very existence real democracy, there’s is a system of oligarchs in favour of the rich and the powerful, they break their own Constitution when the power of bankers and the wealthy is at risk (anti-constitutional imposition of memoranda), we point out that real democracy is direct democracy, this political organization of society today presupposes the economic organization of society based on the principle of economic equality.

The current system of parliamentary representation, especially in our time, with a discredited parliament that, according to a Eurobarometer survey, is only trusted by 13% of the people in the country, the current political system that is now commonly understood to be a puppet of the world’s powerful, this is the enemy of real democracy.

Real democracy, political freedom and economic equality are inseparable values. And an indisputable value is social solidarity. All these values that kill the existing economic and political system. And these are the values for which Revolutionary Struggle fights and for those values we are in prison.

Even before our arrests the repressive mechanisms they formed the frame through the media with ourselves as the central faces and Revolutionary Struggle as an umbrella organization for every armed activity in the country. They had set a bounty of €1 million each for us.

The arrest of Nikos Maziotis in July 2014 was presented by the then Minister of Public Order as an important element for the unimpeded implementation of the memoranda and the salvation of the system. With Nikos Maziotis they “inaugurated” the Type C prison[1] of New Democracy in Domokos as he was the first political prisoner to be transferred there.

A special moment in our special treatment was the arrest of Pola Roupa. The way the state and government treated our six-year-old child will remain in history as the most violent repressive blow.

The imposition of a unique exemption regime for Maziotis, who has been in isolation since last July, is another move in our special treatment.

The new Penitentiary Code introduces a special photographic arrangement for Pola Roupa to be put in isolation and to establish the isolation regime of Nikos Maziotis (article 11 par.6 point e). Whilst a special provision is introduced for the detention of those who are tried and are in a special regime of isolation, they are detained in police stations, which, for us and the long trials we have, is a move aimed at failing to conduct the civil trial and effectively cancelling it.

We know that we represent a political threat to the regime even though we are in prison. We know that we are still at the top of the agenda of the government’s political goals to address a political adversary of the system. This was expressly stated by Tsipras in the parliament, mentioning twice the name of Pola Roupa to the successes of his government’s repressive policy, paying special attention to this arrest. And they all heard that it was the only name in terms of arrests mentioned in the parliament.

They explicitly state this with the extensive reports they are always doing mentioning the name of Pola Roupa and our political history with the media presenting us as the central face in every armed activity.

And it is clear that while the repressive mechanisms have already reduced Revolutionary Struggle to an “umbrella” for a series of robberies that have taken place across Greece, they continue to place at the center of domestic armed action – of every kind and form – Revolutionary Struggle and us personally.

This is a strategically important policy for the state, the government and the media that stems from the prioritization of our case, Revolutionary Struggle and our political choices. Because while we are in jail, their war against us does not stop and in every way the government shows its political will against us that has long been personal.

We have repeatedly stated and everyone knows that what we do, we do. The political actions and actions of Revolutionary Struggle, of the organization to which we are members, we always defend them politically at all costs. However, actions that are not related to and are not related to Revolutionary Struggle – which the repressive mechanisms know – we are not willing to be credited with. Everyone assumes their responsibilities in the political field.

However, we know that the choice of the state to place us at the heart of any armed activity is of strategic importance. And this policy is converging with the state’s primary target of putting us in a special treatment regime within prisons. It comes and converges with the new exception regime that prepares and restores Type C prisons, with a special priority to be given to us personally this time with the photographic arrangement of Art. 11 para.6 of the new Penal Code.

THE NEW PENITENTIARY CODE AND THE THREAT OF THE PRISON REGIME

According to Article 11, paragraph 6 of the new Penitentiary Code, “those convicted of organizing escapes and other offences committed within detention facilities and under the applicable criminal and terrorist law will be detained in specific designated areas”.

It is known that in the past there have been cases of escaping detainees or attempted escapes. Never before has any government been asked to legislate specifically on organizing escapes to isolate detainees for such cases. The last escape took place in 2013 under ND (New Democracy political party).

In the recent historic juncture, the only such escape that has not been tried is the attempted escape of political prisoners that Pola Roupa attempted in February 2016, for which both Nikos Maziotis and other political prisoners are accused.

We do not know whether this provision is applied retrospectively and includes other cases of escape, but it certainly concerns this case. This is a pure device.

To the extent that there are other prisoners convicted of organizing escapes from prisons, they will obviously have the same treatment, as we know that the extension of an exceptional measure already enforced by law will include other categories of prisoners, that is a given.

Every move towards more and more totalitarian conditions in society, and in this case in prisons, is usually passed over the declared political enemies of the system that are prisoners of the state and then they are to be extended to wider social and political categories of people. With regard to escapes from prisons, up to now – and after legal and political interference in the matter – it has been enshrined as a prisoner’s right because of the recognition of human nature which tends towards freedom, with the result that the escape has constituted until recently a misdemeanour.

Obviously in a regime such as the modern one, which is steadily and without a political rival heading towards an absolute totalitarianism, the state wants to show that this tendency to freedom is a detestable tendency. That’s why their exemplary punishment by putting them in a regime of permanent isolation is now routed through the new penitentiary code by a left-wing government.

The special conditions of detention, even in absolute isolation, are laid down in the same article and for a large category of prisoners who “manifest violent behaviour towards the prison staff”. In addition to the imposition of a disciplinary sanction on the so-called “harsh” prisoners that is to be imposed by the council, Article 11 (6) (a) introduces the possibility of placing these detainees in a special quarantine regime for long periods of time. And because the issue may even concern the incitement of mobilization in prisons, this article is expected for “security reasons”, prisoners who are actively involved in prison life are to be placed in isolation.

Article 11 lists discrimination and segregation of detainees. In addition to the existing categorizations in paragraph 4, an extraordinary regime for the detention of a special category of detainees is taken “in case of transfer for procedural reasons if there is no such facility or department, the detainee resides in a specially designed area of a local police station”.

“If reasons connected with the security of the country or public order or order and security in the detention facilities make it necessary to take additional security measures for the guarding of a detainee for procedural reasons and to avoid communicating with detainees of other categories, guarding and staying in the detention facility may be done at the suggestion of the competent police authority or the Directorate-General for Criminal Offences of the Ministry of Justice in some other police facility”. “Grounds related to the country’s security or public order” are clearly relevant to members of armed organizations since they are invoked for reasons which exist only in 187A and in any other article of the Penal Code. Accordingly, this provision reserves the option to keep someone in isolation in GADA (Police Headquarters) and detention there by decision of the minister if it is someone who is in prison under 187A[2], IE they are a member of an armed revolutionary organization, throughout their trial.

Detention in the police stations (and while there are prisons in the trial area), the same article is also provided for security reasons for detention facilities. Consequently, for those detained in the detention category under special circumstances, their right to an effective trial is being circumvented.

Given the conditions of detention in these circumstances and given that our trials are many months long with the restoration of this provision initially introduced by ND with the Type C prison bill, the state not only violates any right to trial, but renders void its conduct. And in this case it is clear. Kontonis, the Minister of Justice, with Article 11, quite openly declares the “extraordinary” treatment that we have, a unique exception scheme with more personal targeting.

Since he has stated in many ways the central policy of the government and himself to introduce segregation and within the class of political prisoners, IE those in prison on 187A, it is clear that the exceptional treatment is aimed at creating the most stifling conditions of imprisonment, without communication with other detainees.

Article 11 and the subheadings introduced in paragraph 6 in conjunction with the specific reference made in Article 11 itself and in paragraph 4 to “security issues of the country and of public order” which concern exclusively political prisoners and the conditions for conducting their trials, which are mainly political trials, it is clear that the ministry has launched the exceptional treatment and personal targeting against those who have a political attitude and reason, who defend their choices and express them throughout the prison and courts. Our trials are targeted and their abolition is being launched, all of which, together with Article 51 on prisoners’ communications and their drastic limitation (see below), aims at the political silencing of political prisoners.

We know that even our political voice is dangerous to the regime junta. The open attack on us is at the bottom of their policies, and comes from this political fear. Because it is assumed that trials such as those we face are impossible to conduct smoothly under the conditions introduced by the new prisons, the safe conclusion is that ultimately the government’s goal is primarily political. It is the abolition of the civil trial.

Equal rights and respect for human dignity under the Constitution are explicitly circumvented in the New Penitentiary Code, both with the special provisions and the exception regime that will be imposed in specific cases as we have mentioned, and through other provisions such as Article 2 Paragraph 4 mentions “exceptional cases where measures may entail restrictions on the normal living conditions of prisoners determined on a case by case basis by a public prosecutor’s decision”.

Also, Article 15 (3) provides for the decision of the Minister of Justice to “include detainees in new categories for reasons of special treatment”. Therefore, the introduction of new discrimination among prisoners is subject to the discretion of the prosecutor and the minister.

Article 51 introduces the restriction of the prisoner’s telephone communications. Based on this article, telephone numbers communicated with by prisoners will be imported into software and the prisoners will be given a password to communicate with them and only the phones they have given themselves to the service will be allowed. It is clear that this measure is not introduced to monitor and control the prisoner’s telephone communications as this is in any case valid. What is introduced is the strict control of communications on those persons who visit the detainees, IE relatives, and will clearly require special approval from the prison service for the other prisoners’ communications. If for example the individual prosecutor does not approve any communication, no password will be given.

The universal restraint of all first-time prisoners’ telephone communications is a new type of totalitarian measure against the freedom of people in communications that is also enshrined in the Constitution.

Although it is not explicitly stated in this article, the restriction of prisoners’ communications is the one that provided for by this article.

Article 13 “on special arrangements for detained mothers and detained parents” and in paragraph 3, first incorporates Article 1532 of the Civil Code on “Parental Responsibility” for imprisoned parents. It restricts the possibility for children up to 3 years of age to live with their detained mother (the possibility of living with the detained father is introduced, but such a possibility is impossible under the existing conditions) only if judged necessary by a juvenile court. Therefore it dismisses the fact that if a prisoner, a mother can keep her child if she wishes within the prison. This will now be judged by the courts. There is also a distinction in those prisoners serving sentences of more than 10 years where the child’s care – whether it will go to a relative or an institution – will also be judged by a juvenile court. Consequently, the child will remain with the mother as a need only if there is no other suitable person and at the discretion of the judge.

And when the child reaches the third year it will go to an institution if each juvenile court deems inappropriate the family environment of the parents. While the government says it legislates release for women with young children and with sentences not exceeding 10 years, the new penal code cancels this feature as in Article 13 paragraph 3 provides that this measure be applied ”Where the provision for an individual living space solely for the detained parent and his/her child is not possible (…) It (the competent body) can order the house arrest of the mother or father (…)”. Under house arrest it is a given that no parent can perform a parent’s duty, as the child cannot remain continuously closed in at home. It is therefore ridiculous to propose and apply such a law.

But what if the sentence exceeds 10 years? In Article 13, paragraph 3 it says that if there is no suitable place to stay for children up to 3 years old with its mother in prison and while the sentence is more than 10 years the juvenile court will decide if the child is taken by a family member or an institution. And in cases where there is no family member or they are not considered appropriate by the court, rather than improving conditions of detention they prefer to put children in institutions.

Instead of institutionalizing children, they could arrange another space for the mother to stay with her younger child up to the age of 6 – an absolute necessity for the mother – instead they provide for day visits by imprisoned parents once a month, instead legislate for overnight stays for underage children with their mothers, for example. With one visit in a two-month period, a measure that would be essential to support children themselves, they legislate against children and are vindictive and sexist to women – they abuse the law and are denying the right to maternity.

It goes without saying that no possibility of release is given to detainees whose sentences exceed 10 years, and the absence of a suitable environment for children makes definite the decision to go to the institutions.

It is obvious that the regime that existed beforehand on parents and detained minors is overturned. To date, children and their detained parents have not been involved in court proceedings to judge the environment of the child, except in exceptional cases of violence against children, or the complete inability of the environment to keep them or in the absence of relatives.

There is now a measure that has so far been applied in very special cases, for the courts and child psychiatrists to control and decide on the children’s environment, while the detained parent enters into an unfavourable and racist attitude for their ability to judge the interests of their child, such interests under Article 13 (3) will now be judged by the court.

This arrangement was announced by Justice Minister Kontonis in an interview he had given on 7/1/17 on the state TV channel, when interviewed about the treatment of our child by the state and the government with the arrest of Pola Roupa on 5 /1.

It is well known that the “exceptional” treatment of our child, who was held in GADA and specifically in the anti-terrorism department for hours under extreme secrecy, was interrogated and with a prosecution order kept guarded in a closed psychiatric clinic, is historically unique. Our child was treated as a criminal offender as a potential terrorist because it was our own child. Then, at first, it was initially attempted to remove our parental care altogether and definitively, to take away any parental relationship with our child and to break it forever, giving parental care temporarily to the social service of the hospital that kept it with the option of shutting it in an institution.

The kidnapping of the child in the psychiatric hospital ended after the hunger and thirst strike, but also the political and social outcry that it stirred up, but the State claimed through the Prosecutor’s Office of Kalamata to remove custody of our child and impose restrictive conditions on him under the supervision of the social service and child psychologists. This condition of permanent hostage that they want to impose on our child, as well as the removal of custody from us, relates to the fact that we are who we are.

In the trial that will be held on 15/11 from which we are excluded by refusing to take us to Kalamata to attend the trial, the Prosecutor’s Office of Kalamata asks us to permanently remove our custody and impose conditions on our child until he reaches the age of maturity, the imposition of permanent control by the social services and the child-psychologists. For reasons of political revenge they want to remove our custody, for reasons of revenge and on our own child, they want to impose restrictive conditions, to keep him as a hostage.

Article 13 does not provide custody to imprisoned parents, but the courts will decide which is the most appropriate environment for their care. What they have sought for our own child is clearly different and is dictated by our political choices and positions.

Article 13 introduces a new totalitarianism. The ability of the state to judge universally and to question the suitability of the parent or relatives on the basis of its own criteria. It is well known that the institutions that have the honour in the new prison code are claiming child prisoners. Obviously the financial interests behind the institutions, the most famous of which are under the auspices of well-known economically powerful individuals in Greece, are very large and the expectations for the expansion of institutions-businesses in the country are significant. It is not possible for the government to deceive people that it is legislating on the basis of the “interest of the child”, everybody understands this – since it is known that the institutions are an investment for the powerful and for specific economic interests – the interests of some powerful families in the country. It is also well known, for the most part, that many institutions are genuinely hell holes for children, who are systematically abused and sometimes “killed in the wells”.

However, in the name of the interests of ‘security’ and, in particular, of the state totalitarianism being promoted, institutions are now legally recognized as a ‘popular’ destination for the children of prisoners, and always, in ‘the child’s interest’.

Other provisions of the new Penitentiary Code are also contributing to the setting of prison conditions.

The lawful detestable vaginal check-ups for women and the incarceration of the prisoner during a physical investigation with Article 21 paragraph 7.

Article 63 (1) first regulates the use of force against detainees by prison staff in any cases such as “active or passive physical resistance to a lawful order” or “lawful defence cases”. In short, every employee can legally practice violence against any prisoner even if they show a passive refusal to execute a staff order! As for the equipment of prison staff for the means of violence, it will be provided by the prison rule under Article 63 (4). It is clear that while the use of force will be provided for by the prison services themselves and at the will of the individual guards, the use of force by police forces and the special guards is legislated in the same article, and in cases of group disobedience, such as the mobilizations of prisoners when they refuse to enter their cells it will be handed out, (article 63, para. 2). Legislation on the abolition of protests and mobilizations of detainees introduced by this correctional code is one of the most totalitarian features of the history of prisons in the country. Along with the legalization of the use of force as provided, the conversion of all prisons into disciplinary cultures is rooted in the most explicit way, while the right to protest is criminalized.

On the basis of Article 63 and in conjunction with Article 11 (6) (a), detainees will be placed under special detention if they participate in mobilizations or, most importantly, if they are potent, since in any event they will be suppressed with violence.

The right of prisoners’ leave is to be abused for many categories of detainees, and sentences for acts of violence exceeding 15 years ( Article 53 (2 ) (d ) will be excluded from this right. In these cases involving hundreds of prisoners, leave will not be given and the prisoners will be in danger of being in a closed prison even until the end of their sentence.

And while Justice Minister Kontonis defends “equal treatment of prisoners in the face of the law” he legislates for discrimination based on the offence, refusing leave and release for certain categories of prisoners, such as those incarcerated for 15 year sentences and above for acts of violence, including those falling under 187A. And it is not about the specific measure for example drug dealers. We mention this example because he has publicly stated that he has intervened in a court decision to refuse to interrupt a prisoner’s sentence because he considered it unfair to decide the interruption of a sentence for a drug dealer rather than for a specific prisoner. He is extremely selective not only in his interventions but also in the way he is legislating now. And he is the first minister to legislate for discrimination on the basis of the offence, but also on the basis of specific persons.

Let us remind ourselves that he is the same minister who publicly defended the special treatment of our child, for which a number of laws were violated, he finally defended the treatment of our child, a six-year-old child, and defended his treatment as a “criminal offender” and his confinement to the psychiatric hospital.

In any case, the new penitentiary code wants to promote the end of prison protests, to introduce violence, punishment and revenge on detainees without room for protest, especially through articles that provide for special quarantine conditions.

A new regime of extermination of a special category of prisoners is introduced in the article. 11 (6) (e) and (4) of that Article. As far as political prisoners are concerned, the continued pressure to legislate on denial of leave and release without a statement of repentance reduces political prisoners to a special category for political reasons, since the extraordinary treatment concerns the motivation that is political rather than personal.

And such pressure as these measures to exclude political prisoners in prison are those which power wants to pass is in the direction of destroying all political resistance against the regime. The status of the oligarchy of the rich and their political co-soldiers who are responsible for the death, extermination and misery of millions of people in the country and for these crimes, for the terrorism they are practising, no one will pay.

On the contrary, those who struggle against their criminal, murderous regime must be exterminated.

The invocation of cases where prisoners violate the law when they left prison under the Paraskevopoulos law[3] is devoid of substance, since the type and intensity of social crime is not defined by the time of imprisonment, but by the wider social and economic conditions.

While the increasingly harsh conditions of detention will guarantee the return of detainees to delinquency, and even in more fierce forms of detention, since the tendency for revenge will coexist.

To the extent that poverty and regime violence at the expense of the social majority is increasing by dismantling social cohesion, killing social solidarity and turning the social base into a jungle, it is assumed that social crime will not only grow but will become more and more violent. The status of the “war of all against all” is imposed by the economic and political system itself. Since the elimination of crime presupposes the treatment of the causes that give birth to it and because the cause of the crime is the very system of capitalism, the state and the junta of the markets, the only way to effectively tackle crime at the basis of society is another type of social organization based on economic equality and political freedom.

Through Article 11 (4) and (6), it is clear that it is determined that we will be placed in a regime of permanent isolation from other prisoners while aiming at removing the possibility of trial. Nikos Maziotis is already in isolation status for the last 4 months for reasons we have outlined in texts published last July and September. Obviously, the imposition of a total isolation regime for Maziotis has “whetted the appetite” of the ministry to establish this treaty by law and to impose it on Pola, as she has taken responsibility the attempt to break out political prisoners from Korydallos.

The left-wing government, specializing in introducing and promoting divisions within resistance spaces and within political prisoners themselves, is certain that these measures will not apply to all those detained for involvement in armed activities. There will be clear discrimination among those who the government and the state always judge for their behaviour, especially their politics. As far as we are concerned, it is clear that we are the top priorities of the government’s war. And we will be the ones the government wants to pass these new measures upon.

But they will not just stay with us. It is certain that any exceptional measure applied to the political opponents of the regime will be broadened in their application to other categories of people.

Flagging the phrase “for the country’s security and public order”, the Syriza-ANEL government introduces new regimes of exclusion and isolation, as well as the most restrictive terms of detention for anyone recognized as a political threat.

The regime of modern parliamentary and economically powerful oligarchs does not recognize the existence of political opponents, it characterizes them as “terrorists” and condemns them with 187A to severe punishments. Once again, provisions are introduced for their slow destruction through the return of isolation and special conditions of detention. At the same time, both the media and the regime politicians howl about the treatment of the Junta and demanded that this regime be extended to a life long treatment, so as not to let the political opponents of the regime out of prison. It is obscene to draw a parallel with the Junta who imposed fascism on the whole country, who killed, tortured thousands of people, and sent tanks to the Polytechnic in 1973, and killed the insurgents in revolt in any other case.

As we have already said, Revolutionary Struggle has for years been an important priority in the repressive state policy. We know that we are also an important political target for the regime, given the choice of struggle we have made. However, the totalitarianism introduced by the new prison code and the incessant measures of control and pressure on prisoners promotes a new type of universal censure and social racism in prisons in order to make the pursuit of detainees more effective and on terms that will even go as far as their crushing if the state deems it necessary for its security.

In a pro-government newspaper we read in regard to the new prison code, titled “Prisons not sweat shops”, that the supposed pillar of the new code is the principle that “the only restriction imposed on the prisoners is on their movement.” No matter how the government’s parrots tried to beautify the new law they can not reverse the truth: It is a legal monstrosity that introduces the “modernization” of prisons to the country turning them into crematoriums for many detainees according to the specifications laid down by the new totalitarian regime imposed on the whole of society.

It is in “absolute harmony” with the modern junta of markets, supranational capital and government-puppets in Greece. It is in “absolute harmony” with the supervision and social subordination to the supranational power centres. With policies of social genocide for the social base, subordination and total control for all, to ensure the smooth reproduction of the criminal economic and political system. No social resistance, no political threat. And it is clear that while the regime imposes these conditions on society, and while politically threatening adversaries do not exist, the totalitarianism that will pass as a juggernaut through society will not leave the prisoners out of their sight.

The new penitentiary code and the threat of the detention conditions it imposes are a cause of struggle for all prisoners, and it does enough to “raise” the request to withdraw all the articles mentioned in the text, which for us are weapons of revenge and punishment against thousands of prisoners.

But we have already said they will not let the new Type C prisons and prisoners’ extermination schemes pass over us.

So we commence a HUNGER STRIKE today Saturday, November 11th with the following demands:

To withdraw the provision in Article 11 para, 6 pt. E and para. 4 in the same article regarding the detention in police stations. Do not bring back the Type C prison regime. Immediately release Nikos Maziotis from the isolation in which he is held by a decision of the ministry since last July.

Introduce adjustment to the correctional code for the easing of visitor hours based on the frequency of visits a prisoner has. For example, a prisoner who has one hour per month visit or cannot at all extend the time of the meeting.

There should be a special meeting room for parents to meet with their children (there is no such place in the Korydallos men’s prison) and when the frequency of meetings is rare, the meeting time should increase accordingly.

In our case the visits with our child, take place once a month due to distance and the time of one hour that is imposed is a mockery for the child. Also other visitors than that, we do not get at all. Everyone in prison knows this condition and the frequency of visits is written in the prison books.

The prosecutor of the prison refused to extend the time to meet with our child while they are aware of everything and insist on one hour per month, a decision directly against the child itself as it completely discredits our meeting. Potentially with 1 hour it is desired to completely cancel the meetings with our child.

In order to achieve even the bare minimum to meet the needs of our child to communicate with us due to the inability to visit us often we request:

· Visiting with our child to last at least three hours.
· Visiting between us two hours.
· Similar arrangements are provided for similar cases and should be extended to the minimum time for parents’ meetings with their children.

During the hunger strike we must be given a telephone conversation with our child and our lawyers.

We state from the outset that we will not receive serum when hospitalized, we will only receive water throughout the strike and do not think of force feeding us.

Pola Roupa – Nikos Maziotis,

Members of Revolutionary Struggle

[1] Type C prisons: maximum security prisons introduced in 2014 under the Samaras government which placed prisoners, mainly political prisoners, in special isolation units. Elements of these prisons were removed in 2015.

[2] 187A is the article of the Greek criminal code on the formation of criminal organizations, it is the main charge brought against members and suspected members of guerrilla groups.

[3] Paraskevopoulos law was brought in during the prisoners’ hunger strike in 2015 and grants early release for some prisoners in the hope of easing prison overcrowding.

Pola Roupa and Nikos Maziotis, imprisoned members of Revolutionary Struggle on hunger strike (Greece)

Bern: Soli-Transpi für “Revolutionärer Kampf”

Zum gestrigen Aufruf zur Solidarität mit dem «Revolutionären Kampf» haben wir in Bern ein Soli-Transparent gesprayt und aufgehängt.

Der Revolutionäre Kampf ist nebst der «Verschwörung der Feuerzellen» einer von zwei noch aktiven anarchistischen und bewaffneten Gruppen in Griechenland. Am fünften Januar dieses Jahres wurde Pola Roupa, ihr Sohn und die Anarchistin Konstantina Athanasopoulou in Athen verhaftet. Auf Pola war zuvor ein Kopfgeld von einer Million Euro ausgesetzt worden.

2011 waren Pola Roupa, Nikos Maziotis und Costas Gournas nach der Entlassung aus der maximalen U-Haft Dauer von 18 Monaten untergetaucht. Im Juli 2014 wurde der Ehemann von Pola Roupa, Nikos Maziotis, in Athen verhaftet. Er wurde für einen Sprengstoffanschlag auf die Baustelle der Nationalbank zu lebenslanger Haft verurteilt. Dies ist bemerkenswert, da bei dem Anschlag eine Warnung vorausgegangen war und es weder Tote noch Verletzte gab. Zur Lebenslagen Haft kamen weitere 129 Jahre für Schüsse auf PolizistInnen und diverse Banküberfälle.

Pola Roupa versuchte im letzten Jahr Nikos Maziotis auf spektakuläre Art und Weise zu befreien. Sie kaperte dazu einen Touristen-Helikopter mit dem Plan, diese zum Gefängnis von Nikos zu fliegen. Der Pilot, ein ehemaliger Polizist, lies den Hubschrauber jedoch abstürzen und Pola konnte fliehen.

Nach der Verhaftung wurde ihr Sohn in ein Krankenhaus eingesperrt und durfte keinen Besuch erhalten. Daraufhin traten die Mitglieder des Revolutionären Kampfes in einen Hunger- und Durchstreik. In dieser Zeit kam es in ganz Griechenland zu verschiedenen Solidaritätsaktionen. So versuchten beispielsweise Anarchist*innen mit einer Demo in das Krankenhaus zu gelangen, um den Sohn von Pola und Nikos ein paar Spielzeuge zu bringen. Im Gefängnis, wo die Mitglieder des Revolutionären Kampfes inhaftiert sind, verweigerten die Insassen den Einschluss.

Wir möchten uns den Solidaritätsaktionen anschliessen und senden den Gefangenen solidarische Grüsse aus Bern.

Mehr zur Geschichte des Revolutionären Kampfes, den Zielen und Strategien der Gruppe gibt es im diesem Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x_fPr787H4Y 

Griechenland: Lambros-Viktoras Maziotis Roupas bei Verwandten

Heute, am Sonntag 8. Januar 2017, bekam die Grossmutter mütterlicherseits von Lambros-Viktoras Maziotis Roupas nach einer neuen Entscheidung des Staatsanwalts die vorläufige Obhut für ihn. Seine Inhaftierung in der psychiatrischen Abteilung (!) des Kinderspitals in Athen wurde so endlich beendet. Das sechs Jahre alte Kind verliess das Spital unter der Begleitung seiner nächsten Verwandten.

In der Zwischenzeit gab es Proteste durch Gefangene in den Männer- und Frauenknästen von Koridallos, im Frauenknast von Elaionas in Thebes und im Knast von Trikala.

Die Mitglieder des Revolutionären Kampf Nikos Maziotis, Pola Roupa und Kostantina Athanasopoulou haben ihren Durst- und Hungerstreik unterbrochen.

Ein Gericht wird innerhalb von sechs Monaten über die definitive Obhut für das Kind entscheiden.

Greece: Lambros-Viktoras Maziotis Roupas placed with relatives

Greece: Lambros-Viktoras Maziotis Roupas placed with relatives

Today, Sunday January 8th 2017, after a new prosecutor’s order, temporary custody of Lambros-Viktoras Maziotis Roupas was given to the grandmother on his mother’s side, so his captivity in the psychiatric unit(!) of the children’s hospital in Athens was finally terminated. The six-year-old child left the hospital escorted by his first-degree relatives.

Meanwhile, there were protests by inmates at Koridallos men’s and women’s prisons, Elaionas women’s prison in Thebes, and Trikala prison.

Revolutionary Struggle members Nikos Maziotis, Pola Roupa and Kostantina Athanasopoulou have interrupted their thirst and hunger strike.

A court will decide on the final custody of the child within six months.

Greece: Lambros-Viktoras Maziotis Roupas placed with relatives

 

Athen, Griechenland: Drei Mitglieder vom Revolutionären Kampf im Hunger und Durststreik.


Solidarität aus Zürich (7.1.2017)

Am frühen Morgen des 5. Januar 2017 wurden zwei Mitglieder des Revolutionären Kampfes, die flüchtige Gefährtin Pola Roupa und die Anarchistin Konstantina Athanasopoulou in einem Vorort von Athen gefangengenommen. Antiterror-Einheit der Bullen haben einen Unterschlupf überfallen, in dem sich Pola und ihr sechsjähriger Sohn aufhielten, während Konstantina in einem anderen Haus in der Nähe verhaftet wurde.

Nachdem Lambros-Viktoras Maziotis Roupas (der kleine Sohn von den Revolutionären Kampf Mitgliedern Nikos Maziotis und Pola Roupa) gewaltsam seiner Mutter weggenommen wurde, wird er, von Bullen bewacht (!), in einem Kinderkrankenhaus gefangen gehalten. Er erhält dort keine Besuche von seinen nächsten Verwandten. Sogar die gesetzlichen Vertreter*innen seiner Eltern dürfen nicht zu ihm.

Die griechischen Behörden und insbesondere die für Minderjährige zuständige Staatsanwältin Frau Nikolou, verweigert es noch, das Kind an Verwandte ersten Grades zu übergeben.

Als Antwort darauf, haben drei Mitglieder des revolutionären Kampfes (der anarchistische Gefangene Nikos Maziotis, die wieder gefangene Pola Roupa und die gerade verhaftete Konstantina Athanasopoulou, seit dem 5. Januar einen Hunger-und Durststreik begonnen. Sie fordern, dass der sechsjährige Junge sofort bei seiner Tante und Großmutter untergebracht wird. (Verwandte mütterlicherseits).

In einem offenen Brief verkündet Nikos Maziotis u.a., dass “Unser Sohn das Kind zweier Revolutionär*innen ist und er stolz auf seine Eltern sei. Wir werden uns nicht erpressen lassen. Wir verteidigen unsere Wahl mit unserem Leben.”

Am 6. Januar, während der Überführung der Frauen zum Evelpidon Gericht, rief Pola: “Die Würmer halten mein Kind im Paidon (Kinderkrankenhaus in Athen), bewacht durch bewaffnete Bullen, im Alter von sechs Jahren. Er ist ein Kriegsgefangener“ und „Lang lebe die Revolution“. Weiter hat sie erklärt „Ich bin eine Revolutionärin und ich habe mich für nichts zu entschuldigen”

Es folgt die Erklärung von Konstantina:

“Ich bin Anarchistin, Mitglieder der bewaffneten revolutionären Organisation Revolutionärer Kampf (Epanastatikos Agonas). Die einzigen Terrorist*innen sind der Staat und das Kapital. Ich verweigere das Essen und Trinken bis das Kind meiner Gefährt*innen Pola Roupa und Nikos Maziotis ihren Verwandten übergeben wird. “
Konstantina Athanasopoulou

Im Inneren haben anarchistische Gefangene und andere Insass*innen verschiedener Flügel von Koridallos Männer- und vom Frauengefängnis aus Solidarität mit den Gefangenen des Revolutionären Kampfes (die sich momentan im Hunger- und Durststreik befinden) einen gemeinsamen Protest organisiert. Der Einschluss wurde verweigert, um das Ende der Gefangenschaft von Lambros-Viktoras zu fordern.

Draußen haben GefährtInnen in verschiedenen Städten ganz Griechenlands diverse Aktionen als sofortige Unterstützung der anarchistischen Revolutionäre durchgeführt. Auch sie fordern, dass die Verwandten ersten Grades von Pola Roupa sofortige Besuchserlaubnis und Sorgerecht für das Minderjährige Kind erhalten.

Viel Kraft für Konstantina Athanasopoulou, Pola Roupa und Nikos Maziotis, stolze Mitglieder des Revolutionären Kampfes.

Der Revolutionäre Kampf wird weder die Waffen nieder legen, noch sich den Feinden der Freiheit ergeben.

https://de-contrainfo.espiv.net

Greece: Revolutionary Struggle member Pola Roupa arrested in Attica

According to Greek  media the comrade Pola Roupa, member of Revolutionary Struggle, has been arrested at a home in the Attica region. Pola is the partner of Revolutionary Struggle member and political prisoner Nikos Maziotis and was one of the most wanted fugitives in Greece. According to media reports Pola was at the house with her young child and a 25 year old woman when police raided. The 25 year old woman was also arrested. There are unconfirmed reports that two more people may have been arrested as well. More information as it becomes available.

Solidarity with Pola Roupa and Revolutionary Struggle!

Greece: Revolutionary Struggle member Pola Roupa arrested in Attica

Greece: Revolutionary Struggle member Nikos Maziotis on the escape attempt and life sentence

Text of Nikos Maziotis about the operation of escape from Koridallos prison and the sentence of life imprisonment handed down in the 2nd Revolutionary Struggle trial

The attempt to escape from Koridallos prison by helicopter on February 21st 2016 – an operation carried out by comrade Pola Roupa, member of Revolutionary Struggle – was a revolutionary act, a guerrilla action for the liberation of political prisoners. It was a means of continuation of Revolutionary Struggle’s activity, a response to the State’s repressive operations against our organisation and other political prisoners, comrades who are in prison for armed activity as well. It was therefore an exemplary solidarity act of great and unique importance. The prison escape operation was a step towards continuing armed revolutionary activity; promoting the struggle for the overthrow of the State and Capital; overturning the establishment’s policy of bailout programs imposed by the troika of the country’s supranational bosses, the EC, ECB and IMF, to which the ESM has been added with the enactment and implementation of the third memorandum program by the SYRIZA-led government. Armed struggle in the present circumstances is more timely and necessary than ever. The failure of this operation won’t bend us. We will struggle as long as we live and breathe.

Revolutionary Struggle has proven that it has remained standing over the years, despite successive repressive blows and sacrifices: the blood of comrade Lambros Foundas, who was killed on March 10th 2010 in a shootout with police in the district of Dafni, Athens, during a preparatory action of the organisation; our arrests a month later, April 10th 2010, on the eve of Greece’s signing of the first memorandum; my arrest on July 16th 2014 in Monastiraki, Athens, where I was injured following a chase and shootout with police. Revolutionary Struggle remained standing because we undertook political responsibility for our participation in the organisation – in Greece, we were the first armed revolutionary and anarchist organisation to do so – and because we defended our history, the organisation’s actions and our comrade Lambros Foundas, who gave his life so that the memorandum wouldn’t pass; to turn the crisis into an opportunity for social revolution. We remained standing as an organisation because we didn’t mind paying the cost and price, because we didn’t turn ourselves into betrayers or deserters, because none of us tried to save one’s own skin at the moment of repression. It’s precisely because we claimed political responsibility that we stayed alive as an organisation in prison in 2010–11. We gave a political battle against the enemy in the 1st special court. Once released from prison after 18 months in pretrial detention, we chose not to surrender ourselves to imminent imprisonment and went underground instead, to continue armed struggle and the organisation’s activity.

The attack of Revolutionary Struggle – Commando Lambros Foundas on April 10th 2014 against the Bank of Greece, a branch of the ECB – one of the most popularly-hated organisations that make up the quartet of supranational bosses – but also a building that housed the office of the IMF’s permanent representative in Greece, annulled the 2010 repressive operation, and continued the organisation’s strategy that was launched in 2009 with the attacks on Citibank’s headquarters and one of its branches, a Eurobank’s branch and the Athens Stock Exchange. For years Revolutionary Struggle is faced with the spearhead of state repression, since the issue of dealing with the organisation and generally armed revolutionary activity is a major priority for the survival of the establishment, seeking to eliminate the internal enemy for the smooth enforcement and implementation of bailout programs, which constitute policies of social genocide and cleansing of parts of the population.

In 2007, the U.S. Department of State and the Greek State placed bounties of 1 million dollars and 800 thousand euros, respectively, after the organisation’s attack with an anti-tank RPG at the U.S. Embassy in Athens. In 2010, the Papandreou government celebrated our arrests, and a government official stated that they prevented a blow that would end the economy, on the eve of the signing of the first memorandum and amid fear of Greek economy’s collapse. In 2014, after we had gone into clandestinity and had been sentenced to 50 years imprisonment by the 1st special court, the Samaras government placed a bounty of 2 million euros on our heads – one million on comrade Roupa and another million on me. My arrest, three months after Revolutionary Struggle’s attack against the Bank of Greece, was celebrated by Greek authorities. U.S. officials congratulated them on my recapture and made statements on political stability. Special measures were implemented after my arrest and, in December 2014, I was transferred to the newly-inaugurated type C maximum security prison, this being the first such transfer of a political prisoner, already preannounced since my recapture. In April 2015, I was included in the list of “international terrorists” designated by State Department, even though I was in prison. The authorities have now unleashed a manhunt to arrest comrade Roupa. All this demonstrates that combating Revolutionary Struggle holds great significance for the establishment. That is, repression against Revolutionary Struggle and implementation of memoranda, together with the establishment’s political stability, go hand in hand.

Last link in the chain of the establishment’s repression against Revolutionary Struggle is the decision of the 2nd trial against the organisation, a few days after the prison escape attempt. I was sentenced to life imprisonment for the bombing attack against the Bank of Greece, plus 129 years for two expropriations of bank branches and shooting of cops who persecuted me in Monastiraki. The imposition of the severest possible sentence for the organisation’s attack against the country’s bosses is a conscious political decision and not just a procedural exaggeration. As I have already stated, this decision aims not to terrorise me – because they know I am and will remain unrepentant – but those who’ll want to opt for armed struggle, comrades of the anarchist/antiauthoritarian milieu and other fighters within society. This political decision – applied for the first time in Greece in regard to a bombing attack which took place following a phone call warning, causing no injuries, but only material damages – is aimed at multiple recipients and sends out an intimidation message, that fighters who’ll opt for armed revolutionary activity will be treated with the utmost severity.

This decision demonstrates the establishment’s increasingly harshening stance against their number one enemy – Revolutionary Struggle, armed fighters. It’s not difficult to understand why, at a time when the SYRIZA-led government has voted the third memorandum, which is harsher than the previous ones. The big difference between penal treatment in the 1st and the 2nd Revolutionary Struggle trials may give rise to misinterpretations; I would therefore like to point out the following: Since the enactment of anti-terrorism laws in 2001 and 2004, this special legislation constitutes a political choice of Power in order to deal as effectively as possible with urban guerrilla in Greece as a major threat to the establishment. A provision in the anti-terrorism legislation allows life sentence, not for homicide, but for explosion as a result of which there was danger to humans or an injury occurred. I was sentenced to life in prison under this provision. Special court decisions in trials against armed fighters are eminently political decisions; the elements in the accusatory dossier are often of secondary importance. For example, as demonstrated during court hearings of the 2nd trial against Revolutionary Struggle in regard to the organisation’s attack against the Bank of Greece, even though there was a phone call giving 50 minutes warning before the explosion, the security officers remained inside the building on the instructions of the Bank of Greece’s security supervisor. The security supervisor himself admitted there’s a standard regulation which obliges the security staff to stay inside the building despite the threat of explosion. The same happened at Piraeus Bank’s headquarters located opposite the Bank of Greece, where security officers remained inside the building on the instructions of the bank’s head of security. As demonstrated in the 1st trial against the organisation, the same also happened on September 2nd 2009 in Revolutionary Struggle’s attack against the Athens Stock Exchange building, where security staff stayed inside as ordered by the head of security.

It’s thus demonstrated that those who are responsible for causing danger to humans are the executives of the economic Power and establishment’s mechanisms and central structures, such as banks and the stock exchange, who consider people and entire populations to be expendable, and even the security officers of their facilities. Because, for them, their profits override everything; their profits, which are dipped in blood and misery, override human life itself. These are the mechanisms that the Greek people consider responsible for the policy implemented over the last six years, which has resulted in thousands of deaths and millions of poor, destitute and hungry people. These are the mechanisms whose executives (bankers, major shareholders, big businesspeople) alongside their subordinates (politicians of Greek governments) the Greek people consider responsible for the devaluation of life of millions of people, for suicides and pauperisation; not the fighters of Revolutionary Struggle. Revolutionary Struggle’s attacks against such mechanisms and structures are to a great extent popularly and socially accepted.

In both the 1st and 2nd trial against the organisation, I have been consistent in facing the enemy at special courts. This entails the undertaking of political responsibility, the political defense of Revolutionary Struggle’s activity, armed struggle and Revolution for the overthrow of the State and Capital, without counting the cost and the price. This is the duty of every fighter, every anarchist, every revolutionary who is faced with judges and organs of the enemy. The sentence to 50 years imprisonment in the 1st trial was based on the undertaking of political responsibility. This is why we were convicted as accomplices in the organisation’s 16 actions by the theorem of collective responsibility, rather than being convicted as actual perpetrators. The State’s response to the fact I remain consistent in my trajectory as a fighter and continue to defend Revolutionary Struggle, and by extension armed struggle and the prospect of Revolution and the establishment’s overthrow, was the outcome of the 2nd trial, where I was sentenced to life imprisonment for one action, the bombing attack against the Bank of Greece. My entire trajectory after the initial arrests in 2010, the fact that Revolutionary Struggle stayed alive during the pretrial detention in 2010–11, the fact that comrade Roupa and I defended the organisation’s activity at the 1st special court, our choice to not surrender ourselves to prison, to go into clandestinity and continue armed struggle and the organisation’s activity with the attack against the Bank of Greece, this entire trajectory and all these choices are based on the undertaking of political responsibility for our participation in Revolutionary Struggle after being captured in 2010. This is what the State attempted to crash by means of the decision of the 2nd trial against the organisation.

My sentence of life in prison was a message to the fighters who assume political responsibility and do not repudiate their activity and membership in their organisation.

Things are becoming increasingly clearer for the fighters who want to resist and the political prisoners. The dilemma “repudiation or life imprisonment” (in the old days there was execution by firing squad) comes into effect; a dilemma put by Power, a dilemma that in the old days was “repudiation or death”.

Over time, in order to suppress any revolutionary perspective, the State doesn’t confine itself to military predominance over its rivals only, but it also attempts their political defeat by forcing them into political repudiation. In the case of the Western-European urban guerrilla in the 70s and 80s, especially in Italy, the target of political repudiation was not one’s convictions or political identity, but rather armed struggle as being one of the means of struggle and urban guerrilla organisations. In Greece, the dilemma put by Power was once this: either repudiation of communism, or imprisonment and, in other circumstances, execution by firing squad. Nowadays, more indirectly, the dilemma is this: either choice of armed revolutionary struggle with heavy costs and consequences, or renunciation of armed revolutionary struggle as being one of the means of struggle. Either undertaking of political responsibility for one’s participation in an armed organisation and defense of its activity, or acceptance of the State’s pursuit of repudiation of an armed organisation and one’s membership in it, and by extension of armed struggle, in the face of fear of going to prison.

In other, more difficult periods like the Occupation and the Civil War, the price to pay for the struggle was the firing squad; and not only for armed struggle. Many fighters faced with the dilemma “repudiation or death” preferred the firing squad; of course not because they wanted to become martyrs, but because they believed that repudiation is a shame and disgrace; as such, it was considered worse than death. There were armed militants and guerrillas of ELAS (Greek People’s Liberation Army) and DSE (Democratic Army of Greece), but also fighters that didn’t wage armed struggle, who remained unrepentant and were sent by thousands to the firing squad during the Occupation and the Civil War; they were executed in Goudi, in Kessariani shooting range, in Chaidari and Pavlou Mela camps, on Makronissos and Corfu, in Yedi Kule. Similarly in Spain, after Franco’s victory, thousands of armed anarchists who fought for Revolution in 1936–39, and waged guerrilla warfare until 1975, were sent to firing squads in Campo de la Bota, Montjuïc, Carabanchel, or strangled by the method of garrote – used as a means of execution for heretics since the Inquisition.

The struggle for the overthrow of the State and Capital is an activity that requires unwavering convictions, responsibility, consistency, commitment, political engagement, steely will, and political and theoretical knowledge of principles and experiences of the historical revolutionary tradition. How can we even talk about struggle, social liberation, revolution, Anarchy, asking others to participate in a subversive struggle with all the costs and consequences that it entails, if we ourselves are unable to assume responsibility for our political choices?

For the first time in decades – since the era of the post-Civil War State, when ELAS guerrillas who were excluded by the 1945 Treaty of Varkiza, which didn’t recognise their activity as being political, as well as those of DSE remained in prison for at least 15 years – there is a prospect that political prisoners sentenced to 25 years or life imprisonment for armed revolutionary action will remain many years in the prisons of the contemporary Greek State-marionette of the supranational economic elite. We’re going through a period where Power is even indirectly trying to pose dilemmas for educing credentials once again, as in the past, to break us with the spectre of long-term incarceration.

The struggle for Social Revolution, for overthrowing the State and Capital, must go on despite the difficulties, the cost and consequences. We will never surrender the weapons of our struggle.

NO PEACE, NO TRUCE WITH THE STATE AND CAPITAL
ARMED STRUGGLE FOR SOCIAL REVOLUTION
HONOUR FOREVER TO COMRADE LAMBROS FOUNDAS,
MEMBER OF REVOLUTIONARY STRUGGLE

Nikos Maziotis, member of Revolutionary Struggle

http://325.nostate.net/?p=19401