Former OPEKEPE vice president Anna Maria Giantsi appeared before the Hellenic Parliament’s Examination Committee, urging that responsibility for the agricultural subsidies case be assigned only to those truly involved. Justice, she noted, should determine accountability without drawing in individuals who played no part in the matter.
Her testimony highlighted that her service at OPEKEPE in 2015 lasted only a few months, which she said limited her ability to fully grasp developments that unfolded in later years. Continuous supervision by European Union authorities during her tenure, she added, had revealed no significant irregularities at the time.
Questions from committee members focused heavily on OPEKEPE’s cooperation with its technical advisor, an issue she said she could not fully assess because she lacked detailed knowledge when she served. Complaints from farmers and technical consultants about delays in payments and application submissions, she recalled, had been present on both sides.
Her comments also addressed the broader functioning of the agency, stating that EU audits were frequent and that no serious concerns had been flagged during her period in office. Oversight, she maintained, appeared solid at that time.
Giantsi confirmed that she was an ANEL member when appointed and later joined New Democracy. Her departure from the agency, she explained, came as a decision by the minister in office, a move she said she did not challenge or request further clarification on.
The committee additionally examined an allegation from an agricultural cooperative claiming that a consulting company linked to her had received compensation without providing the promised services. She rejected any wrongdoing and committed to submitting evidence to counter the accusation.
Reactions from PASOK sources were sharply critical, arguing that her testimony relied too heavily on claims of limited memory and insufficient awareness of critical issues. Concerns were raised over her inability to clarify matters involving information system oversight, decisions on pasture allocations and the circumstances behind her dismissal.
PASOK representatives also pointed to public accusations that her company, Agrologic, had collected payments for advisory work it allegedly failed to deliver. Their statements emphasized her repeated hesitation and eventual pledge to present documentation to the committee following persistent questioning.
