Marriage of same-sex couples / The bill passed with the votes of the opposition – 176 “yes”

The bill for the marriage of same-sex couples was approved by a large majority in the Plenary of the Parliament. 254 MPs took part in the vote, 176 voted yes, 76 against, 2 were present. According to the first information, 11 PASOK MPs were absent. It is recalled that SYRIZA, PASOK, New Left and Pleussi Eleftherias were in favor of the bill, while the far-right parties together with the KKE voted against it.

The fissures in New Democracy were deepas Antonis Samaras with a far-right manifesto launched a fierce attack on Kyriakos Mitsotakis. “No comment, he expresses his personal views” state government sources which do not hide her embarrassment for the intervention of Antonis Samaras.

It is recalled that earlier from the floor of the Parliament, Antonis Samaras spoke about “regular bowling” and “tutorials”, while he reached the point of stating thatwhat “same-sex marriage is not a human right”. At the same time, pointing his arrows at the prime minister, he recalled that in 2018, when the SYRIZA government brought to the Parliament a bill on the adoption of children by same-sex couples, the ND of K. Mitsotakis voted against it and emphasized, among other things, that “now we accept something much more serious like adoption”.

THE Kyriakos Mitsotakis, for his part, in his speech to the Parliament, he defended the provisions of the draft law, saying that inequalities are removed and the self-evident rights of the children of same-sex couples are protected, while he called on the members of the “blue” KO to say “yes to Justice”. It was also mentioned on reactions of the Church saying that the government must proceed with the reforms it deems necessary. He said that the specific law equalizes citizens in the face of civil marriage, noting that religious marriage is a religious sacrament and the exclusive business of the Church, “whose positions the State certainly respects, but always based on the distinct roles of the two institutions”.

The intervention of the president of the KO of SYRIZA-PS was resounding Socrates Famello who emphasized from the floor of the House that “history will write that the ND did not have the sufficiency to carry out a reform”. “The SYRIZA Parliamentary Group has proven that it is in favor of marriage equality reform for a long time. After all, the legislation of the 2015-2019 period of the SYRIZA government paved the way. The question is how many of the MPs and ministers of the New Democracy are ready to take this step” pointed out Sokratis Famellos.

“We have said that even though the bill is incomplete – as the Scientific Service of the Parliament and the bodies identified in the hearing of bodies – we would like an answer Mr. Mitsotakis for all the things you have not answered” he added and added among other things that “the bill takes society forward, it is part of our proposal that we submitted to the Parliament in 2022 and I have to say, Mr. Prime Minister and you must recognize it, that without the Coexistence Agreement of SYRIZA Mrand without SYRIZA’s struggles for visibility, this bill would never have come. And you must recognize in SYRIZA PS, in society and in the other progressive parties, that others have opened the roads, which you are coming, pressured also by the European reality, to follow”.

At the same time the president of the KO of the main opposition party raised a question series of questions to Kyriakos Mitsotakis, which – as he pointed out – he didn’t listen when he posted “because we want an answer.

1. Does New Democracy have the sufficiency to pass this bill on its own? It is a question that has also been raised through the request for a roll-call vote.

2. Do you insist on your exhortation to the MPs to abstain from voting? In order to erase this black page of your interview, you must reconstruct it here in Parliament: declare that the MPs must respect the oath and the Constitution and represent the citizens by respecting the vote of the citizens. It is a disgrace that remains in the political history of the country for a Prime Minister to tell the MPs not to come to vote, especially to cover up their disagreement with his own Government’s bill. Your own weakness, that is, you are asking MPs to cover it by abstaining from voting. It is not right for them to go for coffee, Mr. Prime Minister.

3. How is government cohesion demonstrated, when there are Ministers who will vote against this bill? Because the stability of the Government concerns the whole society. Here, for a small news leak about SYRIZA, the channels and your representatives do not stop talking, while for a statement by a Minister, in this case Mr. Voridis, that the bill is unconstitutional, nothing happens? How do you judge the position of the Minister of State who represents you here?

4. How can a Minister declare that a bill is unconstitutional, but does not come to Parliament at the time of the discussion of the objection of unconstitutionality? We were here and we defended it, not all of you were here. We asked you all to be here, because we support the bill, you do not have the sufficiency to support it.

5. How will Mr. Voridis come back to represent you Mr. Prime Minister here in Parliament? With how much seriousness and credibility should we deal with him now? How will this be done, since we know it is being accomplished under your bill? He will not be able to speak to us Mr. Prime Minister again, he will not be serious and reliable. I’m telling you clearly.

6. We heard from Mr. Schertsos and Ms. Sirengela that the bill fulfills the constitutional direction of the Constitution for the equality of citizens. The question is simple: Are the MPs and especially the Ministers of the New Democracy who will not vote for it, violating the constitutional principle of equality?

7. You said that this bill is in line with the principles set by the European Union, European legislation and European jurisprudence. So, those New Democracy MPs who do not vote for it, are they violating European principles?

8. Also, those Ministers and MPs of New Democracy who do not vote for it, are they questioning the position and role of Greece as a member of the European family? And I say this for you, dear colleagues, who will not vote for it. Do you agree or not, Mr. Prime Minister?

9. However, the question remains: how many Ministers and MPs of the New Democracy do not want the protection of children as you said Mr. Prime Minister in your speech, how many and how many want there to be invisible children and invisible parents. I think we should have this as an answer.

10. There is also a question in Greek society: How do you tolerate extreme right-wing and obscurantist voices being broadcast by MPs of the New Democracy against this bill, in the public sphere and in Parliament, and even to hear something like this from the mouth of the former Prime Minister? How is it that Mr. Samaras comes to disagree in such a short period of time for the third time with your choice, such as with Mr. Erdogan’s visit or with the amendment for immigrants? How is it possible that MPs remain members of the New Democracy Parliamentary Group, when you say that you are a party of multi-level modernization and these MPs will vote against the European acquis, the European rule of law and the Constitution and against the rights of children and parents? Is this your proficiency?’