Greek Health Minister Adonis Georgiadis has rejected allegations from opposition party PASOK over municipal recycling house contracts, citing a supreme financial court ruling that cleared pricing and competition standards in the tenders.
Responding to a statement by PASOK press spokesman Kostas Tsoukalas, Georgiadis said the opposition was suppressing decision 1345/2024 issued by the First Minor Plenum of the Court of Audit, which authorized the signing of a recycling hub agreement.
The dispute centers on municipal recycling centers, known locally as recycling houses, which PASOK claimed were subject to overpricing, rigged technical specifications, and administrative scandals.
Court of Audit Ruling
Georgiadis said PASOK had urged the public to read official documents, but accused the party of selecting only texts that fit its political narrative while ignoring the ruling of the country's highest financial tribunal.
He clarified that he had never disputed the findings of the Financial Audit Committee (EDEL), the Ministry of National Economy and Finance, or cabinet minister Kyriakos Pierrakakis. He acknowledged that fiscal corrections and recovery decisions issued by EDEL remain valid administrative acts.
However, Georgiadis maintained that these administrative corrections do not prove overpricing, tailored tender specifications, or corruption, as PASOK had alleged.
Evaluation of Recycling Hub Costs
In its decision, the Court of Audit examined the 300,000-euro benchmark price per recycling center set in a tender by the Solid Waste Management Association of Attica (EDSNA). The court determined that the sum was realistic, reasonable, and consistent with similar audited contracts.
The tribunal issued its ruling despite knowing that the EDSNA contract was subsequently subjected to an audit by EDEL, concluding that the subsequent audit did not undermine the budget documentation supporting the cost.
The court also rejected claims concerning commercial ties between recycling equipment suppliers TEXAN and ENVIPCO. Judges found that both businesses operate independently without shared management or equity, and saw no evidence of concerted practices that distorted market competition.
Technical Specifications and Next Steps
Addressing accusations of tailored tender terms, the Court of Audit ruled that the technical requirements did not reference equipment from any single manufacturer, did not restrict competition, and did not favor any single economic operator.
Following its findings, the court plenum overturned an earlier negative determination by its lower section and confirmed that there were no legal obstacles to signing the framework agreement for the recycling centers.
Georgiadis noted that decision 1345/2024 specifically involved a tender conducted by the Municipality of Palaio Faliro and does not automatically void EDEL administrative acts for other public authorities.
He added that presenting administrative fiscal corrections or prosecutorial reviews as definitive evidence of fraud or criminal scandal was politically unacceptable, emphasizing that financial adjustments do not inherently denote illegal activity under the rule of law.
