kathimerini.gr
Greek Construction Bonus Ruling Appealed to ECtHR
Greek construction firms and owners are appealing a Supreme Court ruling that deemed New Building Code bonuses unconstitutional to the European Court of Human Rights, questioning liability for resulting damages, while the responsible government officials remain unaccountable.
- How did the Greek government's actions contribute to the current legal challenges faced by construction companies?
- The ECtHR appeal highlights a failure of Greek legislation concerning construction bonuses, leading to financial and legal problems for developers. This situation also demonstrates government disregard for citizens affected by increased construction in specific areas, potentially creating public resentment.
- What are the immediate consequences of the Greek Supreme Court's decision deeming the New Building Code's bonuses unconstitutional?
- Greek construction companies and owners are appealing to the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) against a Greek Supreme Court ruling that deemed bonuses in the New Building Code unconstitutional. The question of who will pay compensation if the appeal is successful remains. Currently, the Deputy Minister of Environment and the General Secretary, who are responsible for the legislation allowing these bonuses, remain unaccountable.
- What are the potential long-term implications of this case for government accountability and future building regulations in Greece and beyond?
- This case may set a precedent for future legal challenges to flawed legislation, potentially influencing how governments implement building codes. The outcome could significantly impact future construction projects in Greece and potentially other countries with similar regulatory issues, and the financial liability of government officials involved in drafting potentially flawed legislation.
Cognitive Concepts
Framing Bias
The article frames the NОК bonus issue negatively, emphasizing the problems it caused for developers and the government's apparent negligence. The headline regarding the energy crisis also uses alarmist language, focusing on the potential for a repeat of last year's issues. This framing influences the reader's perception of the situations.
Language Bias
The language used in the article is largely neutral, but phrases like "tragic outcome" (regarding the NОК issue) and "alarmist" language in the energy crisis section contribute to a somewhat negative tone. The use of phrases like "enmeshed in a maelstrom" also creates a dramatic tone that could influence reader perception.
Bias by Omission
The provided text focuses primarily on economic and political news, omitting social and cultural aspects of Greek society. There is no mention of, for example, healthcare, education, or social welfare issues. This omission limits the scope of understanding of the overall situation in Greece.
False Dichotomy
The article presents a somewhat simplistic view of the legal dispute over the NОК bonuses. While it mentions the possibility of compensation, it doesn't explore alternative solutions or the broader complexities of the situation. It also implies that the government's actions were solely responsible for the problem.
Sustainable Development Goals
The article highlights a situation where legal loopholes and flawed legislation disproportionately affect certain groups, creating economic hardship for builders and owners affected by the court decision on construction bonuses. This creates further inequality and amplifies existing economic disparities.