10 Years Held Hostage: Who’s Liable?

Since the establishment of my initial encampment outside to the UNHCR office on the 21st of March 2017, I have meticulously imparted the gravity of my circumstances to a multitude of members of the Greek Parliament and sought their intervention in addressing the egregious situation that amounts to a Hostage crisis, infringing upon my personal liberties by the nation. Regrettably, as of today, my entreaties have not elicited any responses.

Consequently, I undertook the initiative to personally visit their respective offices whenever circumstances permitted. Such endeavors supplement my prior in-person visits to their Parliament, which were invariably hampered by the Police presence at the entrance. My inaugural visit was to the office of MP Mavroudis (Makis) Voridis, which occurred in January.

He is a distinguished member of the New Democracy party, and one of a select few representatives whose office is situated in close vicinity to my location, sharing a similar postal code. In his absence, I had the opportunity to converse with one of his associates, who assured me that the issues presented would be duly considered. Regrettably, subsequent communication from their office has not been forthcoming, notwithstanding my efforts in sending at least three additional emails subsequent to my initial visit in January.

Given the apparent limited likelihood of procuring aid from their office, I have resolved to seek an audience with an alternative Member of Parliament, specifically Mr. Theodoros Rousopoulos. He, much like the previous, is a New Democracy affiliate, with an office situated in proximity and sharing an identical Postal Code to my location outside the UNHCR office.

In the current year, to date, there has been a minimum of four instances wherein electronic correspondence issued from my side, specifically dated January 09th, January 10th, September 08th, and October 26th, 2023, all failing to elicit a response from the recipient. It should be further noted that a subsequent attempt to dispatch a pre-visit notification via email on the eve of my intended visit was met with an obstruction at their end, impeding delivery.

Their office is situated at Kon/nou Ventiri 1. Regrettably, the absence of clear signage at the entrance impeded the ease of locating their office within the building. Consequently, this necessitated an ascent via the staircase, diligently surveying the offices on every level, until their office was eventually discovered just before arriving at the topmost floor.

Upon activation of the doorbell, an individual of youthful demure, who later presented herself as the MP’s secretary, attended to the door. Regrettably, she refused my admittance to the office. Consequently, our terse dialogue was held at the threshold, involving her and two additional personnel—one designated as the office manager and the other as the MP’s advisor—who had been apprised of my presence and joined us in the exchange, all the while maintaining our positions standing.

It was communicated that the MP was not in attendance at the office and would also be absent for the remainder of the day, extending to the following day. My contact details were duly submitted, along with a record of the four emails sent to their office this year, emphasizing the critical nature of the issues addressed therein, and additionally noted that my most recent email, sent the previous day, encountered an obstruction at their end.

My inscribed notes were duly appreciated. Nonetheless, with the exception of my most recent email dated October 26th, the search for prior electronic correspondences in their inbox yielded no results. Both the Secretary and the adviser have refuted the possibility of any intentional impediment to our communication on their part and have professed ignorance regarding the potential causes of such an occurrence. Moreover, despite my persistent entreaties for an alternative email address to resubmit the previous exchanges, my requests were met with an unequivocal statement from both parties involved: “There is no other email address.”

I urged the importance of their perusal of my correspondence dated January 10th, which delineates the intricacies of my precarious circumstance. Nevertheless, in light of their inability to retrieve said email, I implored them to assist in devising an alternative solution to ensure the transmission of the essential communication, whether that entails the provision of a secondary email address or another feasible approach.

The adviser, nevertheless, appeared inclined to circumvent the immediate concern and insisted that I elucidate the purpose of my visit to their office. Consequently, I conveyed to him with succinct clarity, “The crux of my predicament pertains to the seizure of my freedom by Greece.” In response, he queried, “How could such a situation arise?” I responded, asserting that the responsibility lay upon them to unravel this conundrum.

“The crux of my predicament pertains to the seizure of my freedom by Greece.”

Subsequently, he inquired, "How might Mr. Rousopoulos be of assistance to you?" To which I responded, "He serves as a Member of Parliament." He then proclaimed, "Resolution lies solely within the jurisdiction of the authorities." At this juncture, I apprised him that I had pursued every official avenue available, including the offices of the Prime Minister, the Minister, the Police, the Greek Ombudsman, and the Judicial system, among others.

Upon receiving this information, he articulated a brief 'and?'—a prompt for the conclusions of my efforts. I, in turn, conveyed the unvarying nature of these scenarios. Subsequently, he revisited his initial inquiry, "How might Mr. Rousopoulos assist you?" In response, I articulated, "As a parliamentarian, it is incumbent upon him to ascertain the nature of these occurrences."

He subsequently pronounced, “Nevertheless, the Ombudsman, the Prime Minister, and the Minister wield greater authority than a Member of Parliament.” My rejoinder was measured but clear, “I am subject to their hostilities.” Persisting with his initial inquiry, he asked, “In what manner can Mr. Rousopoulos be of assistance to you?” To which I queried in return, “Is he not a legislator within the Parliament?” He affirmed, “Indeed, yet he is incapable of enacting legislation exclusively for your benefit.”

In rebuttal, I articulated, “I do not require legislation that caters uniquely to my situation. What is the rationale behind these proceedings? Is it customary within your nation's legal framework to retain individuals as captives, deprive them of sustenance and water, and attempt to induce their demise through starvation, while simultaneously obscuring their predicament?” Upon hearing these concerns, he adopted a solemn demeanor and declared, “Sir, the intricacies of this situation elude our understanding. This issue is within the purview of the relevant authorities. Regrettably, our capacity to intervene is exceedingly limited.”

"Is it customary within your nation's legal framework to retain individuals as captives?"

In response, I assertively reiterated, “The authorities remain unresponsive. Rather, I find myself subject to their detrimental actions against my welfare. Could you elucidate the reasons for such occurrences? I require a cogent explanation.” In retort, he declared, “This issue does not fall within our purview. An explanation may only be forthcoming from the authorities themselves.” Pursuing clarity, I restated, “Access to the authorities is denied, they resort to summoning the police, and I am subject to their hostilities. Such is the current state of affairs with the authorities. What justification can there be for this?”

He then articulated, "We cannot provide you with any assistance." To which I expressed, "There must be a reason you have an office. What precisely is the nature of your function here?" In return, he asserted, "The purpose of our office extends beyond the scope of your issues." I then inquired, "Could you clarify what lies beyond the scope of my concerns? Should your nation be implicated in the unlawful seizure of an individual, is it customary for there to be no response or comment provided?"

Subsequently, he curtly articulated, albeit with a lack of due decorum, "We shall examine the matter and apprise you accordingly. Is that acceptable?" Concurrently, he made an attempt to hasten my departure and proceeded to close the door, all the while neglecting the salient issues pertaining to the electronic correspondence I was keen for them to pursue. Nevertheless, as the discussion persisted in ensuring the scrutiny of my email dated January 10th, the adviser became agitated and unwarrantedly threatened to involve the police.

At this juncture, it was conveyed to them that involvement of the Police was neither necessary nor warranted, and I guaranteed my voluntary departure in due course. Despite this, due to the noticeable absence of cooperative effort from their side to ensure thorough review of my electronic correspondences, particularly the email referenced, my solicitation for a convocation with the MP was once again put forth. In response, they conveyed the impracticality of arranging such a meeting at that juncture, yet they assured me of their commitment to notify me promptly via email when the possibility materializes.

Before my departure, I had the opportunity to inscribe the dates of all my previous correspondences from the year 2023 onto the final email, the receipt of which was previously confirmed by the Secretary, who was in possession of a printed version thereof. Upon returning the document to the advisor, I sought to ascertain whether the Hellenic National Commission for Human Rights (NCHR) might extend any form of assistance in relation to my situation. They professed a lack of awareness on the matter and urged my departure. "We are not privy to such knowledge. How could we possibly be?" the MP’s advisor remarked before promptly requesting, "Might I ask you to take your leave now?"

I complied, yet prior to departing I sought clarity on, “When might I anticipate a response?” Whereupon the MP’s advisor reiterated, albeit with discernible disquiet, “We are unable to specify. At the earliest convenience. That is the response.” With that, our exchange concluded, the door was closed, and I proceeded to return to my place of refuge outside the UNHCR office.

Nevertheless, on the forthcoming Wednesday, the 22nd of November 2023, I had the occasion to receive a telephonic communication from a confidential line emanating from their office. The distinguished advisor, Mr. Dimitris, who initiated the call, had inquired with due formality whether it was feasible for me to dispatch the pertinent case details to their attention. I affirmed in response that the comprehensive transmission of all requisite particulars had been effectuated in my extensive electronic mail dispatched on the 10th of January.

Notwithstanding our previous encounter, wherein their inability to retrieve the specified email was expressed, and the provision of an ancillary email address for resending was declined, I suggested submitting the Portable Document Format (PDF) compilations of all my antecedent communications from 2023, encompassing the dispatch dated January 10th, as attachments to my lately acknowledged email. The proposal found concurrence with the adviser.

Nevertheless, with due consideration to the impediment encountered by my previous email? prior to my arrival at their office, coupled with the insufficiency of calling credit to initiate a follow-up telephone call post-dispatch, it is with due respect that I solicited a re-engagement from their side within a concise interval of five minutes to confirm the successful delivery of the said email and its pertinent documents.

Once more, the MP's adviser concurred, and in the absence of any delivery errors upon dispatching my email to them on this occasion, a subsequent telephone conversation ensued promptly thereafter to affirm the reception of my correspondence and its enclosed documents. The email dated January 10th, which pertains to my online petition, is publicly accessible for review here for those who desire to acquaint themselves with its details.

Currently, it remains unclear as to whether they will ultimately render any assistance to resolve the protracted hostage situation instigated by their nation, nevertheless, the video record of my visitation to their office on Thursday, November 16th, 2023, is accessible for review here.

Conclusions:

Given the severity of the situation I have continuously faced in Greece over the past decade, I respectfully request any entity, corporation, or business with the financial capacity, to prudently reflect upon the gravity of my circumstances and consider contributing financially to my Fundraising Campaign Here. Your generous contribution would provide substantial assistance in coping with these persistently challenging conditions.

"Donate now to support a Refugee directly."

Your charitable contributions, regardless of size, possess the potential to instigate significant change. It would be greatly valued if support could be extended via a steadfast and ongoing monetary pledge.

Additionally, it is of paramount importance to facilitate the advancement of the campaign by disseminating information across an array of platforms, such as social media, electronic mail, and short message service. Your efforts to inspire participation in this laudable endeavor are highly appreciated.

Moreover, it would greatly benefit the cause should you graciously extend your support to my online petition through endorsement and assist in its broader distribution.

Sign the Petition here.

Should you deem yourself adequately prepared to advance the objectives of this noble endeavor, your participation would embody a significant manifestation of solidarity amidst the inequitable battle for justice and freedom that I have stoically confronted over the preceding ten years.

Moreover, in light of the persistent adverse occurrences in Greece, I earnestly entreat all members of the press and media, encompassing distinguished correspondents and news writers, to consider coordinating their endeavors in bringing this issue to the attention of the broader populace. By undertaking such action, we may aid in upholding the principles of justice and the rule of law, as opposed to promulgating injurious narratives.

In conclusion, I wish to convey my profound appreciation and respectfully solicit your deliberation and judgement on this issue, with the aspiration that it will contribute significantly to the betterment of our collective human society.

Your immediate action is required.

Hostage of Europe / Anwar Nillufary

Published: Friday, December 08th, 2023

#HumanRights #Humanity #Justice #Freedom #Immigration #Refugees #Politics #Democracy #Europe #Greece #Athens #Greek #GreekParliament #MavroudisVoridis #MakisVoridis #TheodorosRousopoulos #Police #Food #Water #Starvation #UnitedNations #UNHCR #OHCHR #Petition #Philanthropy #Donations #AnwarNillufary #Hostage #HostageOfEurope

Sign the Petition | Donate | Facebook | Twitter | YouTube