Ch-ch-ch-ch-changes... in the Constitution.

Over the past few months, people here have been getting worked up over the discussion of a possible amendment in Article 16 in the Greek constitution. In its current form, the article states the following:

"University level education is provided exclusively by institutions which are bodies corporate of public law and fully self-governed. The said institutions are under the supervision of the State and entitled to financial support."

So basically, non-state universities that do exist in Greece are practically not fully recognized as such here, especially by the Greek government. I don't want to get in to too many details on this, I'm quite frankly tired of the conversation, each side has some valid points, but in the end it doesn't really matter much. If the EU wants this, or any other law, changed, it will happen. I keep thinking the EU will turn all EVIL OVERLORD OF DOOM on us one day, but for now they still seem pretty benevolent.

Anyway, Article 16 isn't really my main interest in this post, so I'll just say this. I can't help but chuckle a bit whenever I hear all these people talk so passionately against this change, saying it's going to be bad for public education and will only benefit the financial elite, etc. Sure, it's a valid point of sorts, though whether or not our public education can be any worse is definitely up for debate.

Anyway, I keep getting carried away. My point was this: It's funny how people here act like Greece will be the first country in the universe to allow the existence of non-state universities. Really, people. Come on, keep up. It's been like this in other countries for years. And for those that just stumbled in this blog, I graduated from a non-state university. But, I've also spent a year in a state university, so make of that what you will.

Heh, turns out I couldn't help talking about Article 16 after all. I guess it can't be helped since it affects me on a personal level.

But as I said earlier, that wasn't the point of this post. No, my point is about a possible amendment in another article that isn't discussed in news reports by random people all day long, and one that is probably a lot more important, Article 24.

The main part of Article 24 states the following:

"The protection of the physical and cultural environment constitutes an obligation to the State. The State must take special preventive or repressive measures for the conservation thereof. A law shall regulate matters relating to the protection of forests and forest areas in general. Any change in the land uses of public forests or public forest areas shall be prohibited, unless the agricultural use thereof or any other use be beneficial to the national economy or dictated by the national interests."

The most interesting part is the last sentence, and especially the last words. Essentially, the Greek government can change the description of an area from "public forest/public forest area" to whatever else, so that it's no longer protected by law.

Now the current government was trying to make such a change in Article 24, a change that would mean that 40.000.000 square meters of forest area would no longer be protected by law, unless my math is off, which I doubt it is. This isn't just a small forest near a beach that a corrupt politician wants to change into a summer resort. This is a big fucking part of Greece, essential to the entire eco-fucking-system. 'Scuse my language, I get all emo'd up with subjects like this.

At any rate, this change is apparently so big, that even a change in Article 24 is not sufficient in order to remove the protection over the area in question. I don't want to get in to too many details, but these parts of the land are protected for a reason. Selling them off to the highest bidder would not only mean that the ecosystem would be destroyed, but it wouldn't even help the country's economy (if that can ever be seen as a valid reason to mess up the environment we live in) since the people who would buy the land would use it for their own profit*. So we're in a lose-lose situation here.

What I find most frustrating is this discussion wasn't mentioned in the media at all, until last week, and the Parliament was supposed to vote on this change this week. People have been recycling the same nonsense over Article 16 over and over for months, and we weren't even informed about Article 24. Of course, Article 24 and environmental issues generally aren't as catchy as young students getting their panties all in a bunch (oops, so much for playing nice in this post), but come on. We never even heard about a possible constitutional amendment a few days before it almost came to pass? That's retarded.

Luckily, in the end the Parliament voted against the amendment in Article 24, so it seems for now the forests are protected, and I can stop being so angry. Now if you'll excuse me, I have some trees to hug.

*Want To Sell: [Broken English]. Please Send Tell. Poor quality guaranteed!

This post is pretty messy and I'm using some strong words, sorry 'bout that. Next time I'm making a long post, I'll make sure to log off MSN first.

The Constitution quotes are taken from http://www.oefre.unibe.ch/law/icl/gr00000_.html, I'll probably make proper MLA quotes tomorrow, or the day after, mainly for kicks.

Four "ch"'s in "Changes"? Huh.