On the site Kouti tis Pandoras, Vaxevanis writes, “Evangelos Venizelos as Finance Minister was the person who took the decision to move forward with the PSI [Private Sector Involvement] and for the process to be governed by English Law, undermining the country’s independence and its assets (revenue from energy, gold deposits, sources of wealth) despite the contrary opinion of the American consultancy firm which he hired and paid to secure Greek interests.”
“The document revealed by koutipandoras.gr and which leaves no room for doubt that the the Finance Minister was operating in the service of foreign interest are in a tragic irony being published at the same time that a small time bond holder committed suicide after losing his savings through the bond ‘hair-cut’ decided by Venizelos.”
Below is the full letter written by Lee Buchheit of the firm to the head of the Greek Public Debt Management Authority clearly outlining the alternative and its advantages for the Greek state. According to the letter, by including a simple clause, the Greek state would have been able to reassure bond holders accepting the PSI (and its associated 50% haircut on the value of the bonds they held) that parliament would not in the future pass laws which would further harm their interests, while still retaining Greek law as the governing law for the new bonds.
Yet according to Vaxevanis, Venizelos “rejected the solution and moved forward with the PSI, opting for English Law and the subjugation of Greece. The PSI of course destroyed social security funds and small-time bondholders while leaving other bondholders untouched. The banks which appear to suffer losses from the haircut on Greek bonds are recapitalised with 50 billion euros.”
“The decision by Venizelos for the PSI to be governed by English Law, despite the contrary advice of the company which was paid to find a solution does not only raise a political but a legal question which can be summarized in the simple question, “for what reason did the Finance Minister operate against the country’s interests?. We await a response,” the article concludes.