Legal Attack by the Patriarchate
Statements – Lawsuits – Criminal Complaints
On March 15, 2019, my research “Redemption – On the Holy Fire” was released in bookstores, which I presented in the “RESEARCH” section.
Three days later, on 2019-03-18, the Patriarchate of Jerusalem issued two statements. The first statement, issued that morning, was standard and showed no trace of criticism or negative reaction.
STATEMENT OF THE PATRIARCHATE OF JERUSALEM
18/03/2019
The response of the Patriarchate of Jerusalem to the contents of Mr. Dimitrios Alikakos’ book on the subject of the Holy Fire is that which was already given to him by the Chief Secretariat, prior to the publication of this book, namely that “the official position of the Patriarchate regarding the ceremony of the Holy Fire is that which is contained in the program of the Holy Fire ceremony on Holy Saturday each year, on the Patriarchate’s website, in the studies of the Holy Sepulchre Fathers, and specifically of the blessed Holy Sepulchre Father Kallistos Miliara in the magazine «Nea Sion» and in whatever is derived from Holy Scripture and the Fathers of the Church.”
The archived page can be found here: https://archive.fo/xRzNX
However, that evening it issued a harsh statement regarding my book to the television station ANT1, and indeed in five languages (Greek, English, Russian, Romanian, and Arabic). It is as follows:
LETTER FROM THE CHIEF SECRETARIAT OF THE PATRIARCHATE OF JERUSALEM TO TELEVISION STATION ANT1 TV REGARDING THE PUBLISHED BOOK OF MR. ALIKAKOS
18/03/2019
Prot. No. 133
To: Television Station ANTENNA
Dear Sirs,
Regarding the issue that arose due to the impending release by Ekremes Publications of a book by journalist Dimitris Alikakos titled “Redemption – On the Holy Fire,” we state the following:
A) The author visited the Patriarchate of Jerusalem and met with its officials, initially to address his spiritual needs and subsequently as part of research into the history of our Patriarchate.
B) Any video-recorded interviews he claims to possess took place unlawfully, without the knowledge of his interlocutors, and, of course, without their necessary consent.
C) From the videos that have come to light, the fraudulent compilation (montage) with the aim of achieving the “desired” outcome is evident, an act which, besides being morally reprehensible, is also criminally actionable.
D) All necessary legal actions have already been initiated with Google to remove the disputed videos from the internet as products of illegal interception, which contain misleading and defamatory content and defame individuals and the Truths of our Faith. In any case, we expressly reserve all our legal rights regarding the necessary judicial actions that will inevitably take place.
E) The contents of the disputed book are a product of fictitious stories invented by the author with the obvious aim of scandalizing the faithful and gaining financial profit from the book’s sales. The choice to release the disputed book at this particular time, in the midst of Holy and Great Lent and as our Church approaches Holy Pascha, proves beyond any doubt the deeper motives of the author and the publishing house.
F) The official position of the Patriarchate of Jerusalem regarding the ceremony of the Holy Fire is that which is contained in the program of the Holy Fire ceremony on Holy Saturday each year, on the Patriarchate’s website, in the studies of the Holy Sepulchre Fathers, and specifically of the blessed Holy Sepulchre Father Kallistos Miliara in the magazine «Nea Sion» and in whatever is derived from Holy Scripture and the Fathers of the Church.
Jerusalem, March 18, 2019,
Respectfully,
ARISTARCHOS
Archbishop of Constantina
Elder Chief Secretary
The archived page in Greek can be found here: https://archive.ph/lwcVT In English here: https://archive.fo/kb0tC In Russian here: https://archive.fo/mpOiD In Romanian here https://archive.fo/Qmgyo In Arabic here: https://archive.fo/DQkp4 )
But why was the letter sent to a television channel?
The reason was that the television channel presented, that evening, a small part of the testimony of the Sacristan Archbishop Isidore, which I provided at the channel’s request.
It was clear to me then why, within a few hours, embarrassment turned into rage. They realized that there was recorded testimony from the key person in the Holy Fire ceremony, who was revealing, for the first time in history, the dreadful “detail“. This could be devastating.
Extrajudicial Notices
On 2019-04-17, that is, one month after the book’s publication, I was served with two extrajudicial notices, and two were served to the publishing house, by the Chief Secretary of the Patriarchate of Jerusalem, Archbishop Aristarchos, and the Sacristan of the Holy Sepulchre, Archbishop Isidore.
The demands and protest of Archbishops Isidore and Aristarchos follow in order.
You can see the full text of the extrajudicial notices from Isidore and Aristarchos here and here.
The extrajudicial notices remained unanswered, both by me and by the publishing house.
On June 4, 2019, Archbishops Aristarchos and Isidore filed a criminal complaint against me and the publishing house for:
- Defamation,
- Breach of confidentiality of oral communication, and
- Breach of personal data.
On 2019-07-02, I was served with a lawsuit by the Patriarchate of Jerusalem, as a legal entity “legally represented by His Beatitude the Patriarch of Jerusalem, Theophilos.” Also named as defendants were the owner of the publishing house, Petros Koletsos, and Stavros Zoumboulakis, who had written the preface. The full text of the lawsuit here.
Approximately one month later, on August 7, I was served with two lawsuits, with the publisher also named as a defendant, by the Chief Secretary of the Patriarchate of Jerusalem, Archbishop Aristarchos, and the Sacristan of the Holy Sepulchre, Archbishop Isidore. You can read them here and here respectively.
The total financial claim of the plaintiffs was approximately 750,000 euros.
On 2019-12-12, both Isidore and Aristarchos filed a Complaint with the Hellenic Data Protection Authority against me, the publisher, Facebook Ireland Ltd, and Google Ireland Ltd, requesting the deletion of all references (text, photos, videos) from the book and both platforms.
This was followed on 2020-08-18 by a request for interim measures by Archbishop Isidore to “Google Ireland Ltd” to delete two videos from the YouTube platform containing excerpts from his historical testimony.
The Greek Orthodox Patriarchate, for the first time in its history, regarding the Holy Fire, was launching an all-out attack against me, against the documented truth.
Attempts at Settlement.
Around late September 2019, an attempt at settlement began. My lawyers, Antonis Karabatzos (Professor of Law at NKUA) and Athanasios Anagnostopoulos (Doctor of Law in Criminal Law, Athens), although fully convinced of my innocence, advised me that a settlement with the three parties (Patriarch, Chief Secretary, Sacristan) would be in my best interest, provided we could maintain certain “red lines”. Specifically, to ensure the unimpeded circulation of the book and, naturally, to avoid the multitude of lawsuits (civil and criminal), complaints, and interim measures. I trusted their legal judgment and agreed. One of the reasons that played a decisive role in my decision was that, unintentionally, I had put both the publishing house and Stavros Zoumboulakis in a difficult situation. This saddened me greatly.
The settlement process lasted approximately two months and was conducted with the law firm of Mr. Lampros Kitsaras, Professor of Law at Democritus University of Thrace, who represented the Patriarch of Jerusalem, Theophilos.
It was difficult and arduous. All sides knew that in the end they would gain something but also concede something. During these months, we received and sent (and vice versa) several draft settlements. Sometimes the other side changed entire phrases or just one word. So did we. Sometimes the response time, from all sides, also played its role. It was a strategic game that required patience and endurance.
I present the final draft settlement, which, however, was not signed by any party, although, it seems, all had agreed to sign it. The reason for its non-signing is of historical interest and I will present it subsequently.
In Athens, today, November 25, 2019, the undersigned parties hereby agree to the present private agreement for the purpose of amicably resolving their disputes:
On the one hand: a) the Private Law Legal Entity under the name “Holy Community of the Holy Sepulchre” or otherwise “Patriarchate of Jerusalem” or “Greek Orthodox Patriarchate” or otherwise “Orthodox Patriarchate of Jerusalem” or “Brotherhood of the Holy Sepulchre” or “Holy Sepulchre” or “Simple Greek Monastery”, which is represented for the signing of this document by Mr. Lampros Kitsaras, lawyer and resident of Athens (Alopekis Street, no. 8), who declares that he has been legally and properly authorized to sign this document, the content of which is in the full and accurate knowledge of the Holy Synod of the Patriarchate, so as to produce its legal binding effect (hereinafter: the Patriarchate) and b) Archbishop Aristarchos, and c) Archbishop Isidore, both members of the Holy Synod of the Patriarchate, who are represented for the signing of this document by their authorized lawyers Christos Apostolidis and Aristeidis Askites.
On the other hand: a) Mr. Dimitrios Alikakos, journalist, represented by his authorized lawyers Messrs. Athanasios Anagnostopoulos and Antonios Karabatzos, b) Orestis – Errikos Koletsos, publisher, represented by his authorized lawyer Mr. Evangelos Mallios, and c) Stavros Zoumboulakis, author and President of the Board of Trustees of the National Library, represented by his authorized lawyer Mr. Evangelos Mallios.
The terms of the settlement are as follows:
1. The parties declare their mutual and sincere interest both in preserving the prestige of the ancient Patriarchate in the Orthodox world and in the freedom of investigative journalism. They are imbued with mutual respect and affection for each other and wish not to litigate, interpreting the following terms in a spirit of good faith and forgiveness.
2. The Patriarchate and Mr. Alikakos agree to the definitive cancellation of the lawsuit filed by the Patriarchate of Jerusalem on 2019-07-02, with GAK/EAK: 58201/1849/2019, against the a, b, and c parties of the second part, for which the deadline for submitting proposals was November 11, 2019. The Patriarchate, exercising all its legitimate influence, requested and received the consent of the Holy Synod members Aristarchos and Isidore to similarly cancel the hearing of their own lawsuits filed on 2019-08-01, with GAK/EAK 70162/2181/2019 and 70160/2180/2019, against Mr. Alikakos and the publishing house. And in this cancellation, the terms of this agreement shall also apply to them.
3. Mr. Alikakos declares that he holds respect and esteem for Archbishops Aristarchos and Isidore, and in no way sought to harm them in the exercise of his journalistic duties.
4. The Patriarchate was informed by its authorized lawyer, who in turn was informed by Mr. Alikakos’ authorized lawyers, about the existence of audiovisual material in Mr. Alikakos’ possession. According to Mr. Alikakos’ statement, this material was obtained with the consent of the Patriarchate’s Sacristan and subsequently used to document his book. The Patriarchate expressly declares that it does not wish to be informed of the material’s content, nor to have its reliability checked; consequently, it cannot dispute, nor can it confirm, its validity and authenticity.
5. Mr. Alikakos undertakes the obligation, within three days of signing this document, to withdraw from his online accounts a video presenting part of Archbishop Isidore’s interview, located at the following link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8FDpyvWO9oE. Furthermore, he undertakes not to broadcast it on television, radio, or any other media or social networking platforms.
6. The Patriarchate undertakes the obligation, within three days of signing this document, to withdraw from its website its statement dated 2019-03-18, with protocol number 133, against Mr. Alikakos, and in any language into which it has been translated.
7. This agreement is covered by a five-year confidentiality clause, which pertains to its content, but not its existence itself. After the expiration of the five-year period, the parties will in good faith consider the possibility of its renewal. Should malicious third parties accuse either the plaintiff or the defendants that this agreement conceals any form of reprehensible transaction, the aggrieved party shall be entitled to the issuance of a statement by the other party, in which the truth shall be stated.
8. Any modification of this agreement is agreed to be made exclusively in writing.
9. No party shall publicly consider this agreement a victory for itself or a defeat for the other party, but any reference to the former dispute between the parties shall be made with respect and understanding, as well as recognition of the role each performs.
10. Any dispute arising from this agreement shall be resolved amicably through relevant negotiations between lawyers Messrs. Kitsaras (on behalf of the parties of the first part hereto) and Karabatzos or Anagnostopoulos (on behalf of the parties of the second part hereto). If such a serious attempt to resolve the dispute is unsuccessful, the dispute shall be resolved by a three-member arbitral tribunal in accordance with the Code of Civil Procedure.
11. This document was drawn up in six originals, which were signed and delivered one to each of the signatories.
For the contracting parties
The authorized lawyers of the plaintiffs
The authorized lawyers of the defendants
The two paradoxes.
A paradox arose concerning the settlement. Although the last draft stated: “The Patriarchate, exercising all its legitimate influence, requested and received the consent of the Holy Synod members Aristarchos and Isidore to similarly cancel the hearing of their own lawsuits”, however, Archbishops Aristarchos and Isidore communicated, through their lawyers, that they did not intend to sign it. At the same time, they sent their own draft settlement without the Patriarch’s involvement. Their draft was deemed unacceptable by our side. It was essentially a vindictive and punitive draft. It was immediately rejected by my lawyers.
During the same period, immediately after the collapse of the settlement, the second paradox occurred: the Patriarch withdrew his lawsuit. Without negotiation. The Patriarch’s lawyer, Lampros Kitsaras, informed my lawyer, Antonis Karabatzos, that he wished to cancel the lawsuit. And so it happened. Patriarch Theophilos’ lawsuit was never heard.
Concurrently, Lampros Kitsaras went to Jerusalem to persuade the involved parties (Patriarch, Chief Secretary, Sacristan) to put an end to the matter. The Patriarch was persuaded. However, the Sacristan’s lawyer believed he could win the lawsuits and disagreed with Kitsaras’ proposal.
But what happened that made the Patriarch’s lawyer change his stance? I asked him, but he declined to answer, citing attorney-client privilege.
My lawyer, Professor Antonis Karabatzos, offered this explanation: “A possible explanation is legal instinct.”
“I demand to be tried”
In January 2021, within the framework of the case file from the criminal complaints by Aristarchos and Isidore, and as a preliminary examination was ordered, I received a summons to provide explanations.
On 2021-01-26, I filed a request for “The initiation of criminal prosecution against me”.
As I firmly believed that my research was conducted not only in compliance with journalistic ethics and existing legislation, but was also fully documented, I promptly requested to be tried.
This trial was not (only) a personal matter. Therefore, I had no right to try to avoid it. On the contrary, I considered it my duty, having been challenged, to present evidence before a criminal court that in my book I had stated the one and only truth about how the Holy Fire is lit.
I requested to be tried not (only) because I wanted to refute the charges against me, but primarily so that the “guilty parties” perpetuating a timeless falsehood would be exposed (also) during the trial.
I quote the document.
The Ruling on the Lawsuits.
On November 2, 2021, the Rulings on the lawsuits filed by Archimandrite Aristarchos, Chief Secretary of the Patriarchate of Jerusalem, and Archimandrite Isidore, Sacristan and Abbot of the Church of the Holy Sepulchre, were published. (This was preceded by the decision of Patriarch Theophilos III of Jerusalem not to support his lawsuit – by submitting Proposals, as stipulated – resulting in its cancellation).
Decision (for both lawsuits): “INCOMPETENT”
Furthermore, it divided the plaintiffs’ requests into three and two categories respectively, and sent them to be heard in an equal number of trials.
In simple terms: the court “split” the case and summoned the plaintiffs for new hearings. In other words… back to square one.
Summons.
The summons was issued on June 10, 2022. It reached my hands a few days later, on June 18. The trial was scheduled for October 20, 2022. Finally, the mother of all battles was approaching – or was it not?
Read the summons here.
First postponement.
On October 20, 2022, the trial did not take place. It was postponed as the plaintiffs did not appear. It was rescheduled for March 15, 2023.
Second postponement.
On March 15, 2023, the trial did not take place. The plaintiffs again did not appear, and this time they were convicted of failure to testify.
The court postponed it until October 30, 2023.
Third postponement.
On October 30, 2023, the trial did not take place. The plaintiffs stated, through their lawyers, that it was impossible to travel to Athens because Aegean Airlines had canceled its flights due to the war.
The second was true. The first (“impossible”) was false (this is exactly how it was characterized by my lawyer, Athanasios Anagnostopoulos). We showed the court schedules of other airlines and proved that at least five flights were operating normally every day from Israel to Athens at that time.
New postponement for March 20, 2024.