ANNOUNCEMENT

Replying to inaccurate and misleading statements, Olympiacos BC clarifies the following:

With the initial, no. 101/19.12.2014 irrevocable decision, the C' department of ASEAD vindicated Olympiacos and decided the following:

* That the Regulations of the Hellenic Basketball Federation apply to the A1 professional basketball clubs.
* That the Sporting Judge of HEBA ought to decide on the Olympiacos' allegations according to the previously mentioned regulations and impose on Panathinaikos the loss of the game as provided in the article 88, par. 3 of the Hellenic Basketball Federation's Regulations.

It's needed to say that the C' department of ASEAD completely dismissed the intervention made by Panathinaikos and all allegations submitted together.

The first decision was not appealed by Panathinaikos thus becoming irrevocable.

That is, all the decisions of the C' department of ASEAD that are included in this first decision became binding for any other court that might undertake the said case, that is all the more for the B' department of the court that judged the Panathinaikos appeal.   

Of course this never happened, since the B' department of the same Court turned over the initial irrevocable decision without any new evidence or allegation whatsoever being submitted by Panathinaikos.

Meaning, that Panathinaikos repeated the same allegations submitted before ASEAD that had been completely dismissed by the C' department of the same court.

That is, the B' department of ASEAD that judged the case based on the same laws, rules, evidence and allegations submitted in the C' department of the same court, as well as taking into account the irrevocable decision in favor of Olympiacos, decided to accept the Panathinaikos appeal, judging that although the Hellenic Basketball Federation's regulations applies to professional clubs and although the Olympiacos complaint was submitted legally and in time, and despite the fact that the penalty of losing the game is imposed on the A1 teams whose executives are in breach of court orders, the said penalty is too severe (!) and the monetary penalty provided by the HEBA Disciplinary Regulations suffice.

Finally, it needs to be pointed out that for this decision, the B' department consulted the implementation of article 2 of the Penal Code and the Panathinaikos claim on retroactivity of a more lenient low, an allegation that was irrevocably dismissed with the initial decision made by the C' department of the same court (!).

These for the time being... 

OLYMPIACOS BC SA