Widespread collusion and corruption is a global phenomenon. It is closely connected to the political developments of the post-industrial period, which had two main characteristics: the overcoming of ideological frameworks and the overdevelopment of individualism. Since the theoretical bases of ideologies led to shared values that defined the boundaries of citizens’ lives and activities, the weakening of ideologies has critically undermined those values, reducing their general acceptance. As a result, individual interests have emerged as a dominant pursuit, overturning the delicate balance between personal and social interests.

The promotion of social goals and prospects, centered around state administrations, has been eroded under these emerging trends. Individual pursuits by certain members within administration and management have played a role in upsetting the balance between personal and social interests. This has created collusion, which promotes private interests through the machinery of state administration. Such activities have become the main cause of the proliferation of corruption, spreading across a broad spectrum of the economy, the structures of the wider public sector, and those people dealing with them.

It would be discouraging if such phenomena led citizens, those who still believe in principles and values and aspire to transparent and efficient governance, to abandon their critisicm in this kind of situations and to attempt to intervene, both in word and action, in order to combat these issues. The frequently expressed political will of the state to take measures that expose and suppress such phenomena is a motivating factor in this endeavour. However, the declared government intention for reforms must focus on addressing this kind of phenomena in a radical way, starting with the detection of their hidden forms and following through to the exposure of their anti-social consequences.

The public disclosure of all financial transactions involving the state could empower citizens to access and process relevant information, particularly within the sphere of their interest, to identify illegal activities. These open procedures, through the publication of all their aspects, can form an initial barrier to tendencies toward collusion and corruption. Citizens have welcomed two broad-based initiatives from previous governments: the establishment of the Supreme Council for Civil Personnel Selection (ASEP) in 1994, under the ministry of Anastasios Peponis, for public sector recruitment, and the Transparency (Diavgeia) program in 2010, which mandates the publication of all decisions by state agencies and public organisations.

Additionally, the establishment of the Internal Affairs Directorate within the Greek Police in 1999 and the Financial Police Directorate in 2014 has significantly advanced efforts to combat collusion and corruption, although their effectiveness varies depending on the leadership in place. These institutions, along with the development of the Information Technology sector over the decades that have intervened since then, constitute an initial barrier against collusion and corruption. However, experience has shown that these measures are insufficient, particularly as trends toward privatising public goods intensify over time.

The main obstacle to creating a healthier environment lies in the very structure of the public sector and the mentality that characterises much of the hierarchy, from top to bottom. Indifference and guilty silence in response to attempts to share critical information are key traits of this mindset, ultimately leading concerned citizens to give up their efforts to seek relevant data or abandon their desire for in-depth investigations into the actions of public administrations and organisations. The European Commission’s expertise in establishing and operating the Internal Audit Service, tasked with monitoring and controlling its services while providing guidance under the direct supervision of a judicial body (the European Court of Auditors), could serve as a model for our country. It is widely acknowledged that the public works sector, in particular, requires radical reform, along with continuous monitoring and oversight to ensure the efficient use of public funds.

The above issues, as noted, also affect organisations, funded by the state, such as local governments. Similar proposals for internal control and monitoring of local government affairs in our region, Mani, are especially necessary given the limited financial resources, which demand maximum efficiency.

                                                                                                THE EDITORIAL BOARD

We have become accustomed to referring to small and large homelands and loving them equally. This perspective carries emotional undertones and forms a harmonious relationship between the two homelands. Unfortunately, in many cases where an economic aspect is involved, harmony breaks down, and elements of competition emerge. This is the cause of the emergence of regionalism, defined as attachment to the interests of one’s particular homeland or region and indifference to the interests of the broader area. The background of localism can be traced to the traditional relationships of individuals within families and small settlements, where complementary productive and economic activities were developed, forming the basis for shared understanding and emotional interconnection. However, growing economic needs and the search for safe living conditions against external dangers led individual areas to seek joint actions with neighbouring regions, in order to establish a magnitude that could meet needs and neutralise risks. These processes involve the whole wide spectrum that corresponds to the concept of “place”: villages, provinces, countries, and transnational associations. A problem arises when the economic aspect prevails over the emotional one, leading to competition and the rise of localism.

In our region, Mani, the concept of localism, like many other concepts, has taken on specific characteristics. These can be expressed by a single sentence: love for one’s village of origin, but also a willingness to collaborate in a wider area when high-level security issues are at stake. These tendencies have strong historical backgrounds. They are based on the patrilineal formations of families and settlements and the strong cohesion among their members. The competitive tendencies between neighbouring families were related to the productive utilisation of the generally limited land resources. However, these competitive tendencies disappeared when their security was threatened by an external enemy. Cooperation then transcended competition and local rivalries. These specific characteristics led to significant historical events during the four centuries of Ottoman rule, of which we, their descendants, are proud. The question today is, what are we doing in this era? Are we going to let the extensions of localism, based on customs or genetic heritage, dominate us, or will we recognise the enormous changes that have occurred since the old times and rally to win the battles of modern life as well? There is an urgent need to closely link individual interest with social interest, family progress with wider social, and, more generally, national progress.

Specifically for our region, Mani, which is rich in historical memories, it is essential to have as a starting point the rallies of our ancestors, which significantly contributed to the liberation of the country in the 1820s. Note, for example, that the bravest warrior at the Battle of Verga, at the extreme northwestern point of Mani, was from Skyfianika in Lower Mani. He fought voluntarily for the unified homeland, Mani, and for the preservation of its autonomy and freedom.

In modern times, the need for security, which used to lead to alliances for joint actions, has receded. However, there are now other strong reasons that compel joint actions. Addressing the marginalisation of our region in the distribution of state subsidies and assisting the developmental trend that emanates from the natural, climatic, and cultural characteristics of the unified Mani region are strong motivating factors. The reshaping of local governance, with the creation of only two mayoral centers, is a positive starting point for discussions that would have been impossible with the previous fragmentation into more than a hundred autonomous local administrative units that existed until the end of the last century. Another important factor is the unified ecclesiastical expression, the Diocese of Mani, which, even by its name, points to actions for forming a unified character for such endeavours. Of course, the maturation of conditions leading to a unified plan for joint actions requires conscious will, effort, and selfless, emotional efforts. The representatives of the three institutional expressions mentioned earlier (the two mayoral centers and the Diocese of Mani) have the main responsibility to start this process through their initiatives and actions. It is certain that if this begins and all the benefits that can arise from the completion of such plans become apparent, localisms will gradually recede, and more of our compatriots will support these initiatives. And our ancestors will rejoice, knowing that their descendants are proving themselves worthy of them.                                                                                                                                

THE EDITORIAL BOARD

In the editorial of the previous issue of our newspaper, we concluded: Two key actions (the ecclesiastical unification of the entire territorial region under the name of the Metropolis of Mani in 2010 and the determination of the will for cooperation across all areas for common developmental purposes through the establishment of the Mani Development Company in 1995 as a corporation with all local communities as shareholders) created a strong combined dynamic. This dynamic could serve as a starting point for generalised mobilisation of all the micro-societies of the Mani region and its cultural expressions. In particular, the unifying force, which exists as a possibility in the local ecclesiastical expression, could mobilise all the human resources of the region and our compatriots, both in Greece and abroad, in order to promote common goals of restructuring and development. The formulation of such a roadmap, and only this, could give substantial meaning to the concept of “Unified Mani” that we all advocate.

The forerunner of this idea, a sensitive and resourceful compatriot of ours, the philologist-historian Sarantos Kargakos, who is no longer with us, had already articulated this vision as early as 1996 in an article in the newspaper “Eleftheros Typos” titled “Mani, the Wronged”.  We transcribe the main part of it below, as it was recently reintroduced in publications by the always active journalist Ilias N. Christeas:

“As a Maniot, I experience a psychological split. It is difficult to define myself as either a Laconian or a Messinian. This is because Mani was divided, with one part, Aposkiaderi (Western Mani), annexed to Messinia, while Prosiiliaki (Eastern Mani) and Mesa Mani were annexed to Laconia. Thus, Mani, which should have become a separate prefecture covering the entire Taygetos up to Alagonia, lost its autonomy. Unfortunately, the administrative fragmentation, which certainly served the ambitions of some Maniots (MPs in Laconia — MPs in Messinia), harmed Mani as a region. Its population shrank. However, the administrative division did not lead to a psychological one. A Maniot is a Maniot, whether residing in Messinian or Laconian Mani. Maniots retain their most solid characteristics, even in their appearance.

However, this division constitutes a great injustice. Mani has done a lot for Greece. Some of it was negative, like the assassination of Kapodistrias, even though Kapodistrias treated the Mavromichali family unjustly. Except for some areas of Macedonia, no other region has honoured Mani’s contributions.

I would like to propose something simple: The conditions are now ripe for Mani (Messinian and Laconian) to become a unified prefecture: Nομός Μάνης. This would rectify a great historical injustice. It is the least Greece owes to Mani. The elevation of Mani to a prefecture would offer immense opportunities to the region, first of all creating a solid number of prefecture employees. As a prefecture, Mani would have the ability to participate in the European Community’s development programs, absorb its own resources, and no longer be the poor relation of Messinia and Laconia, which supposedly lives off tourism, while in reality, it lives from the sale of land and towers to foreigners. Within a single Mani prefecture, Maniots would continue – despite their eternal differences (after all, what kind of Maniots would they be otherwise?) – to maintain the unique cultural characteristics of their lineage. As for where the prefecture’s seat would be, today with the progress in transportation and communication, these are trivial problems.

Mani, in order to avoid being destroyed as a region – i.e., to avoid becoming a German “Kreis” (meaning an administrative region with a majority of foreign residents) – needs all its villages. Maniots once declared: ‘When Mani is united, it raises great warriors.’ That is, when Maniots are united, they are invincible.”

Not much can be added to what was expressed around 30 years ago. We will focus on three points: 1) The Metropolis of Mani is now a reality and could become the nucleus of developments leading in this direction. 2) Given the restricted development potential of the country through the administrative framework of the existing Regions, there is often talk about reducing their numbers and reshaping them so that they consist of Sub-Regions (περιφερειακές ενότητες) with homogeneous traditional characteristics, territorial, demographic, and genetic. (It should be noted that this last element was the main argument for the joint proposal by the local government bodies (αυτοδιοικητικοί φορείς) of Mani for funding of 2 billion drachmas through the European Community Initiative LEADER II in 1995). 3) On the central political stage, there is at least one compatriot who is driven by the same emotional connection to the land and our ancestors as expressed by Sarantos Kargakos.

It remains for us to focus on the unification idea and unite. The rest will come because “when Maniots are united, they are invincible.”

                                                                                                            THE EDITORIAL BOARD