isters human populations in inhumane conditions,42 are destined to shape the consciousness of judicial and prosecution oicers. The ever growing exposure of all these, inherently conservative agents of social control to human misery – as well as the growing impact, dissemination and exculpation of extremist ideas and views about public order, race and nation – would inevitably come to encompass similar attitudes and perceptions among the judiciary. It is understood that the following study only compiles a limited number of judicial decisions without claiming to give an exhaustive account of court judgments. At points we make extensive use of quotations from judicial decisions because the judiciary expresses itself through these, and it is otherwise rare for a judicial oicer to make a public statement. Our choice of rulings is related to their content or their object; obviously, it was not our intention to accuse or characterize particular persons. The cases examined are suggestive in many ways. Thematically, they concern issues of national or other identity, the formation of a collective “we” against some “Other”. Moreover, they deal with the speciic ultra-right ideological components of racism, religious fanaticism, sexism and nationalism. In these cases judges were asked to pronounce upon issues charged with special ideological connotations because of socially widespread, extremely conservative or even ultra-right valuations. These ideas are not exclusive to the ultra-right. The ultra-right is their privileged outlet, but their greater social dissemination leaves room for a judge who implements these ideas in his or her practice to still feel as though he or she is anything other than an ultra-right sympathizer. Indeed, this dissemination allows a judge to neglect the fundamental obligation to subordinate his or her ideology to the rule of law and the principle of legitimacy. This is where we get a clear idea of the problem in its entirety, which exceeds by far the outcome of particular cases: judges making use of their public authority to send clear, ultra-right and racist messages to society and other authorities. 2/ INACTION TOWARDS NAZI VIOLENCE “Both the defendant and his organization [i.e. Golden Dawn] condemn violence”. With these words, the Public Prosecutor of the Single Judge Court of Appeal for Felonies concluded his recommendation to acquit Elias Kasidiaris, MP of Golden Dawn, in April 2013. A few months earlier, during a national TV morning talk show featuring MPs in a debate, Kasidiaris threw the water in his glass across the table at Rena Dourou, an MP of SYRIZA, and then assaulted and punched another MP, Liana Kanneli of the Communist Party. He ran out of the TV studio and, although the police supposedly was trying to catch him in lagrante delicto (i.e., within 24 hours ater the assault), he remained in hiding and never surrendered to the police. 42. As far as Greek prisons are concerned, the ECHR case-law has been repeatedly condemnatory; on Ioannina prison, cf. Tagatidis and others vs. Greece, Tzamalis and others vs. Greece, and Samaras and others vs. Greece; on Korydallos Prison, cf. Nieciecki vs. Greece. MAPPING ULTRA-RIGHT EXTREMISM, XENOPHOBIA AND RACISM WITHIN THE GREEK STATE APPARATUS | 45