By Eleftheria Tiliakou, No filter
I will begin with a simple question: What is the role of a professional and scientific body? Is it to defend the professional rights of all its members, or to promote opportunities for a small group of professionals?
This is not a theoretical question. It arises directly from what is happening with the restoration of the historic Engineers’ House in Chora, Kalymnos.
Recently, we heard strong criticism of direct awards—a position with which few could disagree. In practice, however, we now see that the studies required for the restoration of this historic building were directly awarded to a group of local engineers.
And this is where even more questions begin.
Who proposed this particular team? Through what process were these engineers selected? Were there objective, publicly disclosed criteria? Are any of those selected members of the Kalymnos Standing Committee of the Technical Chamber of Greece (TEE), or are they institutionally connected to its leadership?
Above all, who are the engineers who were commissioned to carry out the studies?
Publishing this information would not constitute an attack on the engineers who were selected, nor would it call their professional competence into question. It is a basic institutional obligation to their fellow professionals and to the local community.
Why were the other engineers of Kalymnos not given the opportunity to participate? Why was there no open call for expressions of interest, allowing everyone with the necessary qualifications to submit a proposal?
Was there truly no other engineer on the island with the required experience? Was there not even enough time for a brief, open and transparent selection process?
I assume the answer is already prepared: the Technical Chamber of Greece had imposed a strict timetable, time was running out, and the process had to move quickly to avoid losing the funding.
We have heard this argument many times before: “There was no time.” “We had to meet the deadline.” “We were at risk of losing the money.”
Yet “speed” is precisely the justification most often used by those who opt for direct awards in municipalities, organisations and public bodies. And these are exactly the practices the Technical Chamber frequently criticises, while calling for transparency, open procedures and equal opportunities for engineers.
There cannot be double standards.
You cannot condemn direct awards when others make them and then justify them when the selection is made within your own circle.
Let me be clear: restoring and showcasing the historic Engineers’ House is necessary. It is also positive for the work to be undertaken by scientists and professionals from Kalymnos, thereby supporting the island’s own talent. However, “local engineers” cannot mean only “certain local engineers.” Kalymnos has many highly qualified professionals who have the right to know, to be informed and to be given the opportunity to participate.
The fundamental question therefore remains: Was that opportunity given to everyone, or was the selection restricted from the outset to one particular group?
Principles cannot change depending on who makes the award—and who receives it.
