Athens, May 6, 2026 – The Athens Bar Association is considering an appeal to the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) following Supreme Court Prosecutor Konstantinos Tzavellas’s decision not to reopen the archived file concerning Greece’s wiretapping scandal. This move comes after a press conference where constitutional law professor emeritus Nikos Alivizatos highlighted potential grounds for challenging the prosecutor’s decision under European standards, citing recent Strasbourg case law.
European Court Precedents Cited in Wiretapping Case
Professor Alivizatos referred to two key ECHR rulings: the case of former prosecutor Georgia Tsatani, which led to Greece’s condemnation, and the recent Kanev v. Bulgaria judgment, concerning Bulgaria’s intelligence service’s refusal to inform a citizen about surveillance. He noted that in the Greek wiretapping case, the National Intelligence Service (EYP) confirmed monitoring PASOK leader Nikos Androulakis but did not disclose the reason, a level of acknowledgment not even provided in the Bulgarian case.
“These two rulings, Tsatani and Kanev, lead me to believe that there may be a basis for reviewing Mr. Tzavellas’s act under European criteria,” Alivizatos stated. He added that an alleged conflict of duties could have serious implications for the entire case, emphasizing the need for careful legal study before proceeding to Strasbourg. Athens Bar president Andreas Koutsolampros confirmed the Association is exploring this possibility.
Existing ECHR Cases Involving Independent Authorities
Alivizatos also updated reporters on the Athens Bar’s pending application before the ECHR. This case stems from the Council of State’s rejection of the Association’s request to annul decisions replacing members of the Hellenic Authority for Communication Security and Privacy (HACSP/ADAE) and the National Council for Radio and Television (ESR). The Athens Bar challenged these appointments, arguing that the Conference of Parliament Presidents approved them with 16 votes, below the 17 required by Article 101 of the Greek Constitution. The Council of State rejected these applications as inadmissible in plenary rulings 1639 and 1640 of 2024, citing the Athens Bar’s lack of legal standing.
Alivizatos described the court’s reasoning as a “bombshell,” asserting that it conflicted with Article 90 of the Greek Lawyers’ Code, which allows bar associations to file annulment applications in pursuit of their statutory objectives. The Athens Bar alleges violations of its right of access to a court under Article 6 paragraph 1 of the European Convention on Human Rights, and a breach of the confidentiality of communications and private life of its members under Article 8. The exchange of written observations has been completed, and a ruling is anticipated within the current year.
Androulakis Wiretapping Case Given High Priority by ECHR
Professor Alivizatos also mentioned the separate application filed by PASOK president Nikos Androulakis with the ECHR. Androulakis has challenged the Greek government’s failure to implement a unanimous Council of State ruling (decision 465 of 2024) that ordered HACSP/ADAE to inform him why the National Intelligence Service (NIS/EYP) monitored his phone between September and November 2021. Androulakis alleges a breach of communication confidentiality under Article 8 of the Convention and the state’s non-compliance with a final judicial decision under Article 6 paragraph 1. The ECHR has classified this case as a major priority, and it is currently at the written observations stage.
Athens Bar Rejects Closure of Espionage Inquiry
Koutsolampros reiterated the Athens Bar’s opposition to archiving the wiretapping case, especially concerning the potential offense of espionage. He stated that all three proposals submitted to the Bar’s Administrative Council opposed closing the case, despite the Athens Single-Member Misdemeanor Court’s contrary judicial assessment. All council members agreed that authorities must further investigate the case. Koutsolampros added that the Athens Bar intends to raise the issue in European forums and support victims of phone surveillance and their lawyers in legal actions before Greek and European courts.
Call for Tzavellas to Step Aside
Athens Bar general secretary Kostas Karetsos asserted that Tzavellas should have recused himself from the wiretapping case. During the period under review, Tzavellas served as deputy supervisor of EYP and was also a party before the parliamentary inquiry committee. Karetsos noted that the Single-Member Misdemeanor Court, based on newly revealed evidence, found that illegal spyware had been used against state officials and ordered the case file to an investigating judge for examination of the espionage offense. In contrast, the Supreme Court Prosecutor decided not to retrieve the case from the archive, concluding that the crime of espionage was not substantiated without substantive investigation, witness testimony, or examination of critical evidence. Based on this, the Athens Bar’s board concluded that the prosecutor’s action constituted an institutional deviation and called for his resignation.
Vice President Defends Strong Language
Athens Bar vice president Ms. Tsangkli defended both the demand for the Supreme Court Prosecutor’s resignation and the use of the term “institutional deviation” by the board majority. She stated that the majority’s strict wording and measures, including the call for resignation, were not chosen lightly or hastily. Instead, they were considered a proportionate response to what the board views as the scale of the institutional breach and misconduct by the prosecutorial authority in this case. According to Tsangkli, the prosecutorial authority not only failed to further investigate the case but also should have abstained due to an evident, undisclosed ground for self-recusal.
