By Ioanna Mandrou

The Prosecutor of the Supreme Court herself announced the completion of the investigation into the phone surveillance complaints Georgia Adeline, which had the initiative of upgrading the investigation and assigning it to the deputy prosecutor of the Supreme Court, Achilleas Zisis.

According to the announcement:

  • from the judicial investigation, which was, according to the announcement, exhaustive, no connection of the EYP or the other state agency (ELAS, Anti-Terrorism) with the malicious software Predator and the alleged illegal surveillance of politicians, state officials, journalists, etc.
  • The case regarding the EYP, other state agencies and natural persons who were in critical positions regarding the EYP is archived both by the Deputy Prosecutor Achilleas Zisi who submitted a 300-page opinion, and by the Prosecutor of the Supreme Court herself who agreed with the opinion Life.
  • Due to the law (more lenient) that was passed in 2019 under the SYRIZA government, four persons, representatives of companies that were involved in one way or another with the malicious software, are being referred to trial for a misdemeanor. These are the four who had been summoned to a non-judicial explanation as suspects.
  • They are Ioannis Lavranos, Sara Aleksandra Hamu, TAL JONATHAN DILIAN and Felix Mpiziou.
  • The arraignment, as explained in the prosecutor’s announcement, is only for the misdemeanor of violation of telephone privacy, because the more favorable law prevails, since offenses of this type are now felonies.

At the same time, as emphasized in Mrs. Adelini’s announcement,

  • In addition to justice, three independent authorities were involved in the investigation.
  • In particular, as stated in the announcement, “the Personal Data Protection Authority”, the ADAE (Communications Privacy Authority) and the National Transparency Authority, which conducted investigations, as well as on-site inspections of public bodies: Ministry of Citizen Protection (ELAS), National Intelligence Service (EIPS), as well as to companies and submitted their reports and findings”.
  • Dozens of witnesses were examined, “politicians, journalists, representatives of mobile phone companies, Commanders and Deputy Commanders and other members of the National Intelligence Service (NIS) over the last 10 years, members of the Communications Privacy Assurance Authority (ADAE) and the National Transparency Authority (NAA), Supreme Officers of the Hellenic Police, the Directorate of Information Management and Analysis, the Directorate of Financial Headquarters, etc. in recent years, as well as of the Electronic Crime Prosecution Directorate, and in total more than forty (40) witnesses”
  • A 300-page report was submitted by the prosecutor Achilleas Zisi, detailing all the actions.
  • Among other things, the expert opinions that were carried out, the requests for judicial assistance that were submitted to the USA and Switzerland and answered and a detailed report on the actions of the judiciary in conjunction with other independent or state authorities.

Finally, it is noted that for the prosecutor Vasiliki Vlachou, who was responsible for the Public Prosecutor’s Office at the time, the disciplinary investigation carried out by the Supreme Court resulted in her discharge, which was duly approved.

The announcement of the Prosecutor of the Supreme Court in detail

1. The preliminary examination for the wiretapping case was completed today, after (2) approximately two years in total, and (9) just nine months since the investigation was upgraded, with the assignment by the Prosecutor of the Supreme Court personally to the Deputy Prosecutor Supreme Court Achillea Zisi, due to the major importance of the case and to prevent the risk of limitation of the investigated acts. Time is estimated to be absolutely necessary in view of the unusual scope of the investigation and the in-depth investigation of every aspect of the case.

2. Indicatively, according to her, among others, almost all the witnesses proposed by the appellants-reporters, including politicians, journalists, representatives of mobile phone companies, Commanders and Deputy Commanders and other members of the National Intelligence Service (NIS) in the last 10 years were examined , members of the Communications Privacy Assurance Authority (ADAE) and the National Transparency Authority (NAA), Senior Officers of the Hellenic Police, the Directorate of Information Management and Analysis, Directorate of Financial Headquarters, etc. in recent years, as well as the Directorate of Electronic Prosecution Crime, in total more than forty (40) witnesses.

3. Three Independent Authorities were appointed, namely the Personal Data Protection Authority, the Communications Privacy Authority and the National Transparency Authority, which conducted investigations and on-site inspections of public bodies: Ministry of Defense of the Citizen (ELAS), National Intelligence Service (EYP), as well as to companies and submitted their reports and findings.

4. At the same time, the Directorate for the Prosecution of Electronic Crime carried out an examination of witnesses, which carried out searches of companies and homes of suspects, during which documents, tax information and digital evidence were seized, which were then examined by the Directorate of Criminal Investigations. Two requests for Judicial Assistance to the judicial authorities of the USA and Switzerland were made and answered. An audit was conducted by the Economic Police Directorate (Tax Police Department) on natural and legal persons and its conclusion was filed. Explanations were also received without prejudice, memoranda were submitted, etc.

5. All the requests of those involved were also satisfied, including the Judicial Expertise, which was carried out in the archives of the EYP by two experts, in the presence of the aforementioned public prosecutor. The preliminary examination resulted in an absolutely thorough conclusion of approximately 300 pages, which the above Deputy Prosecutor of the Supreme Court submitted to the Prosecutor, who agreed with both its legal and substantive content.

6. From the above rich evidentiary material, it can be concluded unequivocally that there was absolutely no involvement with the spy software predator or any other similar software of a government agency, namely the National Intelligence Service (NIS), the Anti-Terrorist (D.A.E.E. B.) and more generally of ELAS (Ministry of Citizen Protection) or any government official.

7. Regarding the provisions on declassification of communications, which were issued by the then Prosecutor of the Public Prosecutor’s Office and concern the years 2020-2024, the procedure provided for by the Law was strictly followed, which, among other things, over time, does not claim the citation of a special justification in the above provisions, and the relevant provision, which was first established by Law 2225/1994, was continuously maintained by all Governments until the new Law 5002/9-12-2022, while it is in accordance with in the spirit of the Court of Justice of the European Union (see the decision of 16/2/2023 of the Court of Justice of the European Union in case C-349/21). It is also noted that for the above EYP Prosecutor, after the relatively disciplinary preliminary examination carried out by a Deputy Prosecutor of the Supreme Court, an exculpatory conclusion was issued, with which the Vice President of the Supreme Court, President of the Inspection Council of Courts.

8.Furthermore, there were “sufficient indications” at this stage for the initiation of criminal prosecution against certain legal representatives and real owners of companies, for criminal acts, such as the violation of the privacy of telephone communication, etc. However, these acts, due to the most lenient of their amendment in 2019, with the new PC (law 4619/2019), are punished as a misdemeanor and despite the fact that under the previous, but also the current legal regime (old PC and article 10 of law 5002/9-12 -2022, which amended the new Criminal Code) have the character of a felony, in accordance with the principle of the retroactive effect of the most lenient law (Article 2 of the Criminal Code), in view of the time of their execution, which concerns the years 2020 and 2021.

9. The required at this stage “sufficient evidence” for the initiation of criminal proceedings against the above individuals, which are mainly based on the finding that the companies in question are involved in similar acts of violating the privacy of telephone communications, etc., politicians, journalists etc. and in other countries, combined with the fact of the existence of similar “targets” in Greece, it was decided that they should take the relevant accusation to the audience to check its validity or not.

10.Finally, it should be noted that in no other country has such a thorough (Judicial) investigation been carried out – with the participation of three Independent Authorities – for a similar case, and in most cases the similar investigations resulted in the imposition of simple sanctions and especially fines against the above companies involved.