GREEK HELSINKI MONITOR (GHM)
Address: P.O. Box 60820, GR-15304 Glyka Nera
Telephone: (+30) 2103472259 Fax: (+30) 2106018760
e-mail: office@greekhelsinki.gr website: http://cm.greekhelsinki.gr
PRESS RELEASE
3 November 2010
Greece’s systematic failure to execute international judgments
Greek Helsinki Monitor (GHM), based on its litigation, documents that Greece systematically
fails to execute European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) judgments, European Committee
for Social Rights (ECSR) decisions and UN Human Rights Committee (UN HRC) views.
A. European Court of Human Rights judgments1
1. Ten judgments on police violence cases. There are ten ECtHR judgments (2004-2010) finding
violations of Articles 2 (right to life) or 3 (prohibition of torture) and in some cases 14 (prohibition
of non-discrimination) of the European Convention of Human Rights (ECHR) in cases involving
ill-treatment, injury or death of civilians by police forces (Alsayed Allaham, Bekos and
Koutropoulos, Celniku, Galotskin, Karagiannopoulos, Leonidis, Makaratzis, Petropoulou-Tsakiris,
Stefanou, Zelilof). Police officers who carried out the incriminated actions have not been sanctioned
as a result of the judgments. Greece informed the CM that there will be a resumed investigation in
the Petropoulou-Tsakiris case: GHM that represents the victim was informed that the Athens First
Instance Prosecutor decided not to launch an investigation but filed again the case to the archives
of unknown perpetrators. Greece informed the CM that civil proceedings for damages brought by
Alsayed Allaham were to be reexamined by the Athens Administrative Appeals Court: the case
appears pending since early 2008. The CM is also awaiting information on a legislative process
concerning an independent committee with three independent members who would be competent to
assess the possibility of opening new administrative investigations in cases where failures in
investigations had been found by the ECtHR. Greek authorities undertook in a 14-15/10/2008 high
level meeting with the CM secretariat to set it up at the latest before June 2009. GHM knows that
such committee was never legislated. Finally, GHM as representative of the Celniku family can
report that the Greek state refused to recognize police liability before domestic courts: this is why it
appealed against Athens Administrative First Instance Court judgment 4855/2009 awarding
compensation to the family, invoking the domestic criminal court acquittal of the police officer.
2. Two judgments on religious oath. There are two ECtHR judgments (2008-2010) finding
violations of Articles 9 (right to freedom of religion) and 13 (right to an effective remedy) ECHR in
cases involving involuntary declaration of religious convictions in court proceedings (Alexandridis,
Dimitras and Others). Minutes mentioning wrong religion for Alexandridis have not been
corrected. There has been no change in legal provisions on registration of personal data and oathtaking by courts and effective remedy despite the expressed ECtHR recommendation in Dimitras
and Others. Courts and competent ministers have formally rejected such requests or motions.
3. One judgment on school segregation of Roma pupils. In 2008 (Sampanis and others) the
ECtHR noted the authorities’ failure to provide schooling for the applicants’ children during the
2004-2005 school year and their subsequent placement in special preparatory classes in 2005,
1
Execution supervised by the Council of Europe’s Committee of Ministers – CM – see relevant web site at
http://www.coe.int/t/DGHL/MONITORING/EXECUTION/Reports/Default_EN.asp?dv=1&StateCode=GRC
1
resulting in a difference of treatment between Roma children et non-Roma children (violation of
Article 14 in conjunction with Article 2 of Protocol No.1). The case also concerned the absence of
an effective remedy (violation of Article 13). Greece claimed to the CM to have taken individual
measures to allow the schooling of the applicants’ children in ordinary classes, as well as general
measures aimed at including Roma children in the education system in a non-discriminatory
manner. GHM has documented that these claims are false: the Sampanis and Others pupils still
attend the Roma-only school and a new application (59608/09) was submitted to the ECtHR, while
there are scores of other Roma communities whose children are excluded from schools or
segregated in special schools (http://cm.greekhelsinki.gr/index.php?sec=194&cid=3687).
4. Two judgments on parliamentary immunity. Parliamentary immunity of two members of
parliament against whom applicants had lodged criminal complaints for allegedly unlawful actions
unrelated to their parliamentary activities was found to be in violation of Article 6§1 ECHR
(judgments Tsalkitzis and Syngelidis in 2007-2010). Greece has argued before the CM that since the
violation found does not originate in the legal texts relating to the immunity of members of
Parliament, but rather to the way in which they were applied, and taking account of the direct effect
given in Greek law to the ECtHR judgments, publication and dissemination of the judgment in this
case should constitute sufficient measures of execution. However, GHM’s Panayote Dimitras, even
though he invoked this case law, saw charges for defamation suspended by an Athens ThreeMember Appeals Court on 17 February 2010 (judgment 1656/2010) because the defendant, after
she made the allegedly incriminating statements, became an MP; on 16 August 2010, the Supreme
Court Prosecutor refused to file a motion for cassation considering that judgment correct.
B. European Committee for Social Rights (ECSR) decisions2
1. Two decisions on Roma housing rights and evictions. In 2004 and 2009, the ECSR, in two
decisions on collective complaints (ERRC, Interights), found multiple violations of Article 16 of the
Social Rights Charter on the grounds that Roma live in conditions that fail to meet minimum
standards, and are forcibly evicted, while legal remedies generally available are not sufficiently
accessible to them. The second decision was an unprecedented re-examination under the collective
complaints system triggered by the fact that Greece had failed to execute the first decision. Since
the second decision was taken, Greece has not taken any remedial action, while, on the contrary one
of the worst Roma evictions in Greek history took place in Aspropyrgos in August 2010.
C. UN Human Rights Committee (UN HRC) views
1. One decision on police violence. In 2008 (Kalamiotis), the UN HRC found that Greece violated
Article 2 paragraph 3 (right to an effective remedy) read together with Article 7 (prohibition of
torture) of the of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) concerning
the lack of an effective investigation into the allegations of police brutality against a Rom. Greece
however failed to provide the victim with an effective remedy and appropriate reparation, while the
police officer involved was not sanctioned.
2. One decision on Roma evictions. In 2010 (Georgopoulos family), the UN HRC found that the
demolition of the authors’ shed and the prevention of construction of a new home in the Roma
Riganokampos (Patras) settlement amounted to a violation by Greece of Articles 17 (protection of
home), 23 (protection of family) and 27 (protection of minorities), alone and read in conjunction
with Article 2, paragraphs 1, 2, and 3 (right to an effective remedy without discrimination) of
ICCPR. Greece must provide an effective remedy, as well as reparations to include compensation,
as well as ensure that similar violations do not occur in the future. It is not expected to do so.
2
Execution supervised by the Council of Europe’s Governmental Committee – no information is publicly available
at http://www.coe.int/t/dghl/monitoring/socialcharter/GovernmentalCommittee/GCdefault_en.asp
2