Thessaloniki municipality accused of trying to block TIF referendum

Although citizens submitting the application provided their details in full and declared that they were registered on the electoral rolls of the Municipality of Thessaloniki, the municipality’s Legal Service claimed on Wednesday that there was ‘an absence of legal signatures’.

The response was immediate. Three constitutional lawyers who are part of the Organising Committee’s legal support team argued that the municipality’s position was legally unsound, citing Council of State case law according to which an unsigned application may satisfy the requirement for a written submission when the remaining information clearly establishes the identity of the applicant and the seriousness of their intention.

‘They decided to subject democracy to formalism. However, they failed to do even this correctly,’ said Ifigenia Kamtsidou, Charalambos Kouroundis and Akritas Kaidatzis.

On 2 March, more than 23,000 signatures, corresponding to 10% of the electorate, were submitted to the Municipality of Thessaloniki, meeting the threshold required by law for a municipal referendum and paving the way for what would be the first official municipal referendum in the country’s history.

However, on Wednesday afternoon, the municipality issued a statement saying that its services had found ‘an absence of legal signatures’ in the application. In its document, the Legal Service argued that although the law governing municipal referendums refers simply to a request by 10% of voters without specifying any particular form, Article 3 of the Code of Administrative Procedure should apply additionally, since the special law does not regulate the matter differently.

‘In the absence of a valid application, we consider that further processing and verification of the data is not possible,’ the Legal Service concluded.

The municipality’s statement was met with an immediate response from three constitutional lawyers who have been involved in the legal support team of the Organising Committee for the referendum on the Thessaloniki International Fair from the outset: Ifigenia Kamtsidou, Akritas Kaidatzis and Charalambos Kouroundis. They argued that ‘the Municipality’s carelessness and its haste to reject the request for a local referendum leads it to serious errors’.

As they explain, ‘the announcement of a referendum does not constitute an administrative act, as the case law of the Council of State has recently ruled (Council of State 2787/2015). Therefore, Article 3 of the Code of Administrative Procedure does not apply in this case.

‘Even if this were not the case, however, according to the case law of the Supreme Administrative Court, an unsigned application meets the legal requirement for submitting a written application when the remaining information indicates the identity and seriousness of the will of the interested party (Council of State 2524/2003). In this case, on the electronic platform for collecting applications, citizens were asked to fill in their full name, patronymic, matronymic and year of birth, and to declare that they are registered on the electoral rolls of the Municipality of Thessaloniki.’

A glance at the signature collection platform shows that citizens filled in their full name, year of birth, patronymic and matronymic, while also explicitly declaring that they were registered on the electoral rolls of the Municipality of Thessaloniki, that they were requesting the holding of a referendum, and that they consented to the use of the above data.

The municipality’s statement

‘In a letter dated today (04/03) to Maria Keki, Secretary General of the Municipality of Thessaloniki, Michalis Mittas responded to the request submitted for the holding of a local referendum, attaching a document from the competent Citizens’ Registry Directorate of the General Directorate for Quality of Life, which notes the absence of legal signatures and draws attention to the proper completion of the request in accordance with the law.

‘The following is the Service’s detailed document:

‘Through your above document, you forwarded to us citizen request no. 52713/2-3-2026 regarding the holding of a local referendum, accompanied by a list consisting of 23,214 names with corresponding patronymics, matronymics and years of birth, without physical or digital signatures. The file was transmitted to us in order to examine its completeness in accordance with article 134 para. 1b of Law 4555/2018, and we have found that:

‘The said provision refers to a request from 10% of voters without specifying a particular form. Therefore, Article 3 of the Code of Administrative Procedure, which sets out the general principles regarding the completeness and validity of an application to the Administration, applies additionally, provided that the special law does not regulate the matter differently.

‘According to Article 3 of the Code of Administrative Procedure, applications must contain the applicant’s details and bear a physical or digital signature. From the wording of article 134 para. 1b, it follows that the request of 10% of voters could have been submitted as a collective application, which nevertheless remains a written application to the Administration and, according to the general principles of Article 3 of the Code of Administrative Procedure, requires that each person be identified, each person sign, and a clear declaration of will be obtained. In other words, each citizen must individually and validly express their will by signature, regardless of whether this takes the form of an individual or collective application. The signature confirms the identity of the applicant and their agreement with the content of the request.

‘In conclusion, the statement attached to the request, containing full names and the corresponding patronymics, matronymics and years of birth, does not bear the required physical or digital signatures and therefore, in the opinion of our Service, does not satisfy the requirements of Article 3 of the Code of Administrative Procedure, is not equivalent to an application, and does not constitute a declaration of will.

‘Finally, for all the above reasons, and in the absence of a valid application, we consider that further processing and verification of the data is not possible.’

The response from the Organising Committee’s legal team

‘We were surprised to learn of the response sent by the Secretary General of the Municipality of Thessaloniki to the request submitted by 23,214 citizens of Thessaloniki for a local referendum on the relocation of the TIF and the creation of a Metropolitan Park. The response communicates a document from the Municipality’s Citizens’ Registry Directorate, according to which “the absence of legal signatures is established” pursuant to Article 3 of the Code of Administrative Procedure.

‘This claim shows that the Municipality’s carelessness and haste to reject the request for a local referendum leads it to serious errors. Specifically, Article 3 of the Code of Administrative Procedure, which provides that “A request by the interested party for the issuance of an administrative act is required when the relevant provisions so provide”, applies when the citizen requests the issuance of an administrative act. The request referred to in Article 134 of Law 4555/2018 does not, however, concern the issuance of an administrative act but the issuance of a notice for the holding of a referendum. The notice of a referendum does not constitute an administrative act, as the case law of the Council of State has recently ruled (Case No. 2787/2015). Consequently, Article 3 of the Code of Administrative Procedure does not apply in this case.

‘Even if this were not the case, however, according to the case law of the Supreme Administrative Court, an unsigned application meets the legal requirement for submitting a written application when the remaining information indicates the identity and seriousness of the will of the interested party (Council of State 2524/2003). In this case, on the electronic platform for collecting applications, citizens were asked to fill in their full name, patronymic, matronymic and year of birth and to declare that they are registered on the electoral rolls of the Municipality of Thessaloniki. Furthermore, applicants were asked to declare that “In accordance with Article 134 of Law 4555/2018, I request the Thessaloniki Municipal Council to hold a municipal referendum with the following question:”, after which the referendum question was selected. Therefore, there is no doubt as to the identity of the 23,214 citizens or the seriousness of their intention. On the contrary, all this information is plainly sufficient for the Municipality to exercise the competence granted to it by law, namely to verify whether the applicants are citizens of the Municipality of Thessaloniki.

‘From the response of the aforementioned municipal service, it emerges that the municipal authorities, who were elected through democratic procedures, have decided to subject democracy to formalism. Even this, however, they failed to do properly. We call on the municipality to review its decision in order to preserve the institutional dignity that it tarnished with its response.’

Ifigenia Kamtsidou, Akritas Kaidatzis, Charalambos Kouroundis

______________________________________________

Are you seeking news from Greece presented from a progressive, non-mainstream perspective? Subscribe monthly or annually to support TPP International in delivering independent reporting in English. Don’t let Greek progressive voices fade.

Make sure to reference “TPP International” and your order number as the reason for payment.