The Athens Court of First Instance had ordered Tycheropoulou’s reinstatement as director of internal audit at the former Payment and Control Agency for Guidance and Guarantee Community Aid (OPEKEPE).
In its statement, AADE said that ‘there is no question of reinstating the employee concerned to the abolished position of responsibility from 1 January 2026 onwards’, arguing that the post no longer exists following OPEKEPE’s integration into the authority and the transfer of its responsibilities.
AADE said the case now concerns only the possible payment of money from public funds if the legal remedies are rejected. It also argued that the exercise of legal remedies is both a right and an obligation for the protection of the public interest, and that failure to pursue them could raise issues of disciplinary and criminal liability for the competent officials.
Tycheropoulou’s lawyer, Antonis Vagianos, criticised the appeal, saying: ‘The filing of an appeal is not perceived as the exercise of a legitimate legal remedy, but as a choice to continue a manifestly unfair and already judicially disapproved administrative practice. The administration seems to choose, instead of restoring legality, the continuation and institutional cover of acts by the previous administration now under investigation.’
In its announcement, AADE stated:
‘1. The Independent Authority for Public Revenue, as a public service, proceeds with the exercise of legal remedies and legal means in accordance with the lawful procedure, which includes a relevant recommendation from its legal representatives and the State Legal Council. The exercise of legal remedies and legal means is both a right and an obligation of the service for the protection of the public interest. Failure to exercise a legal remedy, despite a relevant positive recommendation to the competent services of AADE, raises an issue of disciplinary and criminal liability for the competent bodies of the service. This is all the more the case when the subject of the legal dispute, in cases of this nature, is the payment of sums of money from public resources, as in this specific case.
‘Some publications attempt to create the impression that the issuing of the non-final decision of the single-member Court of First Instance in this case, which, it should be noted, was heard before the integration of OPEKEPE into AADE, implies an obligation for AADE to reinstate the employee concerned as head of OPEKEPE’s Internal Audit Directorate. This is not the case, as this specific position of responsibility has not existed since 1 January 2026, following OPEKEPE’s integration into AADE. Internal audit responsibilities have been transferred to the existing Internal Audit Directorate of AADE, which has been operating since the authority was established on 1 January 2017 and which, according to AADE’s organisational structure, is headed by a university-educated employee. Therefore, there is no question of reinstating the employee concerned to the abolished position of responsibility from 1 January 2026 onwards, but only of the possible payment of sums of money from public funds to the employee concerned if the legal remedies are rejected.
‘The placement of employees in positions of responsibility at AADE takes place through open procedures, in accordance with the conditions and criteria provided for by law and by the authority’s organisational structure. It is not legally possible to place an employee in a position of responsibility without full compliance with the prescribed conditions, nor to bypass the selection process.
‘On the basis of the above, it becomes clear that failure to exercise legal remedies in this specific case would constitute not only preferential treatment, but also grounds for seeking disciplinary and criminal liability from the competent AADE bodies that failed to proceed with the prescribed actions.
‘AADE respects the rights of all its 12,000 employees and applies the institutional framework uniformly, on the basis of the principles of equality, impartiality and non-discrimination, with the aim of ensuring legality and the proper functioning of the administration. It goes without saying that it applies all court decisions that give rise to an obligation to comply. At the same time, it expects its employees to respect the procedures provided for by law and the regulatory framework concerning their service status and professional development.’
______________________________________________
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.