Technical Report On Asset Declarations Greece en

Greece-OECD Project:
Technical Support on Anti-Corruption
Technical Report on Asset

Declarations in Greece
TECHNICAL REPORT ON ASSET DECLARATIONS IN GREECE

This document is published under the responsibility of the Secretary-General of the
OECD. The opinions expressed and arguments employed herein do not necessarily
reflect the official views of OECD member countries.
This document and any map included herein are without prejudice to the status of or
sovereignty over any territory, to the delimitation of international frontiers and
boundaries and to the name of any territory, city or area.
About the OECD
The OECD is a forum in which governments compare and exchange policy experiences,
identify good practices in light of emerging challenges, and promote decisions and
recommendation to produce better policies for better lives. The OECD’s mission is to
promote policies that improve economic and social well-being of people around the
world. For further information, please see www.oecd.org.
About the Greece-OECD Project
The Greek government is prioritising the fight against corruption and bribery and, with
the assistance of the European institutions, is committed to taking immediate action.
Under the responsibility of the General Secretariat against Corruption, Greece’s National
Anti-Corruption Action Plan (NACAP) identifies key areas of reform and provides for a
detailed action plan towards strengthening integrity and fighting corruption and bribery.
The OECD, together with Greece and the European Commission, has developed support
activities for implementing the NACAP. This project is scheduled for completion in
January 2018 and is co-funded by the European Commission and Greece. For further
information, please see the project webpage.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS – 3
Acknowledgements
This report was prepared by the Public Sector Integrity Division of the OECD Directorate
for Public Governance as part of the Greece-OECD Project on Technical Support for Anti-
Corruption. Under the supervision of Sarah Dix, the work was led by Tilman Hoppe, with
with Pelagia Patsoule. Laura McDonald managed communications and editing, and
Meral Gedik formatted the report. Voula Akrivaki and Alpha Zambou provided key
administrative support.
The OECD would like to thank the General Secretariat Against Corruption (GSAC) for
their openness and initiative throughout the process. The OECD is also grateful to
experts for sharing their experiences and knowledge. The Report was discussed at and
amended following in-country meetings with representatives of the five oversight
bodies and the General Secretariat of Information Systems on 2 and 3 October 2017.
This report is based on a desk review of relevant laws and annual reports by Greek
oversight bodies conducted in May and June 2017, complemented with input from
oversight bodies obtained between July and September 2017. It analyses Asset
Declarations in Greece with reference to the following international standards:
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), Recommendation of
the Council on OECD Guidelines for Managing Conflict of Interest in the Public Service
(2003; hereafter: OECD Guidelines);1
Organisation of American States (OAS), “Model law on the declaration of interests,
income, assets and liabilities of persons performing public functions” (2013, developed
with input from the World Bank; hereafter: OAS Model Law on Declarations);2
Recommendations provided by Council of Europe’s Group of States against Corruption
(GRECO) with regards to asset declarations, in particular during its Fourth Round
Evaluations;3
United Nations Convention against Corruption (UNCAC), Article 8, paragraph 5 (conflict
of interest and incompatibilities), and Article 52, paragraph 5 (financial disclosure);4
Western Balkans Recommendation on Disclosure of Finances and Interests by Public
Officials (2014; hereafter: Western Balkans Recommendation).5
1
OECD 28 May 2003 – C(2003)107.
2
OAS Model Law.
3
GRECO webpage evaluations.
4
UNCAC (2003) convention webpage.
5
ReSPA, Recommendation.

TABLE OF CONTENTS – 5
Table of contents
Executive summary....................................................................................................... 7
Overview: Asset declarations in Greece ...................................................................... 13

GRECO ............................................................................................................................... 14
European Commission ...................................................................................................... 15
EU Anti-Corruption Report, Annex Greece, 2014: ............................................................ 15
UNCAC ............................................................................................................................... 15
Transparency International Greece .................................................................................. 16
Assessment ................................................................................................................ 17
Legal basis ......................................................................................................................... 17
Purpose ............................................................................................................................. 18
Coverage ........................................................................................................................... 18
Declaration content .......................................................................................................... 21
Submission ........................................................................................................................ 30
Oversight bodies ............................................................................................................... 31
Verification ........................................................................................................................ 37
Public access ..................................................................................................................... 41
Sanctions ........................................................................................................................... 46
Annex. Relevant legislation, code and sample declaration forms ................................. 50

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY - 7
Executive summary
This Technical Report is based on a desk review of relevant laws and annual reports by
Greek oversight bodies and information obtained through interviews and written
feedback from June to October 2017, as well as an in-country workshop with
representatives of oversight bodies in Athens on 2 October 2017. Amendments to
legislation and jurisprudence are taken into account until 31 October 2017, unless
otherwise indicated.
The asset declaration system in Greece has undergone substantial reforms since 2003,
last time by two laws in 2016. In particular the following are strong features of the asset
declaration system:
 Online submission of declarations.
 Online publication of declarations submitted by parliamentarians.
 Dual usability of declarations for the purpose of detecting conflict of interest as
well as hidden wealth.
 In some cases wide-ranging powers of oversight bodies, such as access to
banking data.
 Use of the Financial Intelligence Unit (FIU)’s financial expertise and powers for
the verification of a significant share of declarations.
 A wide range of public officials from all three branches of powers are obliged to
declare.
 A wide range of sanctions for violation of declaration obligations.
In particular utilizing the FIU for verifications as well as the access to banking data are
outstanding examples of best practices by international comparison.
The asset declaration system, modified as of 2016, is just ibeginning to be implemented.
However, one can already make the following observations regarding the
implementation:
 Oversight bodies need to work with a fixed formula for calculating hidden
wealth. This formula will be a compilation of all possible positions an asset
declaration, balancing all incoming and outgoing financial flows of a public
official. Such a formula will ensure unified financial analysis within an oversight
body and across the various bodies. It will also allow for automated arithmetic
control of the declarations.
 For conducting in-depth audits of a sample of public officials, all oversight bodies
need online access to all state databases; ideally, this access should not (only)

8 - EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
take place by manual log-in, but fully automated by the IT-system of the
oversight body.
 Oversight bodies need a methodology for detecting conflict of interest situations
that public officials did not declare.
 Oversight bodies need to define standard procedures/guidelines for audits,
including the following:
- A list of risk criteria and red flags for selecting declarations for in-depths
audits.
- A standard range of public databases to be consulted for each audit of a
declaration.
- A standard time frame for which the data is checked, including not only
data from the current period, but also from past years.
- The sample of public officials that is checked each year (in addition to public
officials on whom a complaint is filed).
 In order to allow civil society to monitor and analyse declarations, declared data
should be machine readable and downloadable for free.
In addition, the asset declaration system would benefit from a number of improvements
which would require legislative changes. The following are recommended:
Coverage
Recommendation 1: Consider expanding the electronic database to declarations

submitted by newly employed civil servants under the Civil Servants Code. At the same
time, review to what extent the obligation under Article 28 of the Code of Civil Servants
leads to double declaration obligations that could be simplified.
Recommendation 2: Possible ambiguities and overlaps in the categories of
declarants should be reviewed and the need for clarification should be evaluated.
Recommendation 3: Consider including other high risk categories of public officials in
the asset declaration regime such as doctors of public hospitals and health centres.
Recommendation 4: The current limitation to spouses and minor children may be
reconsidered and possibly replaced by a term that covers unmarried life-partners, adult
children, and parents.
Recommendation 5: New declaration obligations should ensure that new spouses
make fully transparent the financial source of assets they bring into the marriage;
equally, divorcees should be under a separate declaration obligation following the
divorce.

Declaration content
Recommendation 6: Review to what extent the obligation to declare precious

movables can be reinstated, with lower thresholds, and in line with the recent
jurisprudence of the Council of State.
Recommendation 7: Define a cumulative threshold for all movables acquired within
one year (e.g. double the newly reduced threshold for one movable).
Recommendation 8: Consider clarifying that public officials can provide estimates if
they receive movables not by purchase and ensure that these estimates do not entail
the sanction of false declaration in case the estimate deviates from the real market
value.
Recommendation 9: Consider explicitly including and defining “beneficial
ownership” as one of the forms of possession of assets.
Recommendation 10: Consider including in the declaration large non-asset
expenditures above a certain threshold (e.g. € 1,000 per year and creditor).
Recommendation 11: Consider introducing an obligation for all declarants to declare
loans they granted above a certain threshold to third parties.
Recommendation 12: Amend Law 3213/2003 in order to include digital currencies.
Recommendation 13: The Law 3213/2003 or a similarly binding regulation should
define a formula for calculating a misbalance of income and lifestyle.
Recommendation 14: Data in the initial declaration should be as of the day of coming
into office (or the day prior to this).
Recommendation 15: Oversight bodies should adopt a methodology for detecting real
conflict of interest cases.
Submission
Recommendation 16: Consider coinciding the start of the deadline for submitting
corrections with the end of the deadline for submitting declarations.
Recommendation 17: The e-declaration system should be complemented with an
easy-to-understand guidance for declarants.
Recommendation 18: Consider publishing catalogues listing declarant’s names in
order to allow for scrutiny of these lists by a wider audience.

Oversight bodies
Recommendation 19: Experiences with a multitude of oversight bodies should be

evaluated from time to time and alternatives such as consolidation within a lesser
number or one institution should be considered.
Recommendation 20: All oversight bodies should have access to the same range of
databases (in particular banking and tax data).
Recommendation 21: Ensure that Greek law contains a clear legal basis for oversight
bodies accessing online databases abroad.
Recommendation 22: Join the agreement on international data exchange in order to
access foreign data which is not openly available or not available in a possible working
language of staff of Greek oversight bodies (such as English, French, German).
Verification
Recommendation 23: All oversight bodies should establish risk criteria and IT-systems
that prioritise declarations which are subject to audits. The risk criteria should be
confidential.
Recommendation 24: The verification of all asset declarations should make use of
banking, tax, and similar secret data.
Recommendation 25: All oversight bodies should have online access to all databases.
Recommendation 26: Oversight should adopt standard procedures for rolling out
audits.
Public access
Recommendation 27: Review options in line with constitutional principles on data

protection to publish a larger circle of declarations online.
Recommendation 28: To the extent that Recommendation 27 is not (yet)
implemented, review options in line with constitutional principles on data protection to
make selected declarations available to stakeholders with a legitimate interest (e.g.
journalists, civil society organisations) upon individual requests under freedom of
information legislation.
Recommendation 29: Review options in line with constitutional principles on data
protection to ensure that declared data is machine readable and downloadable for free.
Recommendation 30: Review options in line with constitutional principles to
reconsider the media prohibition in Article 2(3) of Law 3213/2003.

Sanctions
Recommendation 31: Adopt the ministerial decision necessary for the application of
administrative fines for late submission of declarations.
Recommendation 32: Review as to what extent legislation could be changed in order
to apply confiscation and/or attribution (or a similar mechanism) without having to
establish a link between the inexplicable wealth and the declarant’s official position.
Recommendation 33: Review the feasibility and options for raising awareness among
tax authorities on the need to notify asset declaration bodies in defined cases, such as
expenditures not being covered by (declared) income.
Recommendation 34: Review the feasibility and options of prosecutorial/judicial
authorities being obliged or committing to providing feedback on the outcome of cases
referred to them by asset declaration oversight bodies.

Figure 1. Flow chart
Declarations
Legal basis: see chapter
5.1
Purpose: see chapter 5.2
Coverage: see chapter 5.3
Content: see chapter 5.4
Oversight
bodies
see chapter
5.6
Submission Verification Sanctions

see chapter 5.5 see chapter 5.7 see chapter 5.9
Public access
see chapter 5.8

OVERVIEW: ASSET DECLARATIONS IN GREECE - 13
Overview: Asset declarations in Greece
Greece considered introducing asset declarations for the first time in 1927, when two
Parliamentarians submitted a draft proposal to the Parliament.6 Almost 40 years later, in
July 1964, Parliament voted this draft into law (Law 4351/1964). The annual submission
of an asset declaration became obligatory for the Prime Minister, Ministers, Deputy
Ministers, Parliamentarians, leaders and spokespersons of political parties represented
in the Parliament, and close relatives of all these officials. Declarations had to be
submitted to Parliament by April of each year. They contained details in particular on
immovable assets, vehicles, deposits in Greek and foreign banks, businesses, and
securities.
Law 1738/1987 provided details on the verification procedure and introduced new
categories of declarants. Law 2429/1996 further expanded the categories of declarants.
On 31 December 2003, Greece enacted the Law 3213/2003 on “Declaration and
verification of assets for members of parliament, public officials and employees, media
owners and other groups of persons”. The declaration under this Law focuses mainly on
detecting and preventing inexplicable wealth (financial aspect). The Law has undergone
several amendments, in particular:
 Law 4281/2014, Articles 222-229, introducing a second, separate declaration of
financial interests (focusing on the conflict of interest aspect);
 Law 4389/2016, 172-183, inter alia introducing thresholds for movables of a
certain value, and regulating the FIU’s and General Inspector of Public
Administration’s role in processing declarations , introducing the obligation of
banks to provide certificates of deposits, and introducing administrative fines;
 Law 4396/2016, Article 4(5): clarifying the definition of offshore companies
 The amendments of Law 4281/2014 came into force on 1 January 2015, with the
provisions introducing new categories of declarants coming into force on 1 July
2015. The other two laws of 2016 came into force on the day of their
publication.7 The amendments of 2016 brought about the following main
changes:
6
National School of Public Administration, Alexopoulos Panagiotis/Pantazi Anna, Final Paper: The audit
of asset declarations as an institution for transparency, Athens, 2015, pages 11, 13, 17-22 (in Greek
only).
7
Law 4389/2016 on 27 May 2016 and law 4396/2016 on 8 June 2016.

14 - OVERVIEW: ASSET DECLARATIONS IN GREECE
 Banks and similar institutions must provide the balance of deposits free of
charge upon request of declarants;
 The content of the declarations was broadened (adding: hiring of safe deposits,
high value movables, loans and any type of monetary sanctions or fines for
specific categories of declarants);
 Public access to some categories of declarations is defined;
 The oversight bodies responsible for the verification of the declarations are
redefined;
 Establishing fines for declarants that do not respond to supervisory bodies
during verification procedures;
 Administrative fines in case of late submission;
 Prohibition for certain declarants (politicians and relatives) to be
shareholder/partner of foreign companies; criminal liability in case of
infringement;
 Central electronic submission of declarations.
The following monitoring reports review the asset declaration system after the adoption
of the main Law 3213/2003. However, asset declarations are only one part in these
reports that cover a broad range of anti-corruption measures. GRECO (the Council of
Europe’s Group of States against Corruption) has reviewed the amendments as of
August 2014,8 while none of the reports could yet take into account the amendments of
2016.
GRECO
Evaluation report Greece: Fourth Evaluation Round, Corruption prevention in respect of

members of parliament, judges and prosecutors states, 22 October 2015:9
“GRECO recommends that the system of declaration of assets, income and interests is
reviewed so that all pertinent information is adequately reflected, including on debts and
liabilities, and to ensure that declarations are accessible to the public conveniently and
for an adequate period of time.”
“GRECO recommends that the newly established Committee for the Investigation of
Declarations of Assets becomes operational as soon as possible and is provided with all
the means necessary to perform its tasks effectively and pro-actively, and that it reports
periodically and publicly about the results of its activity.”10
8
The in-country mission took place from 1-5 December 2014.
9
GRECO Report (22 October 2015), pages 21-22, at no 52-53.
10
Ibid, at No 57-58.

OVERVIEW: ASSET DECLARATIONS IN GREECE - 15
European Commission
Compliance Report, The Third Economic Adjustment Programme for Greece, First
Review, 9 June 2016:11
“The implementation of the National Strategic Plan against Corruption is continuing.
Following the adoption of the framework law for anti-corruption and the code of conduct
for members of Government in 2014, the amendment of the legislation on the
declaration of assets adopted as a prior action of the first review is expected to
significantly strengthen the framework for the monitoring of asset declarations of
politically exposed persons in a timely, effective and independent manner bringing
Greece in line with best practices.”
EU Anti-Corruption Report, Annex Greece, 2014:12
“Elected and appointed officials are subject to a strict asset disclosure system which has
led to criminal prosecution in some cases. The declarations of ministers and MPs are
publicly available and usually reported in the media. However, verification is not
systematic and the cooperation between internal control mechanisms and law
enforcement bodies to identify breaches of asset disclosure obligations is carried out by
the Control Committee within Parliament, which is composed predominantly of MPs and
three representatives of the judiciary. Therefore, this verification system alone cannot
fully guarantee impartiality.”
UNCAC
The Country Review Report of Greece dates from 2015 and is based on a country visit in
November 2014:13
“An offence with some similarities to the one contained in Article 20 of the Convention
(establishing, under the heading ‘illicit enrichment’, the criminal liability of ‘any person
obligated to file an assets declaration who, taking advantage of his/her capacity acquires
or procures to a third party an illicit financial benefit’) was found until very recently in
Article 4 of Law 3213/2003. Although this offence existed (in various versions) in the
Greek legislation relevant to the filing of assets declarations since 1964, it remained
obscure, had never been applied in practice and was reviewed as running against
fundamental constitutional principles (nullum crimen sine lege certa). Therefore, during
the recent legislative overhaul of the anti-corruption legislation that culminated in Law
4254/2014, it was decided to abolish it.
11
EC Compliance Report (9 June 2016), page 12.
12
EU Anti-Corruption Report, Annex 8, Greece (3 February 2014), page 10.
13
UNCAC Country Review Report of Greece, page 33, at No 71.

16 - OVERVIEW: ASSET DECLARATIONS IN GREECE
At the same time, Article 20 of the Convention was considered, and it was decided that
its goals are sufficiently served by the provisions of the aforementioned Law 3213/2003
that establish a system of asset declaration obligations for public officials and include an
offence of ‘failing to submit or submitting a false asset declaration’. Indeed, the goal of
preventing and suppressing corruption in the public sector is closely related to
transparency as to the possession of assets by public officials. Asset transparency also
acts as a negative incentive in the context of preventive measures against corruption, by
increasing the risks or chances of persons who cannot justify a substantial increase in
their assets (invisible resources) to incur unwanted legal consequences (criminal and
disciplinary sanctions).
[...] Observations on the implementation of the article: The reviewers note that Greece
has not made illicit enrichment a criminal offence. However, its legislation criminalizes
the non-declaration by any official or person with respect to the obligation to declare
assets, incomes and revenues. [...] Greek authorities have explained that they closely
considered but rejected the criminalization of illicit enrichment.”14
Transparency International Greece
National Integrity System Assessment Greece (12 February 2013):15

“Serious criticism has been made regarding the way the asset declarations of MPs are
being drafted and audited. In particular, the current way of depicting their assets does
not allow for safe conclusions as far as the source of their income is concerned, while
there are also serious doubts about the audit of these asset declarations. Furthermore,
there is partial broadcasting regarding the statements of certain MPs during the period
of submission of asset declarations, whereas a declaration as a whole are not accessible
at all times. ”
There are no further reports on asset declarations, such as by the International

Monetary Fund or the OECD.
14
Ibid, page 36, at No 75 (emphasis by author).
15
Transparency International Greece, NIS Assessment, page 39.

ASSESSMENT- 17
Assessment
Legal basis
A myriad of separate Laws and regulations relate to the declaration system:

Law/regulation Declarant or oversight body Main areas of regulation
Law 3213/2003 All Asset declaration:
contents, submission,
verification, sanctions
Law 4281/2014, All Declaration of financial
Article 229 and non-financial
interest: contents
Law 4389/2016 All Unified, electronic
submission
Law 3691/2008, Financial Intelligence Unit, Jurisdiction for
Article 7B and respective declarants verification
Law 3345/2005, General Inspector of Public Possibility to lift bank or
Article 14(4) Administration, and tax secrecy
respective declarants
Decision 3A Committee and respective Declaration forms,
16327/2016 declarants submission
(President of
Parliament)
Decision 3A Committee Functioning of the
11536/2016 Committee
(Plenary of
Parliament)
Common All oversight bodies, except Declaration forms,
Ministerial Decision 3A Committee and the submission
1068/201716 Inspectors Controllers Body;
respective declarants
16
Previously Common Ministerial Decision of 24 November 2015, replaced by Common Ministerial
Decision 1846/2016, replaced by the Common Ministerial Decision 1068/2017.

18 - ASSESSMENT
Purpose
Asset declarations can serve the purpose of preventing and detecting violations of
conflict of interest provisions, or illicit enrichment, or both. Ideally, an asset declaration
system should serve both,17 as is the case of the Greek system. While Law 3213/2003
focuses on the illicit enrichment aspect of a declaration system, Law 4281/2014 focuses
on the personal interests related to financial and non-financial items in a public official’s
life.
Coverage
The asset declaration system covers a very broad range of public officials from all three
branches of power. This includes among others Ministers, Parliamentarians (Greek
Parliament and European Parliament), judges, and prosecutors.
The declaration obligation extends also to civil servants and public employees from the
larger central and local administration (above lower-level), senior level officials at
independent bodies, senior level officials in the defence sector, management of state
owned enterprises (share ≥ 50%) including at the local level, and to managers of public
hospitals (Directors or Coordinating Directors serving at hospitals and health centres of
the National Health System “ESY”). Thus, in the public sector as such, only public
employees from a lower hierarchical level are exempt from having to submit
declarations as are non-management level employees at state owned enterprises.
However, it should be mentioned in this context that Article 28 of the Code of Civil
Servants (Law 2683/1999) requires every newly employed civil servant to submit an
asset declaration at the beginning of their term. After that initial declaration, civil
servants have to declare any “substantial changes” every two years. However, the
necessary ministerial decision determining the form of this declaration was never
issued. Thus, very few civil servants are aware of this obligation. Until now – insofar that
civil servants comply with this provision – declarations are submitted in writing to the
Human Resources Department of each public agency or service.
Recommendation Consider expanding the electronic database to
1: declarations submitted by newly employed civil
servants under the Civil Servants Code. At the same
time, review to what extent the obligation under
Article 28 of the Code of Civil Servants leads to double
declaration obligations that could be simplified.
As a remarkable feature, the declaration system extends to the leadership of political

parties represented in the Greek or European Parliament, owners and managers of
media enterprises, and professional journalists.18 All in all, the Greek asset declaration
17
Western Balkan Recommendation, ibid, at A.
18
Obliging journalists to declare apparently works well in Greece, a country with well-established rule of
law, but would likely be problematic in many other countries, in particular outside European Union.

ASSESSMENT - 19
system is probably among the top countries globally as far as its coverage of various
categories of functionaries is concerned.
Representatives interviewed for this report have by and large all pointed out the need
for redefining more precisely the categories of declarants. In some cases, the criteria
appear to be vague, in some cases there are overlaps (one declarant having to declare
to two oversight bodies) – in such cases it should be clear that only one oversight body is
in charge of verifications.
Recommendation Possible ambiguities and overlaps in the categories of
2: declarants should be reviewed and the need for
clarification be evaluated.
The exclusion of non-management level doctors in public hospitals does not tally with
the risk of their illicit enrichment. The European Union Anti-Corruption Report 2014
notes:
“The healthcare sector is among the sectors in which Greece faces considerable
challenges with regard to corruption. It accounts for 10% of GDP. Both informal payments
and the procurement of equipment and drugs are affected by corruption. In the 2013
Special Eurobarometer, 11% of the Greek respondents who visited public medical
facilities in the past year admitted to having made an extra payment (EU average: 5%)
and of these 24% felt they had to make the extra payment or offer a gift before care was
given. Transparency International’s 2011 survey on petty bribes in Greece estimated the
bribe expected for surgery in public hospitals at EUR 100 to 30,000, for faster treatment
from EUR 30 to 20,000, and for medical tests from EUR 30 to 500. Informal payments
appear to be made most frequently to obtain access to healthcare, bypass waiting lists or
secure treatment by a particular specialist.”
Preventive and investigative measures introduced as recently as April 2017 shall address
this problem.19 However, this means that illicit enrichment of doctors and their financial
disclosure is probably more essential than several or many of the declarants already
obliged under current law. The Greek authorities have pointed out that in practice,
significant bribes would mostly flow to the hospital directors, not to the “lower-level”
doctors.
Recommendation Consider including other high risk categories of
3: functionnaires in the asset declaration regime such as
doctors of public hospitals and health centres.
19
Euractiv (14 April 2017), Greece creates e-platform to tackle corruption in healthcare; Keep Talking
Greece (13 April 2017), Greece to probe corruption in health sector worth €85billion: “Greece’s
parliament on Wednesday voted to open an investigation into alleged health scandals and corruption
going back two decades, involving bribes and inflated prices for medical equipment and medicine. A
broad majority of 187 lawmakers in the 300-seat parliament approved a government proposal to look
into suspected mismanagement between 1997 and 2014. “

20 - ASSESSMENT
All above categories need to declare all information for “their spouses and minor
children” (Article 1(1) Law 3213/2003). This is a rather limited approach. Assets are
typically hidden and shifted among members of the same household. At the same time,
it is difficult to discern who in one household lives from which source of income. Thus, a
common and useful approach is the inclusion of “household members”,20 disregarding of
the marital status and or of the age.21 This would include in particular parents as well
adult children, who are currently missing in the definition of family members (even
though in practice they are a frequently used opportunity for hiding assets). Including
“household-members” would extend the declaration to non-spouse partners. This
seems fair: In essence declarations of unmarried partners should not be treated
differently than married partners. If a couple is married only two months (which usually
entails sharing a household), the public official would have to declare for his/her
partner. The same should be true for unmarried couples, as they could have been living
together for several years or even much longer.
There are two concerns in this regard. First, one could argue that it is hard to prove
whether somebody shares the same household. However, there are many countries
who follow the “household”-approach and who manage to conduct verifications.22 For
example, the oversight body could use information from the registration of residence
(civil registry). In addition, it is often insiders who provide information on wrong
declarations and who know about the household situation. Second, same-sex couples
might share a common household. Including them into the declaration regime would
expose them publicly. This could be problematic given the rather low ranking of Greece
in terms of same-sex discrimination. Inserting an exception for same-sex couples could
be considered as a possible solution.23
Recommendation The current limitation to spouses and minor
4: children may be reconsidered and possibly
replaced by a term that covers unmarried life-
partners, adult children, and parents.
A common pattern of hiding assets is as follows: The public official acquires assets from
illicit sources. He/she covers this up by marrying during the fiscal year and pretending in
the next annual declaration that the spouse brought these assets into the marriage (and
20
See for example the definition in the Slovenian Integrity and Prevention of Corruption Act, Article 4 (7):
“’Family members’ means spouses, children, adopted children, parents, adoptive parents, brothers,
sisters, or any other persons living with an individual in the same household or in a common-law
partnership.”
21
Western Balkan Recommendation, ibid, at. B.3. See for example the reviews by the Eastern
Partnership Project on the asset declaration systems in Armenia and Ukraine; see also Article 4
subsection a) of the Georgian Law on Conflict of Interest, and ReSPA/Tilman Hoppe, “Asset
declarations in practice – A regional study of Western Balkan countries”, 2013.
22
See e.g. Slovenia, Fn. 20.
23
See in this regard, Council of Europe Eastern Partnership Project (2015), Expert Opinion on Draft Laws
of the Republic of Moldova on: “the declaration of wealth, personal interests, conflicts of interest and
gifts”, page 13.

ASSESSMENT - 21
has in fact owned them already “forever”/before the relevant fiscal year). The mirror-
image problem exists with divorces, where divorced spouses hide all the assets, while in
fact the couple is still enjoying the fruits of illicit income together. Separate declaration
obligations of the divorcee following the divorce are one possible solution.
Recommendation New declaration obligations should ensure that
5: new spouses make fully transparent the financial
source of assets they bring into the marriage;
equally, divorcees should be under a separate
declaration obligation following the divorce.
In this context it should be mentioned that oversight bodies in Greece face a problem
they share with all other oversight bodies in other countries: How can one oblige family
members to cooperate in declaring? Possible solutions are: providing separate sanctions
targeting family members;24 subjecting declarations to an audit where family members
refuse to provide information. International guidance is weak at best regarding this
question.25 Greek authorities will have to review the aforementioned or other options in
light of what is possible within the Greek legal framework.
Declaration content
Financial aspect
Movables: threshold
The threshold for movables is outstandingly high (€ 30,000). It equals about an annual
gross salary of a Deputy General Secretary at a ministry (€ 2,800/month).26 It seems
inappropriate, if a high level civil servant could spend his/her entire gross annual salary
on one precious item without having to declare this. The World Bank has recently
suggested a “monetary value for jewellery, art, and antiques to be declared—such as €
5,000 or US$ 6,000, depending on the local context.”27 The Council of Europe has
recommended a threshold of around € 2,000 for movables for Ukraine.28 The respective
threshold for Albania is US$ 5,000, € 4,000 for Croatia, and € 5,000 for Kosovo*. 29 This
24
Albania reportedly foresees such a sanction: RAI (2011), Rules and experiences on integrity issues,
page 57.
25
The most recent publication is silent on this question: World Bank (2017), Getting the Full Picture on
Public Officials – A How-To Guide for Effective Financial Disclosure.
26
Ekathimerini (20 January 2016), New salaries for high-ranking civil service officials decided.
27
World Bank (2017), Getting the Full Picture on Public Officials – A How-To Guide for Effective Financial
Disclosure, page 38.
28
Council of Europe (December 2012), Country risk assessment – Ukraine, “Financial Supervision of
Public Officials”, page 16; repeated in its “Expert Opinion on: Financial Control of Asset Declarations in
Ukraine” (October 2016), page 13.
29
ReSPA/Tilman Hoppe, ibid, page 19 and 50.

22 - ASSESSMENT
aside, the declaration of precious movables is a uniform feature of all disclosure systems
focusing on inexplicable wealth.30
Some stakeholders voiced concerns that even the threshold of € 30,000 is not feasible:
The Unions of Judges and Prosecutors appealed to the Council of the State to declare
this provision unconstitutional. They argued inter alia that the obligation to declare
movables was not appropriate: The ownership could only be verified by an on-site
control at the home of the public official in question. This would raise issues of the
sanctity of the private home. The appeal also argued that the provision is vague, since
declarants could not estimate the value of the movables on their own. In response, the
Council of State has declared Article 2(1)(a)(vi) unconstitutional for violating Articles 5(1)
(free development of personality), 9(1) (inviolability of home and private life), 9A
(protection of personal data) and 25(1) (principle of proportionality) of the Constitution
(Decision No. 2649/2017 of 18 October 2017).31
Nonetheless, it seems important for the Greek legislator to review, to what extent the
obligation to declare precious valuables could be upheld, possibly in a new format: The
declaration of precious movables is a uniform feature of all disclosure systems focusing
on inexplicable wealth.32 In this context, one should keep in mind that – apart from a
few exceptions – no value estimates are required under the Greek system. Regarding
the transactional values (purchase price etc.), see below at “Movables: estimates”. It
should also be noted, that according to the interviews, tax legislation in Greece requires
tax subjects to declare any purchase of a movable above the value of € 10,000. This
raises the question, why this provision is (apparently) constitutional while the much
higher threshold is not. Furthermore, it appears as if the purchase of movables could be
proven without having to enter an official’s home, (which is not foreseen under Greek
asset declaration legislation ) based on credit card receipts, bank statements or witness
testimony (e.g. from estranged family members, or past sellers or future buyers of these
movables). Lastly, an asset declaration system works without the oversight body having
to prove that a public official owns movables he/she did not declare: The pure obligation
puts the official under the risk of sanctions in case he/she does not declare such
movables. The obligation thus serves the purpose of declarations to make it harder for
(corrupt) public officials to enjoy the proceeds of their offences.
Recommendation Review to what extent the obligation to declare
6: precious movables can be reinstated, with lower
thresholds, and in line with the recent jurisprudence
of the Council of State.
Decision No. 2649/2017 of the Council of the State also states that the obligation to
declare such assets would disproportionally limit the right of the declarants to freely
develop their personality, as well as their right to private and family life. (One should
30
World Bank (2013), Financial Disclosure Systems, A Background Primer, page 3.
31
An official English translation of this Decision was not available to the author of this report;
conclusions from this Decision are thus based on secondary sources.
32
World Bank (2013), Financial Disclosure Systems, A Background Primer, page 3.

ASSESSMENT - 23
keep in mind, though, that declarations of judges and prosecutors are not subject to
online publication (yet)). To the extent that these declarations should be or become
subject to freedom of information laws, information on valuables could be redacted.
This option of redacting information should be kept in mind when considering above
Recommendation 6 (even though in most, if not all countries where declarations are
published online, information on precious movables is included in the public version).
Movables: accumulation
In addition, there appears to be only a threshold for each movable, but not an overall
threshold for all movables bought within one year. This is problematic from two angles:
 First, a public official could buy within one year for example 10 or more
movables worth € 29,000 each, thus € 290,000 in total, without having to declare
this. This would include movables that can easily be hidden such as coins or bars
from precious metals.
 Second, the public official could use this threshold as a cover up for illegal
income: A public official might be asked how he/she was able to buy a car worth
€ 200,000 (with an annual salary of € 8,000). He/she could claim he/she had a
multitude of movables just below the declaration value (e.g. 10 pieces of gold
bars each worth around € 20,000), which he/she sold for a total of € 200,000.
Each of the selling transactions would not have to be declared as they are below
the threshold value: Article 2 IX B I “If an asset is sold, the amount received shall
be declared.”
It should be noted in this context, that the World Bank suggested the threshold of €
5,000 even as “a cumulative monetary value”.33 The Council of Europe has recently
recommended to another country to introduce such a cumulative threshold as follows:
“Therefore, it is recommended to include an alternative threshold [alternative to single
movables] for all movables bought within one year, for example double the current
threshold (€ 9,000), where each is above minimal value (e.g. € 50).”34
Define a cumulative threshold for all movables
Recommendation
acquired within one year (e.g. double the newly
7:
reduced threshold for one movable).
All thresholds were introduced for the first time with the introduction of the
declarations of financial interests with Law 4281/2014. As far as Law 3213/2003 is
concerned, the first thresholds were introduced in May 2016, with the amendments of
Article 173(1) of Law 4389/2016. Before that there were no thresholds regarding the
content of the declarations and the description of the assets to be declared (incoming
and outgoing cash flows) appear rather generic in phrasing.
33
Ibid (emphasis by author).
34
Council of Europe PCF (October 2016), Expert Opinion on: Financial Control of Asset Declarations in
Ukraine, page 13.

24 - ASSESSMENT
Movables: estimates
A good feature of Law 3213/2003 is that it does not require declarants to provide
estimates of values. It bases the values on clear cut transactional amounts, such as the
purchase amount, on official estimates by tax authorities, or on estimates by insurances
(Article 2(1)(vi)). There might be instances left, where public officials do not have such
fixed price and/or documentation. These can only be cases, where the public official
receives the movable “for free” (gifts and similar). In this case, the movables are
irrelevant for the balancing of income and expenditures (see below at “Calculation of
illicit wealth”). For the few cases, where there are no purchase values, it should be
clarified that public officials are allowed to provide “good faith” estimates. These
estimates should be indicated in the declaration and should not entail the sanction of
false declaration – this might already follow from an interpretation of the law but should
be reviewed to be sure. For example how should a declarant know that a painting that
he bought for € 900, is now estimated at a value of €5,000? The Council of State has
declared Article 2(1)(a)(vi) unconstitutional through Decision No. 2649/2017 of 18
October 2017. The following recommendation might be taken into account when
reformulating Article 2(1)(vi) in a way that it complies with the recent Council of State
decision.
Recommendation Consider clarifying that public officials can provide
8: estimates if they receive movables not by purchase
and ensure that these estimates do not entail the
sanction of false declaration in case the estimate
deviates from the real market value.
De facto control
Article 17 of the OAS Model Law on Declarations refers to the necessity to also review
the beneficial ownership of assets (de facto control):
“The [verification] procedure may include the verification of undeclared properties
which the competent authority has sufficient grounds to believe are under the de facto
control of the obligated person.”35
This would refer, for example, to the following set of circumstances:36 A public official
owns 30% of shares in a company, which he/she declares. However, the company owns
a luxury car which the public official uses most of the time. This is due to the fact that
the public official in fact bought the car for the company by using undeclared income.
The indirect ownership or de facto possession of the car through the company makes it
possible for the public official to buy and use a valuable asset without having to declare
it (even though he/she theoretically would have to declare it as taxable income, and the
use of the car would formally violate company law provisions against “hidden profit
35
Of 22 March 2013, SG/MESICIC/doc.344/12 rev. 2.
36
Example from Expert Opinion on Draft Laws of the Republic of Moldova, page 12.

ASSESSMENT - 25
distribution” or “illegal retransfer of capital contributions”. Another problematic

situation would be where a nominal owner has issued the power of attorney to a
beneficial owner (a public official) and with this, ceded all power over the company to
the beneficial owner. As the World Bank states:
“The vast majority of financial disclosure systems require filers to provide information
only on assets that they or their family members own directly (that is, to which they
hold legal title). This means, for example, that filers must declare the shares that they
own directly but do not need to disclose shares owned by a legal entity or arrangement
(for example, a trust, a foundation, or a company) that they ultimately control. As a
result, relevant information may be omitted from the disclosure form without the filer’s
having made a misrepresentation […]. Such a situation is not just a theoretical example
but a reality often cited by practitioners, which makes the concept of beneficial
ownership particularly relevant. Not including information on assets whose ultimate
owners are public officials represents an important gap in the vast majority of financial
disclosure systems, and it allows corrupt public officials to hide their assets from
scrutiny. […] Including beneficial ownership in the declaration form makes it harder for
public officials to distance themselves from what they truly own.”37
Recommendation Consider explicitly including and defining

9: “beneficial ownership” as one of the forms of
possession of assets.
Large expenditures
There is no declaration requirement for expenditures on non-assets, such as luxury
vacations or fees for private education, etc. It would seem recommendable to include
such a position, as it would make it harder for corrupt public officials to a certain extent,
to enjoy the proceeds of their illegal activity. Such a declaration requirement would be
in line with international standards.38 Georgia for example requires public officials to
declare “any expenditure” of the person and his/her family members within a reporting
period, amounting to more than € 540 in each case, if not covered by any of the other
declaration categories (such as movables etc.).39 It is true that it is often hard to detect
such expenditures; however, there have been cases where expenditures for education
of children abroad were detected for example through social media. In these cases it is
useful to balance such expenditures with declared data.
Recommendation Consider including in the declaration large non-

10: asset expenditures above a certain threshold (e.g.
€ 1,000 per year and creditor).
37
World Bank (2017), Getting the Full Picture on Public Officials – A How-To Guide for Effective Financial
Disclosure, page 44.
38
Western Balkan Recommendation, ibid, C.2: “other expenses”.
39
Article 15 para. m Law of Georgia on the Conflict of Interests and Corruption in Public Service (as
amended on 11 November 2015).

26 - ASSESSMENT
Increase in market values

Article 2(1)(b)(i) of Law 3213/2003 states: “If […] an existing asset increases in value, the
declaration shall include the amount of related expenditure and a detailed description of
the source of funds.” Experts explained that this provision does not target virtual
increases of value on the market (e.g. stocks soaring in value). This is commendable
since virtual increases of value are irrelevant to balancing income and expenditures. The
provision only covers expenditures that lead to an increase in value, such as adding a
swimming pool to a house, or expanding a building.
Machine readable data

The online interface for submitting registers incoming and outgoing cash flows into one
and the same fields. This is fine from a legal point of view. However, in practice,
incoming and outgoing cash flows should be separate in the declaration form. Otherwise
it will not be possible to automatically calculate the plausibility of the declaration within
a given period (e.g. the past year) or over time (e.g. since assuming office), as shown by
the below mentioned formula (see below under “Balancing income and expenditures”).
Loans received by declarant

Law 3213/2003 requires declaration of loans received (= credit commitments by the
declarants) for “3A-declarants”. For all other declarants, loans received are declared in
the field “income from any source”. This position is utterly important for the following
reason: Public officials often explain their lifestyle by alleged loans they received from “a
friend” (and thus cover up for the same amount earned through bribes). It is one of the
most frequent problems oversight bodies face. The Council of Europe Practitioner
Manual even considers loans as a red flag for audits.40 However, if public officials are
required to declare loans, they cannot allege loans dating back more than the current
year, and thus cannot justify from hindsight, a lifestyle which occurred before the
current year.
Loans granted by declarant

For all declarants, this position does not require declaration. Where loans are above a
certain threshold, it would seem appropriate to declare them: They are a lifestyle –
disbursing large amounts of money to a third party as loan raises the question as to
“where the money came from”.
Recommendation Consider introducing an obligation for all
11: declarants to declare loans they granted above a
certain threshold to third parties.
40
Council of Europe Eastern Partnership Project/Tilman Hoppe/Valts Kalnins, Practitioner manual on
processing and analysing income and asset declarations of public officials, 2014, page 30.

ASSESSMENT - 27
Bitcoins and similar

Article 2(1)(a)(v) and (vI) of Law 3213/2003 “only” cover traditional financial means
(cash, bank deposits, etc.). There is an increasing relevance of digital currencies or
digitally stored money (“prepaid cards”).41 A possible amendment of the Law could be
for example: “Sums of money that have been pre-deposited to electronic or other
means of payment with the prospect of obtaining transactional value in the future are
included to deposits”.
Recommendation Amend Law 3213/2003 in order to include digital
12: currencies.
Descriptive information
Declarations need to show not only numerical data, but also need to contain descriptive
information so that they can be associated with concrete assets.42 Otherwise, public
officials could declare one foreign bank account (while having in fact three); should the
oversight body detect one of the three, the public officials could claim that this detected
one was the one declared. The Greek system provides such descriptive information.
Balancing income and expenditures

The laws and regulations do not contain a formula for calculating illicit wealth. This
absence is problematic in many countries for the following reasons: It seems easy at first
sight to calculate illicit wealth. However, in practice, there are often intentional or
unintentional deviations in the method and financial understanding. Therefore, the
oversight body might regard a case as illicit wealth, but the prosecution office and the
courts might each come to a different result. With numbers, though, there can only be
one result. Disagreements among oversight and law enforcement bodies are therefore
often the result of a lack of a clear, structured financial methodology. The following
chart shows a formula based on the financial flows as defined in Article 2 of Law
3213/2003:
Incoming financial flow during fiscal year Outgoing financial flow during fiscal
year
Cash > € 15,000 at end of previous Real estate > € 0
declaration period
Banks and similar savings balance at end Movables > € 30,000
of previous declaration period
Income of all sources > € 0 Waterborne and airborne vessels and
land vehicles > € 0
41
See for example: FATF (2013), FATF Guidance for a Risk-Based Approach to Prepaid Cards, Mobile
Payments and Internet-Based Payment Services.
42
Western Balkan Recommendation, ibid, C.3.

28 - ASSESSMENT
Proceeds from selling assets > € 0 (as part Loans paid back > € 0
of “income of all sources”)
Loans received > € 0 (as part of “income of Safe deposits and similar
all sources”)
Minimum subsistence expenditures
Cash > € 15,000 at end of (current)
declaration period
Banks and similar savings balance at end
of (current) declaration period
= Subtotal incoming = Subtotal outgoing
* This position is not declared, but needs to be added as all declarants have to spend
money on this.
Recommendation The Law 3213/2003 or a similarly binding regulation

13: should define a formula for calculating a misbalance
of income and lifestyle.
Illicit enrichment is not an offence in Greece (anymore) – see below at section ‎0

“Sanctions”. However, balancing incoming and outgoing financial flows is nonetheless
relevant. A declaration where there are more expenditures than income cannot be right.
This entails questions as to what items were not declared and to what extent the public
official evaded taxes. The formula is also important for determining the amount of
assets or value of money confiscated from the declarant or for which he/she is liable
under “attribution” (see below section ‎0 “Sanctions”). Furthermore, internal audit units
of employers need to know about inexplicable wealth of public officials, so they can
conduct a special audit to identify possible sources of the illicit income at the workplace,
or to transfer the public official to another workplace under risk considerations.
Periods
In principle, all information declared relates to the fiscal year. Thus all incoming and
outgoing financial flows occur within the same period. This is important for any formula
of illicit wealth to work (e.g., one can only juxtapose income and expenditures from the
same period, not from different months/years).
There are some deviations, though: The initial declaration is due within 90 days after
entering office. The declared values relate to the date of submission. Thus, the values
vary according to when the declarant submits the declaration. This creates a gap of
financial accountability between coming into office and the submission of the
declaration. In other words, the question remains unanswered what income the public
official had aside from the official salary between coming into office and the time of

ASSESSMENT - 29
submission of the declaration. Furthermore, the 90-day deadline for submitting initial
declarations could be after the calendar year. For example, a declarant obtaining his/her
status on 15 November 2015 must submit the initial declaration before 15 February
2016. Assuming that he/she submits the initial declaration on 14 February 2016, the
reference date for his/her assets under this declaration would be 14 February 2016. The
reference for his/her next annual declaration (for 2015) would be 31 December 2015.
This would be a date before his initial declaration – an obvious contradiction.
Recommendation Data in the initial declaration should be as of the day

14: of coming into office (or the day prior to this).
Conflict of interest aspect

Most financial data of the declaration under Law 3213/2003 relates also to aspects of
conflict of interest (for example, shares in a company – they indicate money spent as
well as an interest in the company). In addition, Article 229(1) of Law 4281/2014 targets
information on financial and non-financial interests of public officials. This concerns in
particular any income and any membership related to influencing public policy. This
covers the two main sources of non-financial interests43 and is thus commendable.
The online system registers the information under both laws separately. This leads to a
large overlap of information in particular regarding income.
Oversight bodies do not yet have a methodology (guidelines) for actively detecting
hidden conflict of interest. Usually, oversight bodies only verify the accuracy of data in a
declaration, but do not go beyond. As a consequence, they usually detect only “passive”
(or potential) conflict of interest (incompatibilities such as an undeclared business
owned by the declarant), but not “active” (real) conflict of interest (for example a
declared business owned by a public official’s family member being involved in a public
procurement).
Recommendation Oversight bodies should adopt a methodology for

15: detecting real conflict of interest cases.
43
World Bank (2013), Conflicts of Interest, A Background Primer.

30 - ASSESSMENT
Submission
Declarations of assets are submitted upon entering office ("initial declaration"),

annually during office, and after leaving office (Article 1(2) of Law 3213/2003).
Politicians continue to have to submit the declaration up until 3 years after leaving
office. The declarations of financial interests are submitted annually (Article 229(1) Law
4281/2014). This provides a comprehensive picture is in line with international
standards.44
The deadlines are as follows:
Initial declaration: 90 days after entering office.
Annual declaration: 3 months after deadline for submission of tax income declarations.
Leaving declaration: as annual declaration for the tax year of leaving and for the tax year
after.
The submission for both types of declarations electronically45 through a unified online
application (POTHEN, using the TAXISNET service system)46 which complies with good
international practice.47 The electronic submission started in 2016 for declaring data
from the fiscal year 2015 (with an extraordinary submission period from October-
December 2016).
Under Article 173(4) of Law 4389/2016, declarants may spontaneously rectify any
deficiencies or inaccuracies in their declarations within one month after the submission
of the declaration. This provision is ambiguous, as it allows declarants who submitted
late to again extend the deadline by one month. One possible way of remedying the
situation is through an amendment as follows: “Omissions or inaccuracies in a
declaration may be completed spontaneously by the declarant within one month from
the expiry of the deadline for the submission of declarations”.
Recommendation Consider coinciding the start of the deadline for

16: submitting corrections with the end of the deadline
for submitting declarations.
44
Western Balkan Recommendation, ibid, D.1.
45
Law 4389/2016, Common Ministerial Decision of the Ministers of Finance and of Justice1846/2016, as
replaced by Common Ministerial Decision 1069/2017.
46
Article 2 Decision of the President of the Hellenic Parliament No 16327, National Gazette B' 3301/13-10-2016;
the same applies to all other declarants according to Article 2 (1) of Common Ministerial Decision 1846/2016,
as replaced by Common Ministerial Decision 1069/2017.
47
Western Balkan Recommendation, ibid, D.2.

ASSESSMENT - 31
There appears to be a need for easy-to-understand guidance on the use of the asset
declaration system, with a comprehensive Q&A chapter. As some interviewees put it –
“Half of the declarants do not know how to declare properly”. This is a common problem
in all jurisdictions where asset declarations are new, or declaration obligations have
changed.
Recommendation The e-declaration system should be complemented

17: with an easy-to-understand guidance for declarants.
The lack of clarity of categories also creates some problems as to whether the rosters of
declarants (“catalogues”) are complete. Under Law 3213/2003, the oversight body is the
final instance deciding over who should be on this list in case of disagreement. However,
only the employers know the real tasks and job positions of declarants. In addition,
there is the risk that not all declarants are included in the rosters for the simple reason
of negligence or even intentional omission. If one takes only the number of catalogues
the FIU has to deal with (3,500), it is obvious, that oversight bodies could verify the
completeness of these lists, only for a very small sample. In addition, there are no
“checks and balances” on this by the public at large, since declarations of most
declarants are not published online. However, it seems feasible to publish the data from
the catalogues online. This would enable the public to notify oversight bodies on any
missing public official.
Recommendation Consider publishing catalogues listing declarant’s

18: names in order to allow for scrutiny of these lists by a
wider audience.
Oversight bodies
Jurisdiction
There are five main oversight bodies for the verification of declarations (as of end of
2017: four)48. Each oversight body verifies both, the asset declarations as well as the
financial interest declaration, of the respective category of officials.
Declarant49 Oversight Body50
48
As of end of 2017, declarants submitting to the Internal Affairs Service of the Hellenic Coastguard are
submitting declarations to the FIU, which is now in charge of verifying them (Law 4504/2017).
49
As described in Article 1(1) of law 3213/2003.
50
As described in Article 3 of law 3213/2003.

32 - ASSESSMENT
Politicians (Ministers, party Independent Committee of

leaders, Parliamentarians, Article 3A of Law 3213/2003
Mayors, Governors, etc.)
General and Special Secretaries, Financial Intelligence Unit (FIU):
Deputy Mayors, judges, Unit C for Asset Declarations
managers, Directors, Deputy Controls
Directors, etc. of state services,
journalists, etc.
Members of Inspectorate and General Inspector of Public
Control Bodies of the Public Administration
Sector, Heads of Directorates for
Fiscal Controls, President and
members of the FIU, etc.
Staff of the Hellenic Police, Directorate of Internal Affairs of
Border Guards, Firemen the Hellenic Police
(Coastguard, staff of former The prosecutor designated by
Ministry of Maritime Affairs – the Public Prosecutor's Office at
until end of 2017) the Piraeus Court of Appeals
The high number of oversight bodies is unusual. Most, if not all countries have one or
two different bodies at the most. The Western Balkan Recommendation summarises the
problem of such a multitude of bodies:
“For a similar reason, the financial audits should not be subject of different fragmented
entities, such as various human resource departments: this would require a multiple set-
up of financial expertise in different bodies. Furthermore, the sectored approach
regularly entails the risk of the oversight body being too close to peers and thus lacking
independent oversight. In this context there is also no need to subject judges and
parliamentarians to specific oversight by self-administrative bodies: They are all subject
to oversight by one tax administration, so similar is possible for financial oversight on
asset declarations.”51
In addition, each oversight body would acquire different financial expertise on patterns
of hiding inexplicable wealth, on collecting evidence, and on solving difficult situations
with declarants. Such expertise is usually only instantly and fully shared if the respective
staff works within one organisation. Furthermore, the multitude of bodies complicates
the work of state bodies that provide data for the verification of declarations, needed to
establish and maintain communication links with five different oversight bodies, and
each oversight body has its own particular procedures.
51
At E.3.

ASSESSMENT - 33
Recommendation Experiences with the multitude of oversight bodies

19: should be evaluated from time to time and
alternatives such as consolidation within a lesser
number or one institution should be considered.
It should be noted that apart from the above five main oversight bodies, other oversight
bodies can verify an asset declaration on an ad hoc base, in particular when they receive
a complaint or if some internal procedure raises questions in which an asset declaration
is relevant. These bodies are in particular the following: Inspectors Controllers Body of
Public Administration, the Internal Affairs Directorate of the Ministry of Finance, and the
Internal Affairs Directorate of the Independent Authority of Public Revenues.
Legal powers
The following is a list of legal provisions based on which the oversight bodies could
obtain data for verifying declarations:
Independent Article 3b(1) of Law 3213/2003: “The Commission shall have access
Committee of to the files and archives of public authorities, service or Agency that
Article 3A of keep and process data, as well as to” and “Tiresias system may
Law 3213/2003 request, in the context of checks, audits and investigations,
cooperation and reporting all kinds by natural persons, preliminary
judicial or investigating authorities, public services, legal persons
under public or private law and institutions required in any form in
the direct supply of all these elements […]”.
Article 3(4) of Law 3213/2003: “When carrying out its checks, the
supervisory body may invite declarants to provide explanations or
submit additional documents within an explicit time-limit not
exceeding twenty (20) days, which may be extended by a maximum
of ten (10) days.”
Financial Article 7b of Law 3691/2008:
Intelligence
The FIU shall have access to the files and archives of public
Unit (FIU): Unit
authorities, services or bodies that maintain and process data, as
C
well as to the “Tiresias” system.
During audits and investigations, the Units of the FIU can request
information and data from any person, judicial and investigative
authorities, legal entities governed by public or private law and any
other organisation.“
General Article 6(11) of Law 3491/2011: refusal to provide information to
Inspector of and non-cooperation with the General Inspector of Public
Public Administration during an audit, an investigation or an inspection, is
Administration a disciplinary offence.
Directorate of Article 3(4)(a) of Presidential Decree 148/2005: “The Internal Affairs
Internal Affairs Directorate can request information and data from any authority,
of the Hellenic natural person or legal entity, if those are obliged to provide this

34 - ASSESSMENT
Police information and data.”
Article 1(3) of Law 2713/1999: Authorisation to request “immediate

and substantial assistance” of any other public service (civilian or
even military).52
Internal Affairs Article 4(4)(a) of Presidential Decree 112/2007:

Service of the
“The Internal Affairs Service can request information and data from
Hellenic
any authority, natural person or legal entity, if those are obliged to
Coastguard -
provide this information and data.
Public
Prosecutor's
Office at the Article 3(5) of Law 3569/2007: Possible lift of bank, stock exchange
Piraeus Court and tax secrecy under written order of the General Inspector of
of Appeals Public Administration.
The “3A Committee” and the FIU are the only two bodies which have access to
information protected by bank, tax, stock exchange and professional secrecy. However,
the 3A-Committee fully depends on the support of other authorities in order to
implement these powers (it has no genuine powers, unlike for example the FIU or the
Hellenic Police). The General Inspector of Public Administration has the possibility to lift
these secrecies by written order (Article 14(4) of Law 3345/2005). This raises the
question as to why the other oversight bodies do not have this privilege. This also
relates to earlier reflections about consolidating oversight under the roof of one
oversight body (with privileged access to secret information).
Recommendation All oversight bodies should have access to the same

20: range of databases (in particular banking and tax
data).
It should be emphasised that Greece is one of the few countries, which mandates its
FIU with the task of asset declaration. By international comparison, this clearly
constitutes a feature of excellence for the following reasons: FIUs have experts who are
well trained in tracing assets and financial flows; they are well accustomed to using the
channels of domestic and international cooperation with tax and law enforcement
authorities as well as FIUs abroad; once there is intelligence on possible money
52
See also GIPA Annual Report 2015, page 318: Cooperation and exchange of information with
Prosecutors offices, GSAC, SOEE, Inspectors Controllers Body of Public Administration, Inspectorate
Body for Labour, Hellenic Data Protection Authority, Ombudsman, National Intelligence Agency,
Financial Crime Prosecution Unit, FIU, Ministries, European and international organiations.

ASSESSMENT - 35
laundering, they have easy access to further financial intelligence corroborating cases (in
line with internationally recognized standards such as by the FATF).53 Greek authorities
as well as international organisations should keep in mind to continuously promote this
example on the international level and share this experience for the benefit of other
countries.
Foreign data
Many corrupt public officials spend their actual wealth abroad: They buy real estate,
own businesses, or deposit money on foreign bank accounts. They also further their
private interests by using foreign companies as intermediaries. For example, public
officials may apply for a tender at their own ministry through a company they own
abroad. Therefore, the Greek declaration forms ask for foreign income and assets of
public officials as well.
This stands in contradiction to the verification process and legislation, which only relates
to domestic databases. Greek oversight bodies can access data in foreign countries in
three ways:
Cooperating with foreign bodies: This concerns mainly data which is not openly
available. Such cooperation might require a legal basis in Greek law, as well as some
agreement, if only ad hoc, with the foreign body concerned.
Accessing online databases abroad: This concerns databases which are available online
to the general public in a language, which staff of Greek oversight bodies understands.
Using channels for mutual legal assistance in criminal matters or channels of
international anti-money-laundering institutions (Financial Intelligence Units or FIUs):
There are two major impediments with this tool. First, it can take very long (up to a
couple of months or even years). Second, one needs to have a criminal suspicion in
order to justify the initiation of this procedure. However, the purpose of verifying an
asset declaration is to identify suspicious cases – a clear “catch 22” situation. This
channel is thus simply not of much use in most cases.
Integrity bodies from 9 countries in the Balkans have negotiated a draft agreement that
would allow the international exchange of data among integrity bodies such as data
from land registries, business registries, etc. It would also allow monitoring bodies to
directly access foreign databases that are online.54 The draft agreement is open to any
country, hence including Greece. The draft agreement is supported by the Austrian
Government, the European Union, and the World Bank among others. The wording of
this Draft Treaty is by and large based on the Convention on Mutual Administrative
Assistance in Tax Matters,55 developed jointly by the Council of Europe and the OECD.
53
www.fatf-gafi.org/.
54
http://rai-see.org/regional-data-exchange-on-asset-disclosure-and-conflict-of-interest/.
55
Convention website.

36 - ASSESSMENT
The text of the Convention was slightly adapted to fit the context of asset declarations.
The European Union Trieste Summit of 12 July 2017, in its final declaration, encouraged
governments “to endorse and adopt Regional Anti-Corruption Initiative’s International
Treaty on Data Exchange on Asset Disclosure and Conflict of Interest.”56
International cooperation in the realm of verifying asset declarations is still in its infancy.
Practitioners from oversight bodies frequently complain of not being able to access
foreign databases.57 However, national legislators start recognising this issue. The
Ukrainian Law on Prevention of Corruption contains a provision that entitles the
oversight body to “get information from foreign authorities, including that with
restricted access, concerning questions of prevention and combating corruption”. The
provision appears to be not well-formulated. However, a by-law approved by the
Ministry of Justice makes the procedure more clear:58
“The National Agency [verifying asset declarations] has the right to send requests to
public authorities and other bodies of foreign states in order to receive information
required for the detailed audit of a declaration.
To verify information about the declarants referred to in the declaration, the National
Agency has the right to receive information from public databases, registers of foreign
states, including upon paying a fee for particular information under the Law, if such fee is
required to get an access to information.”
The National Agency has already made use of this provision and for example consulted
company registers abroad that provide an optional English language interface.
Recommendation Ensure that Greek law contains a clear legal basis for
21: oversight bodies accessing online databases abroad.
Recommendation Join the agreement on international data exchange in

22: order to access foreign data which is not openly
available or not available in a possible working
language of staff of Greek oversight bodies (such as
English, French, German).
Domestic cooperation
56
Italian Foreign Ministry website.
57
ReSPA/Tilman Hoppe, Asset declarations in practice – A regional study of Western Balkan countries,
2013, page 219.
58
Article 11 of part III of Decision 56 of 10 February 2017 on the “Procedure for conducting control and
detailed audit of declarations of persons authorized to discharge functions of the state or local self-
government bodies”, registered with the Ministry of Justice of Ukraine on 13 February 2017 under file
No. 201/30069.

ASSESSMENT - 37
Oversight bodies cooperate in general under the Coordinating Body for Inspection and
Audit (SOEE). In addition, informal cooperation takes place on a daily basis among
auditors and other practitioners. This informal cooperation includes the General
Secretariat of Information Systems (GSIS), which operates the electronic declaration
system. In the framework of this cooperation, all oversight bodies set up a help desk,
where declarants can address their questions. The idea of a memorandum of
cooperation is on the table to install a more formal framework.
Staffing
Some oversight bodies appear to be rather understaffed. For example, the FIU has 10
staff tasked with the verification and audit of declarations, with an additional 5 staff
contributing assistance in addition to their other tasks. The 10 staff have to conduct
2,000 – 3,000 mandatory audits per year (out of a total of about 120,000 declarations).
This equals about 1 audit per working day per staff (based on 220 working days per
year).
For comparison: The oversight body competent for the Coast guard until end of 2017
had 6 staff working to some extent part time on asset declarations (auditing a sample
out of a total of 7,500 declarations). The oversight body competent for the Hellenic
Police also has about 6 staff working to some extent on about 200 audits per year (out
of a total of 75,000 declarations). It should be kept in mind that audits are only one part
of the work tasks – much if not most time is allocated to advising declarants, dealing
with non- or late submission of declarations, working on the transition from paper to
electronic system, etc.
The “Independent Committee of Article 3A” would appear to be the only body that is
supported with sufficient staff (some hired as external accountant experts), with a total
of 14 accountants audits of about 940 declarations per year. This allows each
accountant to spend three days on one declaration (based on 220 working days/year).
However, it should be kept in mind that the Committee receives a high number of
notifications from citizens on alleged false declarations since the declarations of
declarants under the 3A-Committee are published online.
Verification
Steps
Law 3213/2003 foresees the verification by the following four steps:
Timeliness of submission: Did the declarant comply with the deadlines?

38 - ASSESSMENT
Accuracy and completeness (formal control): Did the declarant fill out the minimum
necessary information and in the correct form?
Logical and arithmetic control (plausibility check): Is the acquisition of new assets
covered by the declared income?
Full audit: Is the declared data correct and complete?
Steps 1, 2, and 4 apply to both declarations (assets and financial interests); step 3 is only
relevant for the asset declarations. The combination of these four steps is in line with
international standards.59
For Step 1, the oversight bodies need to know how many and which declarants fall
under the obligation (roster of officials). To this end, Article 1(3) of Law 3213/2003
obliges the various employers and heads of institutions to submit by February each year
a list of all declarants.
For Step 3, the oversight bodies need instructions on how to analyse the data contained
in the declarations and how to put them together into a formula balancing income and
lifestyle. These instructions are not yet in place, but will be provided for by the Project.
Prioritisation of audits
According to the interviews, declarations are currently mostly prioritised based on
notifications (media, citizens, prosecutorial orders, etc.). The “Independent Committee
of Article 3A” is the only body that by law has to verify all declarations, and manages to
do so in practice (total of about 935 declarations for 2015, and 939 for 2016). For the
other four oversight bodies, the high volume of notifications so far leaves hardly any
room for prioritising declarations based on other criteria.
Law 3231/2003 foresees that oversight bodies prioritise declarations subject to audits
(Step 4) through IT-supported risk analysis (Article 3(3)). Most oversight bodies do not
have a list of red flags and risk criteria yet which trigger an audit (such as suspicious
lottery or casino winnings, private loans, etc.). One exception is the General Inspector of
Public Administration (GIPA). Red flags used for prioritisation include:
Inconsistencies between income and bank balance
Bank deposits changes
Money transfers abroad
Acquiring and transferring assets within the same year
Inconsistencies in the bank deposits due to capital consumption
59
Western Balkan Recommendation, ibid, at E.

ASSESSMENT - 39
Declarant’s position: service, project position, responsibilities, time period in a position

of responsibility
Serving in the same agency as the spouse
Profession of spouse and first degree relatives: accountant
International guidance also suggests the following risk criteria: unusual loans from
private persons, windfalls (casino winnings, lottery, cash gifts, etc.), asset deals with
family members, unusual profit from asset deals, assets acquired below market
conditions, etc.60 This Project drafted a comprehensive list of suggested risk criteria as a
separate output/technical paper. The list of risk criteria was discussed with
representatives from all oversight bodies at a workshop on 3 October 2017.
If the risk criteria were open information, it would be easy for declarants to cheat the
system: They would know which checks to expect. Therefore, at tax authorities, the risk
criteria for selecting audits is usually confidential information.
Recommendation All oversight bodies should establish risk criteria and

23: IT-systems prioritising declarations subject to audits.
The risk criteria should be confidential.
Access to data
The oversight bodies have varying levels of access to databases. This concerns the range
of access as well as the degree of automatisation (online or paper-based on individual
request). For example, the FIU has direct access to all electronic databases (including
the Bank Accounts Registry) with only one exception, the General Commercial Registry.
The FIU also has the power to lift any legally protected secrecy, such as banking secrecy.
The oversight body competent for the staff of the Hellenic Police also has access to all
national databases (to the extent that the police has such access for all its other tasks).
By comparison most other oversight bodies have much less access and powers. The only
online access they have is pothen.gr (the e-declaration database) which again is
connected to TAXISNET services (the e-platform for taxation). However, two caveats
apply: First, the tax data on TAXISNET is declared by the declarant himself/herself.
Second, auditors can have access to TAXISNET only with permission from the declarant
(he or she needs to tick a box before finally submitting the declaration). The only
oversight body apart from the FIU with the power to lift legally protected secrecies is the
General Inspector of Public Administration – it can lift the secrecies related to taxes,
bank accounts and stock-holding.
60
Council of Europe Eastern Partnership Project/Tilman Hoppe/Valts Kalnins, Practitioner manual on
processing and analysing income and asset declarations of public officials, 2014, page 30.

40 - ASSESSMENT
This variety of powers is contradictory – why should one oversight body have powers
which another oversight body does not have? Why, for example, should the declaration
of a prosecutor be conducted using the effective access to banking data (FIU), while the
declaration of a senior police officer cannot profit from this data (Directorate of Internal
Affairs of the Hellenic Police)? In other words: Why should a senior police officer have a
significant lesser risk of his/her undeclared wealth being detected? If at all, the reverse
logic applies: a police officer is less exposed to the public and the media than a mayor,
and thus should face more intense scrutiny by oversight bodies. This aside, it is
inconsistent that most oversight bodies have no access to tax data, even though the
categories of data declared via asset declarations generally overlap with data declared
to tax authorities.
It should be noted that the access to banking data is a remarkably positive feature of the
Greek system: The FIU and the General Inspector of Public Administration can access the
following data through the central registry of bank accounts:61
IBAN;
Balance as of end of year;
Name(s) of holder(s);
Credits/debits as of any day.
Recommendation The verification of all asset declarations should make

24: use of banking, tax, and similar secret data.
Recommendation All oversight bodies should have online access to all

25: databases.
The quality of data differs among the different databases; some are not yet online.
Experts from the General Secretariat of Information Systems have pointed out that it
could be an intermediary solution to at least download/extract the available set of data
from databases (without direct online access) and subsequently use it within the e-
declaration system for automatic verification.
As a positive feature all declarations are tagged to the declarant’s tax number as well as
the declarant’s ID number. This allows matching data using unique identifiers.
61
Art. 62 para. 2 of Law 4170/2013 establishes a “System of Bank and Payment Accounts Registries”
operated by the Directorate for Electronic Transactions Support at the Independent Authority of
Public Revenues (Art. 6 of Ministerial Decision POL. 1258/2013).

ASSESSMENT - 41
Roll-out of audits
For each oversight body, standard procedures need to be defined regarding the
following points:
A standard range of public databases to be consulted for each audit of a declaration.
A standard time frame for which the data is checked, including not only data from the
current period, but also from past years.
What sample of public officials is checked each year in addition to public officials on
whom a complaint is filed?
Which of the five authorities will data-mine the declaration database for patterns of
names, companies and similar recurrent features that could indicate illicit schemes (for
example one and the same legal entity used by more than one public official as a pretext
for legal income)?
Which authorities are informed at the end of an audit in case there are any findings (tax
authorities, FIU, prosecutors, employers, etc.)?
Oversight should adopt standard procedures for

Recommendation rolling out audits.
26:
Calculation of inexplicable wealth

As noted above under ‎0, the laws and regulations do not contain a formula for
calculating illicit wealth. Oversight bodies have planned to develop such a fixed and
uniform formula for calculating inexplicable wealth internally. Some of the oversight
bodies already have developed such a formula for themselves, in some instances having
integrated it into an excel sheet (Hellenic Police, Coast Guard).
Transition of laws
It is a shortcoming of some new asset declaration laws that they intentionally or
inadvertently invalidate declarations submitted under previous laws or do not allow for
older declarations to be verified. It is thus a commendable feature that Article 15 of Law
3213/2003 explicitly ensures that declarations can be checked going “back to 1990”.
Public access
Online

42 - ASSESSMENT
The centralised online transparency of the declarations of senior politicians is a

commendable feature of the Greek system. As GRECO noted recently regarding Turkey:
“Moreover, the asset declarations are not subject to any form of public scrutiny as they
will remain confidential documents in the personal files of each MP [Member of
Parliament]. This weakens the system even more.”62 Article 47 part 1 paragraph 3 is also
in line with the advanced standard of public access set out in a legislative toolkit by the
Council of Europe PCF Project: “Declarations are published online and are freely
accessible, with data in searchable, machine-readable format.”63 The Western Balkan
Recommendation states (H.1): “As monitoring by the public at large is one of the most
effective tools, income and asset declarations should be available online. Ideally,
declarations submitted online are published in real time.” A comparative study
conducted in several countries found that many successful audits of declarations were
triggered by citizens studying declarations online.64
However, out of all declarations, only those by Senior Politicians (Prime Minister,
Leaders of political parties, Ministers, Deputy Ministers and Alternate Ministers,
Parliamentarians, Governors, Mayors and the financial managers of political parties are
available online. This is a tiny fraction of all declarations. It should be noted that not only
highly industrialised countries such as France, but even developing countries with low
GDP managed to install full online systems (inter alia Armenia, Georgia, Ukraine).
According to the World Bank, a significant percentage of the countries that have
introduced asset disclosure requirements for their public officials have also provided
public access to declarations. This facilitates public scrutiny, as civil society and
journalists often play a crucial role in detecting irregularities, on which the state’s
oversight bodies can follow up.
European human rights standards allow for the online publication of asset declarations.
The European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) decided in 2005 to be in favour of
publishing declarations online:65
“With regard to public access to the declarations, which are […] accessible to all
interested parties via the Internet, the Court considers that this is a safeguard to ensure
that the obligation to make declarations available is subject to public scrutiny. The
general public has a legitimate interest in ascertaining that local politics are transparent
62
GRECO (2015), Fourth Evaluation Round, Evaluation Report Turkey, at no. 76.
63
Council of Europe PCF-Project (2015), Legislative Toolkit on Conflict of Interest, Article 15 para. 2.
64
ReSPA/Tilman Hoppe (2013), Asset declarations in practice – A regional study of Western Balkan
countries, p. 132.
65
ECtHR, Wypych v. Poland (Judgement 25 October 2005, application no. 2428/05).

ASSESSMENT - 43
and Internet access to the declarations makes access to such information effective and
easy. Without such access, the obligation would have no practical importance or
genuine incidence on the degree to which the public is informed […].”
The jurisprudence by the ECtHR is part of the European Union’s Fundamental Rights
(Art. 52 para. 3 sentence 1 Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union). One
should keep in mind that there are various options when providing online access, such
as providing a summary of the disclosed information, redacting some information, giving
access to the full content but placing conditions for access, or even providing full online
access to all the information contained in the declaration.66
Recommendation Review options in line with constitutional principles

27: on data protection to publish a larger circle of
declarations online.
The declarations are available online for the duration of the declarants’ term of office
and for three years after the end of their term. This limitation is somewhat unusual but
probably still acceptable as it allows for scrutiny of the official even three years after
office.
Core personal details such as number plates or bank account numbers can be redacted.
This is in line with international standards.67
Individual requests/freedom of information

Article 16 of Law 1599/1986 on State-Citizen Relationships introduced the right of all
citizens to read most administrative documents. The Administrative Procedural Code
(Law 2690/1999) codified in Article 5 the right of citizens have to know the content of
“administrative documents”. However, the asset declarations are not considered to be
“administrative documents”. This is rather unfortunate as citizens, the media or NGOs
cannot review declarations upon individual request. As far as can be seen, no other
European country withholds (the majority of) declarations from public scrutiny, while in
most countries all declarations are even available online. As stated above core personal
details such as number plates or bank account numbers can be redacted in line with
international standards.
66
OECD and the World Bank (2014), Good practices in asset disclosure systems in G20 countries, page 9.
67
Western Balkan Recommendation, ibid, H.1.

44 - ASSESSMENT
Recommendation To the extent that Recommendation 27 is not (yet)

28: implemented, review options in line with
constitutional principles on data protection to make
selected declarations available to stakeholders with a
legitimate interest (e.g. journalists, civil society
organisations) upon individual requests under
freedom of information legislation.
Decisions binding the Greek legislator, in particular possible jurisprudence by the

Constitutional Court, will define how far-reaching these options can be. On a European
level, the European Court of Justice decided under freedom of information rules that
the public should have access to information regarding the income of members of the
European Parliament.68
Machine readable data

Declarations submitted up until 2016 are only available online as scans of handwritten
data (Parliamentarians only). This makes it difficult, if not impossible, for journalists and
civil society to monitor a large volume of declarations. It is important that journalists
and civil society are able to migrate the data contained in the declarations into their
own systems for further analysis, something which image files do not allow. Therefore,
number H.1 of the “Western Balkan Recommendation” states: “A useful public database
of declarations requires in particular electronic and free access, and data in searchable,
machine-readable format.”69 With the introduction of online submission of data, this
problem will probably no longer exist.
Recommendation Review options in line with constitutional principles

29: on data protection to ensure that declared data is
machine readable and downloadable for free.
Media prohibition
Article 2(3) of Law 3213/2003 contains a remarkable provision:
“The publication of disclosures in the media shall be permitted provided that the content
is published in full. Under no circumstances may personal data be disclosed selectively.
68
Judgment of the General Court (Second Chamber) of 7 June 2011, Ciarán Toland vs. the European
Parliament, Access to documents - Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 - Audit report on the parliamentary
assistance allowance - Refusal of access - Exception relating to protection of the purpose of
inspections, investigations and audits - Exception relating to protection of the decision-making
process, Case T-471/08, Reports of Cases 2011 II-02717, T-471/08.
69
Ibid.

ASSESSMENT - 45
Any infringement of this provision shall be punishable, beyond that provided by

Article 7(2) imprisonment, and by a fine of five thousand (5,000) to one hundred
thousand euro (EUR 100,000).”
The rationale of the provision is obvious: It shall prevent the media from
sensationalising facts. Under the provision the following correct statement of facts
would be a crime: “Minister XY has not declared any real estate.” This statement could
be fully correct; yet, since it does not reproduce the entire declaration, it is prohibited.
Similarly, the following statement would be a criminal offence, even if true: “Minister XY
has declared three cars.” Furthermore, obliging journalists to publish the full declaration
seems unsuitable to achieve the intended objective of preventing distorted images on
the financial situation: The income declared in a certain declaration will usually not
match the value of assets owned as contained in the same declaration. Only the full
series of past declarations can explain (if declarations are based on a coherent system)
how the lifestyle of a public official was financed.
It is probable that the European Court of Human Rights would find this Article 2(3) to be
in violation of Article 10 (Freedom of expression) of the European Convention of Human
Rights. Article 2(3) would clearly be unconstitutional for example in Germany. The ECtHR
has even protected the publication of untrue facts; it is thus unthinkable that it would be
in favour of criminalising the publication of true facts ( as being declared by the person
concerned): “Where a journalist or a publication has a legitimate purpose, the matter is
of public concern, and reasonable efforts have been made to verify the facts, the press
shall not be liable even if the respective facts prove untrue.”70 The Court at several
occasions accepted that value judgments by the media, allegations or statements only
had “a slim factual basis” or that it was sufficient that there was “no proof the
description of events given in the articles was totally untrue,” or that the “opinions were
based on facts which have not been shown to be untrue”.71
Discussion of declarations in the media is an important component of awareness raising,

of directing attention to wrong declarations, and of making office holders publicly
accountable. Article 2(3) of Law 3213/2003 is thus not only an issue of
unconstitutionality, but also an issue relevant to the effectiveness of the system. The
offence of defamation provides the necessary protection for declarants against
intentional distortion of facts, with any stricter criminalisation being questionable.
70
Council of Europe, A guide to the implementation of Article 10 of the European Convention on Human
Rights, page 10
71
ECtHR 25 November 1999, Case No. 23118/93, Nilsen and Johnsen v. Norway; ECtHR 28 September
1999, Case No. 28114/95, Dalban v. Romania; ECtHR 26 February 2002, Case No. 29271/95, Dichand
and Others v. Austria and ECtHR 23 October 2007, Case No. 28700/03, Flux and Samson v. Moldova;
quoted after: Dirk Voorhoof, The European Convention on Human Rights: The Right to Freedom of
Expression and Information restricted by Duties and Responsibilities in a Democratic Society, page 22.

46 - ASSESSMENT
Recommendation Review options in line with constitutional principles to

30: reconsider the media prohibition in Article 2(3) of Law
3213/2003.
Sanctions
The following sanctions of Law 3213/2003 support the submission of truthful

declarations:
Act Administrative Criminal

Obstruction of the verification Imprisonment ≥ 6
procedure including refusal to --- months
provide information
Late submission of declaration Fine: € 150 -
---
400*
Non submission of declaration, Imprisonment,
inaccurate or incomplete --- fine ≤ € 100,000
declaration
In case the offender conceals Imprisonment ≥ 2
assets acquired through his/her years, fine € 10,000 -
status --- 500,000
If the total value of the Imprisonment ≤ 10

declarable concealed assets years, fine € 20,000 -
amounts to more than € 300,000 --- 1,000,000
(due to inaccurate, incomplete or
non-submission of declaration)
Negligent omission to submit the Fine is optional
---
declaration
Third person knowingly involved Imprisonment, fine
in non-submission or an ---
inaccurate declaration
Failure to report violations of Imprisonment ≤ 2
---
Law 3213/2003 years
Third person refusing to provide
Imprisonment ≥ 6
information or obstructing the ---
months
verification

ASSESSMENT - 47
Act Administrative Criminal

Person omitting the obligation of
drafting/forwarding the list of ---
declarants
Participation in companies Imprisonment ≥ 2
resident abroad, in States years, fine € 10,000 -
---
uncooperative in tax matters and 500,000,
States with beneficial tax regimes
In rem confiscation Confiscation of
--- assets constituting
inexplicable wealth
In value confiscation Confiscation of value
--- of inexplicable
wealth
Attribution (alternative to Liability to pay to the
confiscation) --- State value of
inexplicable wealth
* The implementation of administrative fines for late submission depends on the

adoption of a ministerial decision.
Recommendation Adopt the ministerial decision necessary for the

31: application of administrative fines for late submission
of declarations.
The above list of sanctions is very comprehensive, focused on criminal penalties

including confiscation, and thus in line with international standards.72 The serious
sanctions for high-value cases of up to ten years of imprisonment are a commendable
feature. The effectiveness in practice will depend on to what extent oversight bodies
detect and corroborate cases, prosecutors follow-up, and courts make use of the
bandwidth of penalties. Oversight bodies have identified several cases of false
declarations concerning significant amounts. The cases are still pending in court.
Due to the lack of an offence of illicit enrichment, the following case would lack a
sanction: A public official truthfully declares all his/her assets with the result that there
are more expenditures than income. None of the above sanctions would apply.
Interviewees pointed out that confiscation applies only if prosecutors can prove that the
enrichment is connected to the workplace. This makes it rather difficult to apply this
72
Western Balkan Recommendation, ibid, G.

48 - ASSESSMENT
provision in practice. However, oversight bodies could apply “attribution” (see above
table), i.e. having the Court of Auditors decide that the declarant needs to pay the
financial value of inexplicable wealth to the State. It seems, as if this provision has not
been applied so far in practice. Furthermore, there was no consensus among
interviewees as to whether this provision could be applied without having to show a link
of the inexplicable wealth to the declarant’s workplace.
Recommendation Review as to what extent legislation could be

32: changed in order to apply confiscation and/or
attribution (or a similar mechanism) without having
to establish a link between the inexplicable wealth
and the declarant’s official position.
In addition, in such cases tax authorities should tax the declarant, possibly including a
penalty tax; even a procedure for tax evasion would appears to be a possible option. To
what extent the tax system reacts appropriately to cases goes beyond the scope of this
assessment.
Representatives from all oversight bodies confirmed that they are notifying tax
authorities in such cases. Furthermore, tax authorities would usually detect such cases
on their own initiative, as the lack of income supporting expenditures is a standard
pattern tax authorities deal with.
On the reverse case, regarding tax authorities notifying asset declaration bodies, it can
be said that the cooperation appears to be less active: The representatives interviewed
from the five oversight bodies stated that they have rarely or never received a
notification from tax authorities on cases where tax declarations appeared to be
incongruous.
Recommendation Review the feasibility and options of raising

33: awareness among tax authorities on the need of
notifying asset declaration bodies in defined cases
such as expenditures not being covered by (declared)
income.
Judicial authorities in Greece – as in many other countries – are rather passive in

providing feedback to asset declaration bodies on what the outcome of criminal
procedures was. This leaves oversight bodies without valuable information they can use
to constantly evaluate the efficiency of their audits and to tailor their work to the
judiciary’s need.

ASSESSMENT - 49
Recommendation Review the feasibility and options of

34: prosecutorial/judicial authorities being obliged or
committing to providing feedback on the outcome of
cases referred to them by asset declaration oversight
bodies.
As for disciplinary sanctions applying to civil servants, human resource departments of

employers are responsible for conducting disciplinary procedures under the Code of Civil
Servants. Representatives of oversight bodies stated that it is standard procedure to
notify employers (human resource offices) on any significant violation (false declaration
etc.).

ANNEX. RELEVANT LEGISLATION, CODE AND SAMPLE DECLARATION FORMS - 50
Annex. Relevant legislation, code and sample declaration forms
Law 3213/2003
[Unofficial translation for the purpose of this assessment.]
LAW NO 3213 (GOVERNMENT GAZETTE 309/31.12.2003)
Declaration and verification of assets for members of parliament, public officials and
employees, media owners and other groups of persons
THE PRESIDENT OF THE HELLENIC REPUBLIC
Hereby adopts the following Law, which has been approved by Parliament:
Article 1 — Declarants
1. The following persons shall declare their assets and those of their spouses and minor
children:
A. The Prime Minister.
B. The leaders of political parties represented in the Greek Parliament or the European
Parliament and of any party which receives State funding;
C. Ministers, Secretaries of State and Deputy Ministers;
D. The Parliament and Members of the European Parliament.
“E. Governors, mayors and those managing the finances of political parties as described
in (ii) above.”

* * * Clause E. was replaced as above by Article 172 Ν.4389/2016, Greek Official Gazette
Α 94/27.5.2016. 1)
F. General and special secretaries of the Parliament and the Government, officials and
experts holding special or temporary posts and officials who are assigned by an
authorised government official or body;
G. The Governor and Deputy Directors of the National Intelligence Service and the Civil
Aviation Authority (CAA).
"H. The Secretaries-General of Decentralised Administrations and, when appointed, the

Coordinators of Decentralised Administrations (Article. 28 of law 4325/2015), the
Deputy Governors, Presidents and members of regional councils, as well as the Heads of
the General Directorates and Directorates of the Regions”.
"I. The Deputy mayors, Presidents and full and alternate members of municipal
committees, chairmen and members of municipal councils, chairmen, directors and
members of Boards of Directors and General Directors of the municipal legal persons
governed by public law, pure or mixed municipal enterprises owned by the above local
government entities and municipal associations, as well as Heads of General
Directorates and Directorates of the Municipalities.”
* * * Paragraphs H. and I. were replaced as above by Article 172 para.2 and 3

respectively Ν.4389/2016, GG A 94/27.5.2016.
J. Presidents, vice-presidents, directors, deputy directors, executive members, managers

or directors and Directors-General of legal persons governed by public law, public
enterprises, public organisations, as well as of private legal entities belonging to the
state or funded regularly by the State resources at a rate of at least 50 % of their annual
budget or private legal entities, whose management is directly determined by an
administrative act of the State or is directly determined by the State, under its capacity
as shareholder.
K. Presidents, members and alternate members of all committees by government

departments for procurement competitions on supplies and services, including the
armed forces, public legal entities, private legal entities belonging to the state or funded
regularly by the State resources at a rate of at least 50 % of their annual budget or
private legal entities, whose management is directly determined by an administrative
act of the State or is directly determined by the State, under its capacity as shareholder.,
public enterprises and public organisations, in so far as they exceed the amount of one
hundred and fifty thousand (150.000) euro per competition, as well as the Director-

52 – ANNEX. RELEVANT LEGISLATION, CODE AND SAMPLE DECLARATION FORMS
General and Directors of the Directorate-General for Public Procurement and persons
holding a Head's position of any organisational level at organisational procurement units
in the public sector and (at) the above legal persons governed by public and private law,
public enterprises and public organisations. The same obligation is incumbent on the
President and members of all competition committees for works contracts related to the
above-mentioned entities. These competitions are governed by the provisions of Law
1418/1984 (National Gazette A' 23) and Presidential Decree 609/1985 (National Gazette
A' 223), if the project budget amounts to more than three hundred thousand (300.000)
euros.
L. Judges, Public Prosecutors and members of the State Legal Council.
M. The Governor, Deputy Governors, Executive Directors and Directors of the Bank of
Greece.
N. Presidents, vice-presidents, managing directors, directors, deputy directors, executive

board members and directors-general of credit and financial institutions and firms
providing investment services.
O. The President and executive board members of the Hellenic Exchanges SA (HELEX SA)
and persons holding a management position in HELEX SA according to its current
regulation or by decision of its board;
P. The President and executive board members of all companies (SAs) controlled by
HELEX SA and persons holding a management position in such companies under the
current regulation or by decision of their board.
Q. The President and executive board members of all other entities of the organised
market legally operating in Greece and persons holding a management position in such
entities, under the current regulation or by decision of their board.
R. Owners, shareholders, partners, chairmen, managing directors and executive board

members, administrators, as well as the directors-general and directors of news and
information, in all forms of companies or firms, licensed or generally exploiting
television broadcasters providing free- or any type of subscription/cable television
services; and radio stations, as well as their main shareholders.
S. Owners, shareholders, partners, chairmen, managing directors and executive board

members, administrators, as well as the directors-general and directors of all forms of

news and information businesses or companies, operating online or publishing national

or local daily news or magazines, as well as their main shareholders.
T. Reporters belonging to a recognized journalists’ association press, as well as

journalists providing journalist services to publishing enterprises and to television or
radio broadcasters or online media on an employment or a works contract;
U. Doctors that hold a Director' s or a Coordinating Director's position at hospitals and

health centres of the National Health System, military hospitals, university hospitals,
clinics and laboratories, as well as the primary national health network (PEDY).
V. Presidents, members and heads of departments at Directorates-General and

Directorates of all independent authorities, including independent administrative and
regulatory authorities, the Competition Commission, the Securities and Exchange
Commission and the General Inspector of Public Administration, “as well as Special
Inspectors working on secondment to his (the General Inspector's) office”.
* * * The words “and assistants” of clause V. has been deleted and replaced by the words
“Special Inspectors working on secondment to his office” with Article 66 Ν.4409/2016,
National Gazette Α 136/28.07.2016.
W. Heads, deputy heads and managers of departments of the National Defence General
Staff and the General Staffs of the Army, Navy and Air Force, armed forces judges, as
well as the Director-General and Deputy Director-General of the Directorate-General for
Defence Equipment and Investment at the Ministry of National Defence.
X. Heads and deputy heads of the Police, Coast Guard and Fire Brigade.
Y. Police, border guards, special guards and civilian staff serving in the Police and Fire
Brigade;
Z. The staff of the Hellenic Coast Guard [and the civilian staff at the Ministry of Shipping
and the Aegean].
"and the civilian staff of the former Ministry of Mercantile Maritime Affairs and the
Aegean of the Ministry of Economy, Infrastructure, Maritime Affairs and Tourism”.
* * * The sentence within the [..] was deleted by Article 51 of law 4331/2015, National
Gazette Α 69/2.7.2015.

* * * The sentence within "..." of clause BB. was added by paragraph Z' of Article 2 of
Law 4336/2015, National Gazette A 94/14.8.2015. Entry into force pursuant to Article 4
of this Law, as from 19 August 2015 (date of signing of the Financial Assistance Facility
Agreement referred to in Article 3).
AA. Staff at the Internal Affairs Service of the Hellenic Police and the Hellenic Coast
Guard;
BB. Prison staff and guards at detention centres;
CC. The heads of the Forest Authorities and Forestry Services;
"DD. Members of all state inspection and audit bodies, heads of organisational units of
any department of inspection, internal audit or internal affairs of the State, legal persons
governed by public law and local authorities of first and second degree, as well as the
staff of such units who carry out any auditing tasks."
* * * Clause FF. was replaced as above by Article 172 of law 4389/2016, National
Gazette Α 94/27.5.2016. 4).
EE. 1) The Directors-General of:

the Ministry of Finance,
the Chief Directorates of the Public Financial Services (Tax Offices - DOY),
the Interregional Auditing Centres of the Audit Centre for High Net Worth Taxpayers
(KEFOMEP),
the Audit Centre for Large Enterprises (KEMEEP),
2) Heads of departments and all officials serving in the Control and Audit Departments
of the above services, and all employees of the above services engaged in control and
audit functions ,
3) the Head of the Directorate of the Operational Collection Unit,
4) Heads of Customs Offices,
5) Heads of the Customs General Issues Departments and the Customs Procedures
Departments, all Customs officials carrying out auditing tasks, Heads of Directorates and
Departments, as well as officials of the Customs Inspection Services (ELYT) and the
Directorate for the Monitoring and Control of Suspension Arrangements (DIPEAK) and
the Heads of the organisational units of the Public Real Estate Services.

FF. Heads of the Operational Directorates for Special Cases at the Financial and
Economic Crime Unit (SDOE), Heads of the Regional Audit and Action Directorates and
Departments of the above mentioned services; as well as employees serving as
inspectors there;
GG. Department Heads and employees at any organisational level of urban planning
units of Local Government Entities;
HH. Staff of the Special Secretariat for Public-and Private Sector Partnerships and the
Presidents, Directors or Chief Executive Officers of private companies involved in such
partnerships;
II. Presidents and board members of sports federations and persons who are executive
members of Anonymous Sports Companies (AAE) or Professional Athletes’ Associations
(TAA) or persons who have been appointed to manage such TAAs or are shareholders of
AAEs with a total of more than 1 % of the share capital. If such shares are held by a
private entity or enterprise, the obligation to declare shall apply to the chairman and
members of the board;
JJ. Certified referees, assistant referees and referee observers for professional sports
championships and persons involved in referee boards or panels, as well as the
President and Members of the Professional Sports Committee and their alternates.
KK. Presidents, Chief Executive Officers, Appointed Counsellors and General Directors of
the legal entities of governed by private law listed in clauses (e) and (f) of Article 14 (1)
of law 2190/1994 (National Gazette A 280) as in force, if these legal entities are the
awarding and execution authorities for public works contracts or studies contracts for
public works.
LL. Heads of directorates-general, directorates and departments of the General

Secretariat for Public Works of the Ministry of Infrastructure, Transport and Networks
and the - pursuant to Articles 28 of Presidential Decree 609/1985 (National Gazette A
223) and 15 of Law 716/1977 (National Gazette A 205) - supervising engineers for public
works and studies for public works. The holders of other corresponding posts in the
public sector, legal persons governed by public law and legal persons governed by
private law, if according to the law or the statutes of the relevant Ministry or the legal
person, these persons have responsibilities related to the award of public works
contracts or studies for public works or act as supervising engineers for public works or
studies.

MM. The Owner, partners, shareholders, the executive members and officers of Greek
undertakings which conclude procurement contracts, as well as natural persons having
their permanent residence in Greece and bearing any of the above capacities in foreign
companies that conclude public procurement contracts, as long as their subject exceeds
the amounts mentioned in clause K.
NN. Members and rapporteurs of advisory committees, members of audit bodies ,

members of institutions responsible for disbursing (state) aid, members of bodies
responsible for evaluating and examining investment plans, members of bodies the
Ministry of Development and Competitiveness responsible for auditing investments and
disbursing state aid.
OO. The Heads of Immigration Services in Decentralised Administrations.
PP. Members of driving examination boards.
QQ. The Chair and the members of the Board of Directors of the Information Society,
the Directors and the Deputy Directors of its Operational Units. The members of the
Assessors Registry for Actions related to State-Aid and other external persons who have
participated in evaluations, advisory committees and Committees for the Appeals
against State Aid Actions, the Presidents and Members Committees for evaluating bids
in every degree, as well as the Appeals Committee for Public Sector Works, the
Presidents and the members of Public Sector Monitoring and Delivery Committees, the
persons responsible for Public Sector Works and state Aid Actions. The Heads, Deputy
Heads and Heads of Units of all Special Services and other agencies with management,
implementation, coordination and audit competences in the scope of the co-funded
actions of the 2007-2013 and 2014-2020 programming period.
* * * NOTE: In accordance with paragraph 4 of Article 38 of Law 4 4314/2014 (National

Gazette, A 265/23.12.2014) the following shall apply:
"4. The staff serving in the National Strategic Reference Framework (NSRF) Special
Services of this Law, the Central Office of the Management Organisation Unit (MOU) S.A.
and at the Intermediate Bodies engaged in activities relating to the assessment,
verification and payments, are subject to the provisions of paragraph 1 point SS of
Article 1 of Law 3213/2003 (National Gazette A 309), as amended by the Law 4281/2014
(National Gazette A 160) as regards the declaration of assets."
RR. Heads at the Services of the Commissioner’s Offices at the Court of Auditors.
SS. Heads of the Directorates for Fiscal Controls of the General Accounting Office of the
State.

TT. The President, the members and the employees of the Financial Intelligence Unit.
UU. The President and the administrators of Non-Governmental Organisations (NGOs)

that are funded by the State.
VV. The employees of the National Organisation for Medicines (EOF), the Hellenic Food
Authority (EFET), the Greek Tourism organisation (EOT) and the Payment and Control
Agency for Guidance and Guarantee Community Aid (OPEKEPE) that are exercising
activities related to control and audit or to the granting of permits, as well as the Heads
of the above services.
WW. Any person obliged to a declaration by a special legal provision.
2. The declaration of paragraph 1 is submitted by the declarants within ninety (90) days
after obtaining their capacity (initial declaration). In the following years, the declaration
is submitted annually as long as the declarants remain in office, exercise the activity or
maintain their capacity and for one (1) year, especially for the declarants od clauses A-E
of paragraph 1 for three (3) years, after loss of capacity or end of tenure, and no later
than three (3) months after the end of the deadline for the submission of the tax income
declarations.
"Exceptionally and especially for the declarations of 2015 (financial year of 2014), the
deadline expires on 31 December 2015."
* * * The final subparagraph of paragraph 2 was added under Article 16 of Law

4346/2015 (National Gazette A 152/20.11.2015.).
* * * NOTE: Article 66 (6) of law 4409/2016 (National Gazette A136/28.07.2016).

“Exceptionally and specifically for the submission of declarations of assets of the year
2016 (financial year of 2015) of law 3213/2003 and the declarations of financial
interests of Article 229 of Law 4281/2014 the deadline begins on 1 October 2016 and
expires on 31 December 2016”.
NOTE: Article 66 (6) of law 4409/2016 (National Gazette A136/28.07.2016), as amended

by article 20 of law 4425/2016 (National Gazette A 185/30.9.2016), states that:
“6. Exceptionally and specifically for the submission of declarations of assets of the
year 2016 (financial year of 2015) of law 3213/2003 and the declarations of financial

interests of Article 229 of Law 4281/2014 the deadline begins on 15 October 2016 and
expires on 15 January 2017”.
3. Each February, a list of the controlled declarants shall be forwarded to the competent
supervisory authorities. The list is drafted by the President of the Parliament for the
persons referred to in clauses A to E of paragraph 1 of this article and by the competent
Minister, the General Secretary of Decentralized Administration or the administration
body of the relevant legal entity, for the persons that are subject to this agency or by
whom they are supervised and in any case by the administration bodies of the relevant
agency. The supervisory authority may ask any service, body or legal or natural person
who has information on persons listed in paragraph 1 for a list of those persons.
4. Disputes as to the capacity of the declarant are resolved by the competent

supervisory authority, which shall issue a decision within one (1) month after a request
form the interested party or body, that is competent to submit a declarants' list
according to the previous paragraph”
* * * Article 1, as amended and supplemented on several occasions (see previous

versions), was replaced as above by Article 222 Ν.4281/2014, National Gazette Α
160/8.8.2014. IMPORTANT: Entry into force, in accordance with Article 253 of that Law,
by 1 January 2015.
* * * NOTE: See also Article 229 of Law No Ν.4281/2014, National Gazette A

160/8.8.2014, about the obligation to declare financial interests.
"5. Banking and all types of credit institutions shall be required, within three (3) working
days of receiving the relevant request from the declarant, to provide that person — free
of charge — with certificates on the balance of their deposits at 31 December of the
previous year. Specifically, for declarants of clauses A to E of Article 1(1) of this Law,
banking and all types of credit institutions shall be required, also free of charge and
within the same time limit, to issue a detailed statement of debts of the declarants as of
31 December of the previous year.”
* * * Paragraph 5 was added by Article 172 of Law Ν.4389/2016 (National Gazette

94/27.5.2016.)
"Article 2 Declaration Content

1. "a. The declaration of assets shall detail all assets owned in Greece or abroad as of 31
December of the previous year. “without prejudice to paragraphs 1 and 2 of Article 8 of
this Law."

Specifically, the initial declaration shall include all existing assets at the time of
submission.
Assets include:
i. Income from all sources;
ii. Immovable property and rights in rem to such property (itemised);
“iii. Shares in Greek and foreign companies (without prejudice to the prohibition set out
in paragraphs 1 and 2 of Article 8 of this Law) and bonds and debentures of any kind,
investment fund shares of any kind and financial derivatives of any kind.”
iv. All deposits in banks and other savings and credit institutions, and all financial market
or insurance products and holdings in business or investment funds or trusts;
v. The hiring of safe deposits in banks and savings and other credit institutions in Greece
or abroad. Also, all cash not included in the case(iv) of this subparagraph exceeding a
total amount of fifteen thousand euro (EUR 15.000). The above amounts concern the
debtor, their spouse and minor children.
vi. Movable property of high value, if the amount exceeds thirty thousand (30.000)
euros, including VAT. If the movable items constitute a single set from a trade point of
view, for calculating the value taken into account the value of all the assets. The
declared value shall be taken either from the relevant proof of purchase or from an act
from the tax authority imposing tax because of a death, gift, parental provision or dowry
at the time of their acquisition. If the movable property is insured against theft, fire and
other risks, the estimated value cannot be less than that indicated in the relevant
contract.
vii. Waterborne and airborne vessels and land vehicles.
“viii. Participation in any company or business (without prejudice to the prohibition set
out in paragraphs 1 and 2 of Article 8 of this Act).”
ix. In particular, the declaration by those referred to in cases (A) and (E) of Article 1(1),
shall include their loan commitments to domestic and foreign credit and banking
institutions, other legal persons governed by public and private law and natural persons.
The declaration submitted by the above persons shall also include any debt arising from
administrative fines, penalty payments, taxes and fees to the State and to Local
Government Organisations, fees to legal persons governed by public law and
contributions to social security funds exceeding EUR 5.000 as at 31 December of the
previous year’.
* * * Subparagraph (a) was replaced as above by Article 173 of Law Ν.4389/2016 , GG

94/27.5.2016.
* * * The words between inverted commas in (a) of the first subparagraph have been
added and points iii) and viii) were replaced as above by paragraph fourth (1-3) of Law
Ν.4396/2016 (GG 111/8.6.2016.).

b. i. If a new asset is acquired or an existing asset increases in value, the declaration shall
include the amount of related expenditure and a detailed description of the source of
funds. If an asset is sold, the amount received shall be declared.
ii. The declaration shall include the declarant’s personal, professional and tax details.
Persons declaring assets shall provide the competent supervisory authority with copies
of any documents requested.
c. Subsequent annual declarations of assets shall refer only to changes in the financial
situation during the period covered by the return.
The declaration shall be submitted and signed by the declarant with respect to the
declarant’s own assets, by the spouse with respect to the spouse’s assets, and by both
with respect to assets owned by their minor children. The declaration shall be
accompanied by a copy of the declarant’s tax return for the previous year and a copy of
the last Form E9 submitted to the relevant tax office.
“d. Notaries are obliged to submit to the President of Unit C of the Hellenic FIU, copies
of all notarial documents prepared by them, according to which an obligation is
assumed or any property, movable or immovable is transferred from or to a judge or
prosecutor, his spouse or child, , if those officials are in active employment and up to
two years after the cessation of the status. The same shall apply to the acceptance of an
inheritance.”
* * * Subparagraph (d) was replaced as above by Article 173 of Law Ν.4389/2016 (GG
94/27.5.2016., 2)
Declarations of assets shall be drawn up in a special form, the content of which shall be
determined by a decision of the President of Parliament for the persons listed in Article
3(1) (a) and for the rest of the declarants, by joint decision of the Minister for Finance
and the Minister for Justice, Transparency and Human Rights. Similar decisions may
provide for declarations to be submitted using a special online application, in which case
the relevant case manager shall be determined, along with details necessary for online
submission, safeguards for persons concerned, conditions of access to data and
transitional arrangements. Declarations shall be processed electronically from a special
database, allowing for a clear indication of total assets, value per asset class and dates of
acquisition. Declarations shall be processed taking into account acquisition values,
where available.
* * * “The decision of the President of Parliament and the joint decision of the Minister
for Finance and the Minister for Justice, Transparency and Human Rights referred to in
the second subparagraph of paragraph Article 2 (2) of law 3213/2003 concerning the
electronic submission of declarations of assets shall be issued within two months of

publication of this Law” (Article 173 paragraph 5 of Law No Ν.4389/2016 (GG

94/27.5.2016).
“3. Declarations of assets by persons listed in points (A) to (E) of Article 1(1) shall be
published on the Parliament website by the President of the Committee referred to in
Article 3a. The disclosure shall take place after the audit and in any case no later than
three months after the expiry of the period referred to in paragraph 2 of Article 1. The
disclosure of declarations shall apply for the duration of the declarants’ term of office
and for three years after the end of their term of office. The subject-matter of the
disclosure, and in particular the form, the type, the aggregated data for publication or
not defined by joint decision of the Ministers for Finance and Justice, Transparency and
Human Rights, which shall be issued at the latest “four (4) months”, “after the
publication of this Law. In any event, information liable to compromise the life or
property of the declarant and the family (such as their address, motor vehicle plate
numbers, tax identification number, etc.). The publication of disclosures in the media
shall be permitted provided that the content is published in full text. Under no
circumstances may personal data be disclosed selectively. Any infringement of this
provision shall be punishable, beyond the penalty of imprisonment provided by Article
7(2), by a fine of five thousand (5.000) to one hundred thousand euro (EUR 100.000) as
well.”
* * * Paragraph 3 was replaced as above by Article 173 Ν.4389/2016, Greek Official

Gazette Α 94/27.5.2016.
* * * The words “two months” of the fourth clause of paragraph 3 was replaced by the
words “four (4) months” as above by Article 66 Ν.4409/2016, Greek Official Gazette Α
136/28.07.2016.
“4. Omissions or inaccuracies in a declaration may be completed spontaneously by the

declarant within one month after the submission of the declaration.”

Gazette Α 94/27.5.2016.
* * * Article 2, as successively amended and supplemented (see previous versions), was

replaced as above by Article 223 Ν.4281/2014, Greek Official Gazette Α 160/8.8.2014.
IMPORTANT: Entry into force, in accordance with Article 253 of that Law, by 1 January
2015.
“Article 3 Instruments and procedure for verification of declarations of wealth

1. Declarations of assets by persons listed in Article 1 (1) shall be submitted to and

checked by:
“(a) persons referred to in cases (A) to (E) of paragraph 1 of Article 1 of this Law, to the
Committee referred to in Article 3a,”
“(aa) the persons referred to in subparagraphs (F) to (X), (AA), (EE) to (RR) and (UU) to
(WW) of paragraph 1 of Article 1 of this Law, to Audit Unit C of the Authority for the
Prevention of Money Laundering and the Financing of Terrorism and for Control of
Declarations of Assets (Hellenic FIU). For the control of the declarations of asset of the
persons in question are those defined in points (c) and (d) of paragraph 3 of Article 7a of
Law 3691/2008 (GG A 166), as added by paragraph Article 2 (2) of law 3932/2011 (GG A
49). Specifically, on the case of, any specific provisions shall continue to apply.”
* * * Subparagraph (a) was replaced as above and point (aa) was inserted by Article 174
paragraph 1 and 2 respectively Ν.4389/2016, Government Gazette 94/27.5.2016.
b) the persons referred to in cases “(DD), (SS) and (TT)” to the General Inspector of
Public Administration.
* * * The words “(DD) and (SS)” of point b) were replaced as above by Article 174
Ν.4389/2016, Greek Official Gazette Α 94/27.5.2016.
* * * NOTE: According to Article 7 of the Ministerial Decision ΑΥΤ. ΤΜ. ΣΤΡ. 0000910 ΕΞ
2015/24.11.2015 (GG, Series B, No 2579/30.11.2015) the following shall apply:
“Without prejudice to the provisions of paragraph 2, Article 1 of Law 3213/2003, the
electronic submission of declarations shall start from 1 January 2016, except for persons
exempted under paragraph 1 (b) of Article 3 of Law 3213/2003, as replaced by Article
224 of Law 4281/2014, for which the obligation to electronically submit an asset
declaration a declaration of financial interests is starting from the publication of this
Decision in the Government Gazette.”
c) the persons referred to in cases (Y), (BB) and (CC) supervising to the Prosecutor from
the Athens Prosecutor’s Office supervising the Internal Affairs Service of the Greek
Police, who shall be assisted to that end by the service concerned,
(d) the persons referred to in case (Z) to the Prosecutor from the Piraeus Prosecutor’s
Office, who shall be assisted in this by the Internal Affairs Service of the Hellenic Coast
Guard.

2. Initial declarations shall be checked to ensure that they accurately reflect assets at the
time of submission. Subsequent declarations shall be checked for accuracy, as well as to
verify that any acquisition of new assets or increase in the value of existing assets is
reasonable given the declarant’s income and living expenses. A declaration shall not be
regarded as inaccurate or incomplete if it contains only a minor error or omission, or if
the source of an incorrectly declared asset questioned by the supervisory authority is
subsequently shown to be legitimate.
3. In random or targeted audits, the audit body shall also carry out risk analysis using IT
systems. The supervisory authority may draw up a plan of summary or specific - theme
audits, which may be extended to regular audits (according to paragraph 2 clause (a)
and (b), only where appropriate).
“4. When carrying out its audits, the audit body may invite declarants to provide
explanations or submit additional documents within an explicit time-limit not exceeding
twenty (20) days, which may be extended by a maximum of ten (10) days. In exceptional
cases in which declarants are unable to collect evidence in time, the audit body may
exceptionally extend the deadline by a special justified decision. For those who are
invited by the audit body and do not comply with the summons either in person or
through a legal representative, the audit body imposes a fine of fifty (50) to three
hundred (300) euros, which shall be collected in accordance with the Public Revenue
Collection Code. A joint decision of the Ministers for Justice, Transparency and Human
Rights and the Minister for Finance issued “within five (5) months from the publication
of this law in the Government Gazette details regarding the competent institutions for
the imposition of the fine and the procedure for imposing and collecting it.”

Gazette Α 94/27.5.2016.
* * * The words “within three (3) months” of clause 4 of paragraph 4 was replaced by the
phrase “within five (5) months” as above by Article 66 Ν.4409/2016, Greek Official
Gazette Α 136/28.07.2016.
5. As referred to in Article 5 of Law 3691/2008 persons have an obligation to inform

without delay the competent audit bodies referred to in paragraph 1, when they are
aware or have serious indications or suspicions of the commission, or the attempt of any
infringement of obligations arising from this Law or the Ministerial decisions published
in execution of this law.
* * * Article 3, as amended by Articles 4 Ν.3327/2005, 9 Ν.3932/2011, 1 Ν.3849/2010, 5,

6 Ν.4065/2012, 143 Ν.4251/2014, was replaced as above by Article 224 Ν.4281/2014,
Greek Official Gazette Α 160/8.8.2014.

2015 and the inclusion of new categories of persons referred to in Article 3(1) (a), as
replaced by Article 224 of Law 4281/2014 in the competence of the Article 3a
Committee, shall begin on 1 July 2015.
Article 3a — Committee for the Verification of Declarations of Assets
“1. Responsible for the verification of the assets referred to in cases (a) to (e) of
paragraph 1 of Article 3 conferred are the members of an Audit Committee, which shall
act as a special body. The Committee shall be independent, shall have administrative
and financial autonomy and is composed of nine members and nine (9) alternate
members. Its headquarters shall be determined by decision of the Speaker of
Parliament.
2. The Committee shall consist of:

a) the President of the Special Permanent Committee on Institutions and Transparency,
as Chairman, with an alternate member appointed by the President of Parliament;
b) a judge of the Supreme Court, as member, with an alternate,
c) a Counsellor of the Court of Auditors, as member, with an alternate; and
d) a Counsellor of State, as member, with an alternate, appointed by decision of the
Supreme Judicial Councils of the relevant courts upon a request from the Minister of
Justice, Transparency and Human Rights
e) the Deputy Governor of the Bank of Greece, as member, with an alternate, appointed
by decision of the Governor of the Bank upon a request from the Speaker of Parliament;
f) the President of the Authority for the Prevention of Money Laundering and the
Financing of Terrorism and for Verification of Declarations of Assets (Hellenic FIU), as
member, with an alternate.
(g) the Ombudsman, as member, with an alternate.
h) a Member of the greater in force parliamentary group that is not involved in the
Government, with an alternate appointed by a statement signed by the Leader of the
opposition.
* * * The phrases in point h), were added with article fourth paragraph of law
.4396/2016, Government Gazette 111/8.6.2016.
Members of the Committee who are judges shall be employed full-time and exclusively
and, like other members, in the exercise of their duties, they shall enjoy personal and

operational independence. The Secretary of the Committee shall be an official from the
department referred to in paragraph 4, by decision of the Chairman of the Committee.
A decision of the President of Parliament, published in the Government Gazette,

determines the remuneration of members who are not employed full-time and
exclusively, and of the Secretary of the Committee; their remuneration may not exceed
the limit provided for by Article 21 of Law 4354/2015. Appropriations for the functioning
of the Committee and the service referred to in paragraph 4 shall be entered in the
corresponding section of Parliament’s budget and will be covered by the registered
appropriations within the limits of the current Medium-Term Fiscal Framework. The
Chairman of the Committee shall be the authorising officer for relevant expenditure.
Questions pertaining to financial management shall be settled by specific rules
established by the Committee and approved by the President of Parliament.”
* * * Paragraphs 1 and 2 were replaced as above by Article 175 of Law 4389/2016 GG

94/27.5.2016.
2. The Committee shall be established by decision of the President of Parliament. Judges

that are members of the Committee shall be appointed for a term of office of two (2)
years, which may be renewed up to two (2) years.
[For the first implementation, the member who is a judge of the Supreme Court and
his/her alternate shall be appointed for a term of three (3) years].
The Deputy Governor of the Bank of Greece shall be appointed for a period of four (4)
years. In case of general elections, the Committee shall re-appoint its parliamentarian
members within one month after the President of the new Parliament is elected. Judges’
membership shall not be affected if they are promoted. If a full member’s position
becomes vacant, his or her alternate shall take his place until a new member is
appointed.
* * The third subparagraph of paragraph 3 IS REPEALED by Article 175 (3) of law

4389/2016, Government Gazette 94/27.5.2016.
The Committee shall be supported by a special service at directory level reporting to the
Chairman of the Committee. A decision of the President of Parliament determines the
structure of the scientific, administrative and auxiliary staff who support the positions,
number and responsibilities. Their positions are also filled on secondment from the
public sector, legal entities governed by public law and the Bank of Greece. The
secondments shall be carried out in accordance with Article 25 of the Law 4024/2011, by
decision of the President of Parliament upon a proposal from the Chairman of the

Commission and, in the latter case, the Governor of the Bank. Staff shall be seconded for
three years; this period may be extended by three years at a time and shall be honoured
by the services from which staff were seconded. Members shall receive full pay and
benefits corresponding to their original position, even if those benefits are not directly
linked to the execution of their duties.
“5. Until the thirty-first of March of each year, the Commission shall submit a report on
its activities of the previous year to the Committee on Institutions and Transparency of
the Greek Parliament and to the Minister for Finance and the Minister for Justice,
Transparency and Human Rights. This annual report shall include at least the number of
the declarants, the number of people who submitted a declaration, the measures taken
for those that did not submit a declaration and the results of the audits carried out
during the execution of the duties of the Committee, with statistical representation
thereof. The report shall be posted on the Parliament’s official website no later than one
(1) week after its submission, and shall remain on the website for seven (7) years. The
same obligations to submit a report, with the same content and the same deadline for
submission and posting applies to all relevant bodies receiving and processing
declarations of assets.”
* * * The above new paragraph 5 was added by Article 175 of Law4389/2016 GG A

94/27.5.2016)
* * * Article 3a was added by Article 225 of Law Ν.4281/2014, Government Gazette A

160/8.8.2014.
2015.
“6. All matters relating to the organisation and functioning of the Verification
Committee and the special service are governed by rules of procedure issued by the
Committee and approved by the Parliament meeting in plenary.”
* * * The original paragraph 5 was renumbered as paragraph 6 and was amended as

above by paragraphs 2 and 4 respectively of article 175of law 4389/2016, Government
Gazette A 94/27.5.2016.
“Article 3b — Functioning of the Committee”
1. In the context of the verification of declarations of assets, the Article 3a Committee

may ask the declarants to provide all information necessary for the fulfilment of its

tasks, including information relating to certain categories of transactions or activities of

natural or legal persons or entities in Greece or abroad, public funding, private and all
kinds of contributions or tenders. The Committee shall assess and investigate
information provided or otherwise acquired on whether declarations are inaccurate or
incomplete. The Commission shall have access to the files and archives of public
authorities, service or Agency that keep and process data, as well as to the “Tiresias”
system and it may request, in the context of checks, audits and investigations,
cooperation and reports of all kinds from natural persons, preliminary judicial or
investigating authorities, public services, legal persons under public or private law and
institutions of any type, who in turn are obliged to directly provide all this data and
inform the competent authorities about situations of lack of cooperation or of non-
compliance with their obligations in accordance to this law. The bank, tax, stock
exchange or professional secrecy does not apply vis-à-vis the Commission, during audits
and investigations of, without prejudice to Articles 212, 261 and 262 of the Code of
Criminal Procedure. In any case, and if necessary, the Commission is assisted in its work
by an Assistant Public Prosecutor for Corruption (Law 4139/2013), to be proposed by the
Public Prosecutor for Corruption upon request from the Committee.
“2. The Committee shall audit all the declarations under its responsibility.”
* * * Paragraph 2 was replaced as above by Article 17 of law 4389/2016, Greek Official

Gazette Α 94/27.5.2016.
3. For the performance of its tasks, the Committee may commission an accounting or
financial expert or other audit documents from statutory auditors and experts, who shall
scrutinise information in declarations and supporting documents and draw up a detailed
report to assist the Committee. To this end, the Committee may request the specific
assistance of any public audit authority to its purpose.
4. After checking each declaration, the Committee shall decide whether to close the
case or to send a reasoned, detailed report to the relevant public prosecutor if there is
well-founded, sufficient grounds for doing so. Where appropriate, the report shall be
sent to the General Prosecutor of the State at the Court of Auditors; if there is need for
clarification on matters involving a tax or other authority or service, the report shall be
sent there as well. If the case is closed, it may only be reopened, if substantial new
evidence is cited that would justify a re-examination or if the case needs to be linked to
another case investigated by the Commission.
5. The verification procedure is confidential. In the performance of their duties, the

President, Members, Commission staff and the persons referred to in paragraph 3 have
the obligation to observe the principles of objectivity and impartiality and to refrain
from investigating cases, where a potential conflict of interest arises or involving any of
their relatives or familiars. They have a duty to respect the confidentiality of any

information they obtain in the course of their duties. They shall continue to do so after
leaving the Committee or the execution of their duties as regards the persons referred
to in paragraph 3. Infringement of the above duty of confidentiality shall be punishable
by imprisonment of at least three (3) months.
6. Obstruction of the verification procedure, particularly refusal to provide information

to the Committee or its inspectors, shall be punishable by imprisonment of at least six
(6) months.
7. A decision of the President of Parliament, published in the Government Gazette, shall

regulate more specific matters relating to the object the audit procedure, as well as the
organisation and functioning of the Commission for the verification of the declarations
of assets of the persons mentioned above.”
* * * Article 3b was added by Article 226 of Law 4281/2014, Government Gazette A

160/8.8.2014.
2015
* * * Articles 4 and 5 of this Article REPEALED by article 1 subparagraph .ΙΕ.20 clause.10

of law 4254/2014, Government Gazette A 85/7.4.2014.
“Article 4 — Illicit enrichment”
1. A declarant benefitting himself or a third party illicitly, exploiting his or her status,
shall be punished by imprisonment of at least three (3) years and a fine of twenty
thousand (20.000) to one million (1.000.000) euros.
2. Such a person shall be subject to imprisonment of up to ten (10) years and a fine of
thirty thousand (30.000) to one million five hundred thousand euro (EUR 1.500.000):
(a) if the illicit benefit amounts to more than seventy-three thousand (73.000) euro or
(b) the person acts under a commercial capacity or is a repeat offender.
3. The penalties laid down in paragraphs 1 and 2 shall also apply to anyone who receives
an illicit benefit arising from the offences described in paragraphs 1 and 2 knowing that
these offences where committed by a person required to declare assets.

4. The above provisions shall apply if the offence of securing or receiving an illicit benefit
is not subject to greater
punishment under another provision.”
* * * The original Article 4 was repealed and the new Article 4 above was added by
Articles 1 paragraph 5 and 2 respectively of law 3849/2010, Government Gazette A
80/26.5.2010.
* * * Articles 4 and 5 of this Article REPEALED according to article 1 subparagraph ΙΕ.20

case10 of law 4254/2014, Government Gazette A 85/7.4.2014.
“Article 5 — Offer of influence”
1. Anyone who demands, receives or accepts a promise of financial exchange for himself
or a third person, so that he himself/she herself or another party influences a person
required to declare assets to take a decision within his or her official remit, shall be
punished by imprisonment of at least two (2) years and a fine from fifteen thousand
(15.000) to fifty thousand seven hundred euro (EUR 750.000). The same penalty shall
apply to anyone who promises or offers financial exchanges to another party, in order
for the recipient or the other party to influence a person required to declare assets to
take a decision within his or her official remit. In any event, it is immaterial whether such
influence is actually exerted or leads to the desired result.
2. If the exchanges amount to more than EUR 73.000 or the offender acts under a
commercial capacity or is a repeat offender, imprisonment of up to ten (10) years and a
fine of thirty thousand (30.000) and one million five hundred thousand (1.500.000)
euro”
Articles 1 paragraph 5 and 3 respectively of law 3849/2010, Government Gazette
80/26.5.2010.
‘Article 6 — Failure to declare or submission of an inaccurate declaration
1. Administrative fine of one hundred and fifty (150) to four hundred (400) euros, which
shall be collected in accordance with the provisions of the Public Revenue Collection
Code, shall be imposed on a person on expiry of the time-limit laid down in paragraph 2
of Article 1 of this Law. The details concerning the bodies responsible for imposing the
fine and the procedure for imposing and collecting the fine are defined by a joint

decision of the Ministers for Justice, Transparency and Human Rights and the Minister
for Finance issued “within five (5) months” from the publication of this Law.
* * * The words “within three (3) months in the second subparagraph of paragraph 1
was replaced by the phrase “within five (5) months” as above by Article 66 Ν.4409/2016,
Greek Official Gazette Α 136/28.07.2016.
2. A declarant who fails to submit a declaration after thirty (30) days of the expiry of the
period provided for in paragraph 2 of Article 1 of this Law, or submits an inaccurate or
incomplete declaration, shall be liable to imprisonment and a fine of up to one hundred
thousand (100.000) euros. In case the declarant commits the offence in order to conceal
assets acquired through his status, he or she shall be punished by imprisonment of at
least two (2) years and a fine of ten thousand (10.000) to five hundred thousand
(500.000) euros.
3. An offence such as described in the second subparagraph of the previous paragraph

shall be punishable by imprisonment of up to ten (10) years and a fine of twenty
thousand (20.000) to one million (1.000.000) euros, if the total value of the concealed
asset owned by the declarant and other persons for whom he or she is obliged to
submit a declaration exceeds the amount of three hundred thousand (300.000) euros,
irrespective of whether the assets have been concealed by failure to submit a
declaration or by submission of an incomplete or inaccurate declaration.
4. Offences listed in the first sentence of paragraph 2 and committed by negligence shall
be punishable by a fine. A judicial council or court, freely assessing all circumstances,
may decide that such an offence is not punishable.
5. A third party knowingly involved in the submission of a false declaration, and in

particular failing to declare assets, shall be subject to imprisonment and a fine.
6. Natural persons and staff at legal entities mentioned in Article 5 of Law 3691/2008
who fail to provide the information required in paragraph 5 of Article 3 shall be subject
to imprisonment of up to two years.
7. The court may order appropriate measures to be taken to disseminate information on

a conviction for crimes under this Law, including posting the judgment on the internet or
publishing it in full or in part in the media.”
* * * Article 6, as replaced by Article 227 of Law Ν.4281/2014 (GG I 160), was replaced
as above by Article 177 of law 4389/2016, Greek Official Gazette Α 94/27.5.2016.

“Article 7 — Obstruction of verification and unlawful publication of declaration
1. Any third party who refuses to provide information or in any way obstructs the
verification of the assets of a declarant, shall be punished by imprisonment of at least six
(6) months.
* * * The phrase “carried out in accordance with the provisions of this Law” in paragraph
1 has been replaced with "assets of a declarant”, as above, with Article 11 (1) of law
3932/2011, Government Gazette A 49/10.3.2011.
2. The same penalty shall apply to anyone who publishes a declaration of assets, in
violation of Article 2 (3).’
Articles 1 paragraph 5 and 5 respectively of law 3849/2010, Government Gazette A
80/26.5.2010.
“3. The same punishment shall be imposed on anyone who, although responsible, in
accordance with the provisions of article 1 par. 3, for the preparation and further
sharing of the list of declarants as described in clauses G, H, L, M, N, O of paragraph 1 of
the same article., omits to prepare and further share and forward this list..”
* * * Paragraph 3 was added by Article 11 of Law 3932/2011 (GG 49/10.3.2011.
“Article 8 Prohibition of politicians to participate in companies resident abroad,

prohibitions on participation in companies resident in States uncooperative in tax
matters and States with preferential tax regimes
1. The Prime Minister, the Leaders of political parties represented in the Greek
Parliament or the European Parliament, as well as leaders of political parties receiving
public funding, Ministers, Alternate Ministers and Deputy Ministers, Members of the
National Parliament and Members of the European Parliament and those managing the
finances of political parties as above, the General and Special Secretaries of the
Parliament and the Government, the Heads of Regions and Mayors, shall be prohibited
from participating, either themselves or through intermediaries, in the capital or
management of companies , with real or registered offices broad .
2. The Coordinators of the decentralised administrations, judges and prosecutors, the

Presidents, Directors, Deputy Directors and Directors General of credit institutions
controlled by the State, and also the persons referred to in clauses I and J of paragraph
1 of Article 1 of this Law, as well as the persons referred to in paragraph 1 of this Article

shall be prohibited from participating, either themselves or through intermediaries, in

the capital or management of companies, with real or registered office in States
uncooperative in tax matters or States with preferential tax regimes within the meaning
of Article 65 of Law 4172/2013 (Income Tax Code, GG I 167) and the ministerial
decisions issued based on the above provisions and apply each time.
3. Infringement of paragraph 1 through direct or intermediate participation to a

company that is resident abroad shall be punishable by imprisonment of at least two (2)
years and a fine of ten thousand (10.000) to five hundred thousand (500.000) euros. In
infringement of paragraph 2, the direct or intermediate participation to a company
based in: a non-cooperative in tax matters State as defined in the Ministerial Decision
issued in accordance with paragraphs 1 to 5 of Article 65 of Law 4172/2013, or a State
with a preferential tax regime within the meaning of the ministerial decision issued in
accordance with paragraphs 1, 6 and 7 of Article 65 of Law 4172/2013, shall be punished
by the same penalty.
4. For the purposes of this Article, intermediaries of persons referred to in paragraphs 1

and 2 of this Article are:
a) spouses and separated spouses and persons with which they have concluded a civil
partnership;
b) first - degree relatives
(c) a natural or legal person who is acting, for any reason, on behalf of or designation or
by another person who holds one of the properties referred to in paragraphs 1 and 2 of
this Article.
5. a. within a strict period of sixty days following publication of this Law, the persons
referred to in paragraph 1 of this Article must transfer the assets referred to in the
provision.
b. The transfer shall not affect and shall not preclude the criminal liability for the
already committed infringements of the provisions relating to companies with actual or
registered office in states non-cooperative in tax matters or a state that has a
preferential tax regime within the meaning of Article 65 of Law 4172/2013 (Income Tax
Code, GG A 167) and the ministerial decisions issued by invoking these provisions, as in
force.
6. Article 2 of the Criminal Code shall not apply to those infringements.
7. Article 178 of Law 4389/2016 (GGA 97) is repealed from the time it entered into
force.’ * * * The above new Article 8, which was added by Article 6 of Law 3849/2010,
GG A80) and replaced by Article 178 of Law 4389/2016 (GG A 94), was replaced as above
by paragraph 5 under Article Four of Law.4396/2016, GG A 111/8.6.2016.

* * * The original Articles 8-12 of this Law were renumbered 14 to 18 Article 1 (5) of Law
3849/2010 (GG A 80/26.5.2010.).
Article 9 — General criminal provisions
1. Where the provisions of the previous articles provide for a cumulative penalty of
imprisonment as well as a monetary fine, Article 83 ca. (e) of the Criminal Code shall not
apply.
“2. The offender of the offenses referred to in Articles [4, 5, ] 6, paragraph 2 and 8
paragraph 2 shall be charged and deprived of civil rights for one (1) to five (5) years, if
the penalty is imprisonment, and two (2) to ten (10) years, if the penalty is incarceration.
The deprivation of the elective public office or public, municipal or borough position or
of his political rights, is imposed once their conviction becomes final and cannot be
excluded by the application of Article 64 of the Criminal Code.”
* * * Paragraph 2 was replaced as above by par. 4α. Article 143 of law 4251/2014, Greek
Official Gazette Α 80/1.4.2014.
3. [a. Assets which are the direct or indirect proceeds of one of the offences described in
articles 4 and 5 or were directly or indirectly acquired from the proceeds of such an
offence shall be confiscated upon conviction. If such assets are mixed with lawfully
gained assets, they shall be confiscated up to the amount determined to be involved in
the offence. Any income or other benefits from use of the proceeds of any of the
offences described in Articles 4 and 5, of assets acquired through such offence or of
other assets mixed with them may also be confiscated up to the amount involved in the
offence].
* * * Subparagraph (a) 3 IS REPEALED by Article 180 (2) of law 4389/2016 (Government

Gazette A 94/27.5.2016).
“b. The assets not reported in the case of one of the offences described in paragraphs 1
and 2 of Article 6, [and if paragraph 5 of Article 2has not been applied] shall be
confiscated upon conviction, unless the offender can demonstrate that they have been
lawfully acquired.”
* * * Clause b, as replaced by Article 8 of Law4065/2012 (GG A77), was replaced as

above by article 4 (b) Article 143 of Law.4251/2014, GG A 80/1.4.2014, the phrase “if ...
Article 2 has not been applied” was deleted by Article 180 (2)of law 4389/2016
(Government Gazette A 94/27.5.2016.).

c. The share directly or indirectly owned by a person who commits an offence referred
to in paragraph 2 of Article 8, and any proceeds, income or other benefits acquired from
such a share or from participation in the management of an offshore company shall be
confiscated upon conviction.
d. If the assets subject to confiscation, in accordance with the above provisions no

longer exist, has not been found, cannot be confiscated or is owned by a third party
against whom it is not possible to enforce confiscation, assets of equal value to those at
the time of conviction, as determined by the court, shall be confiscated. The court may
also impose a fine of up to the value of the assets, if it considers that there are no
additional assets to be confiscated or that the total value of existing assets is less than
the amount to be confiscated.
4. Article 263b of the Criminal Code shall also apply to crimes of Articles [4, 5] and 8 2 of
this Law.”
* * * NOTE: “In paragraphs 2 and 4 of Article 9 of Law 3213/2003 and in paragraph 1 of
Article 11 of the same Law, as well as any other provision, referring to Articles 4 and 5
thereof, the respective words are deleted "(Article 180 para. 1 clause a of law4389/2016,
Government Gazette, A, 94/27.5.2016).
5. Case (a) of paragraph Article 9 (3) of law 3213/2003 is hereby repealed. In point (b) of
paragraph 3 of Article 9 of the same Law, as in force following its replacement by
paragraph 4 (b) Article 143 of Law 4251/2014 (GG A 80), deleted the words ‘, and has
been applied in paragraph 5 of Article 2”
* * * The original Article 9 was renumbered 15 and the new Article 9 above was added
by Articles 1 paragraph 5 and 7 respectively of Law 3849/2010 (GG A 80/26.5.2010.).
“Article 10“Article 10 Criminal proceedings
1. For the offences referred to “in Articles 6 to 8 ‘’ committed by declarants referred to

in cases (A) to (F) and (K) of paragraph 1 of Article 1, without prejudice to the provisions
of Articles 62, 85 and 86 par. 1 and 2 of the Constitution, the Rules of Procedure of
Parliament and the Law on criminal liability for ministers, criminal prosecution is
brought by the competent public prosecutor of appeal, questioning and following a
request by the prosecutor and appointment of an investigative judge by the full bench of
the relevant district court. For a major offence, the charge shall be decided by the
council of a court of appeal in the first and final instance.
2. For the offences referred to in “Articles 6 to 8” committed by the rest of the

declarants, referred to in paragraph 1 of Article 1, in Article 14 and in other special laws,

criminal prosecution is brought by the competent public prosecutor who shall request
for preliminary investigation or main judicial investigation, depending on the seriousness
of the act. In the cases of major offences (felonies), the council of the misdemeanours
court decides on the accusation.
* * * The words “Articles 4 to 8: in paragraphs 1 and 2 shall be replaced by the words

“Articles 6 to 8” with Article 180 (1) of law .4389/2016, GG A 94/27.5.2016.
“3. The managing public prosecutors for appeals and misdemeanours courts in Athens
and Thessaloniki respectively shall appoint at least one Deputy Public Prosecutor of
Appeal and one Deputy Public Prosecutor for Misdemeanours to their offices. The
appointed public prosecutors shall handle the respective case files for the offences
under this Law.’
* * * The above new paragraph 3 added and paragraphs 3 and 4 were renumbered
paragraphs 4 and 5 under Article 179 of Law 4389/2016, Government Gazette A
94/27.5.2016.
4 3. Three-member courts of appeal shall have jurisdiction for acts punishable as major
offences, and three-member magistrates’ courts shall have jurisdiction for minor
offences.
5 4. In other respects, the provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure shall apply.”
* * * Article 10, which was added by Article 8 of Law3849/2010 (Government Gazette

A80) and amended by Article 75 3 of law 3994/2011 (A 165), was replaced as above by
Article 36 of law 4055/2012, Greek Official Gazette Α 51/12.3.2012. Article 110 (7) and
(8) of that law state:
” 7. Offences such as described in Article 36 which have not been referred to the
competent court of the time of publication of this Law, with a summons or subpoena
served to the defendant, shall immediately be brought by a public prosecutor of
territorial jurisdiction under the new provisions to the court with jurisdiction.
8. Cases involving offences such as described in Article 36 which are under investigation
or pending at any stage and level shall continue to be handled under the new provisions.
Preliminary criminal proceedings carried out under the provisions amended by Article 36
shall remain valid.’

“Article 11 — Confiscation and prohibition of sale of assets”
1. When the investigation concerns an offence that Articles [4,5] 6, paragraphs 1 and 2
and Article 8, the examining magistrate may, with the consent of the public prosecutor,
prohibit the movement of any accounts, securities or financial products held with a
credit or financial institution, as well as the opening of bank deposit boxes owned by the
accused, even common species with any other person, provided there are reasonable
grounds to believe that the accounts, securities, financial products or boxes contain
assets which may be subject to confiscation as provided for in paragraph 3 of Article 9.
For a preliminary investigation, the judicial council may issue an order freezing the
defendant’s accounts, securities and financial products or preventing the defendant’s
bank deposit boxes from being opened. The examining magistrate’s order or the order
of the council shall be equivalent to a confiscation order, without a summons of the
defendant or third party does not necessarily have to indicate a specific account, title,
financial product or box, and shall be served on the defendant and the legal
representative of the credit or financial institution or the director of the branch where
the examining magistrate or public prosecutor is based. If the accounts, securities,
financial products or safe deposit boxes are shared, the order must be served on the
other holder or holders as well.
* * * NOTE: “In paragraphs 2 and 4 of Article 9 of Law 3213/2003 and in paragraph 1 of

Article 11 of the same Law, which refers to Articles 4 and 5 thereof, the respective words
are deleted. In paragraphs 1 and 2 of Article 10 of Law 3213/2003, as in force, the words
“Articles 4 to 8” are replaced by the words “Articles 6 to 8” (Article 180 paragraph 1 of
Law No Ν.4389/2016 (GG 94/27.5.2016).
2. The prohibition provided for in the previous paragraph shall apply as of the time when
the credit or financial institution is served with the order of the examining magistrate or
judicial council. The opening of the bank deposit box shall be prohibited as of the same
time and any disbursement deriving from the defendant’s accounts or divestment of
securities or other financial products shall be invalid vis-à-vis the State. Any executive or
employee of a credit or financial institution who knowingly infringes the provisions of
this paragraph shall be subject to imprisonment of up to two (2) years and a fine.
3. If the conditions in paragraph 1 are met, the investigative judge or judicial council may
prevent the sale of certain immovable property held by the defendant. The investigative
judge’s warrant or the decision is equivalent to a confiscation order, without a summons
of the defendant and shall be served on the defendant and the head of the relevant land
registry office or the Land Registry, who is required to note the confiscation in the
records on the same day and archive the respective document. Any transaction,
mortgage, confiscation or other act recorded by the land registry office after the above
note has been recorded shall be officially void. A decision of the Minister for Justice,
Transparency and Human Rights shall determine the details for the implementation of
this paragraph.

4. The defendant involved in an ongoing preliminary examination and the third party
shall be entitled to request an end to the investigative judge’s warrant or order the
withdrawal of the respective decision, by a written request addressed to the judicial
council and submitted to the investigative judge or public prosecutor, within twenty (20)
days from the service of the order. Such a request shall not suspend the execution of the
order or the decision. The order or the decision may be revoked at any time, if new
evidence comes to light.’
* * * The original Article 11 was renumbered 17 and the new Article 11 above was added
by Articles 1 para.5 and 9 respectively of Law 3849/2010 (GG A 80/26.5.2010.).
“Article 12 Attribution”
A person who is the subject of an asset audit may be held liable for a pecuniary amount
up to the value of assets acquired by the person and by his or her spouse and minor
children, if the source of the asset benefit cannot be proved. Such a person may be
declared liable to the State by the relevant department of the Court of Auditors, in line
with the applicable provisions. The attribution is excluded if the asset in question has
been confiscated in accordance with Article 9 paragraph 3.”
* * * The original Article 12 was renumbered 18 and the new Article 12 above was
added by Articles 1 paragraph 5 and 10 respectively of Law 3849/2010, GG
80/26.5.2010, then replaced as above by Article 228 Ν.4281/2014, Greek Official
Gazette Α 160/8.8.2014.ΠΡΟΣΟΧΗ: entry into force, in accordance with Article 253 of
that Law, by 1 January 2015.
“Article 13 — Restrictions on transactions in securities”
1. The restrictions in paragraphs 1 and 2 of Article 32 of Law 2843/2000 (GG A 219) shall
be extended to Members and MEPs, to the Secretary-General of the Council of
Ministers, general secretaries of regions, presidents of prefectural authorities, prefects
and mayors to those persons, as well as cases of I, J, K of paragraph 1 of this Law. The
same restrictions shall apply to presidents, directors, deputy directors and managers of
state-controlled credit institutions acting individually or on behalf of their spouses or
minor children.
“2. As the Commission in par. Article 32 (2) of law 2843/2000 shall be regarded the same
Commission of paragraph 1 Article 3 of this Law or Unit C of the Authority referred to in
Article 7 of Law 3691/2008.”
* * * Paragraph 2 was replaced as above by Article 12 of law 3932/2011, Greek Official

Gazette Α 49/10.3.2011.

* * * Article 13 was added by Article 11 of Law Ν.3849/2010 (GG A 80/26.5.2010.).
Article (8) 14 — Special arrangements for the Inspectors Controllers Body of Public
Administration and other groups of persons subject to asset audits
1. The Inspectors Controllers Body of Public Administration is still responsible for

auditing he assets of the employees of government, local government first and second
level and of their businesses, public law legal persons, state-owned private law legal
entities or public enterprises whose management is directly appointed by the State
through an administrative act as a shareholder or in the specific provision of Article 2
par. 4 of Law 3074/2002 (GG 296 Α '), except those whose staff are included in
paragraph 1 of Article 1 of this Law.
2. a. Asset declarations of police staff working for the Ministry of Public Order, border
guards and special guards, as well as their spouses and children, shall be submitted to
and audited by the Internal Affairs Service of the Greek Police.
* * * See relevant Presidential Decree 106/2006 (establishing a Department for the

Receipt and Verification of Declarations of Assets at the Directorate for Internal Affairs).
b. A presidential decree issued on a proposal by the Ministers for Economy and Finance,
Interior, Public Administration and Decentralisation and Public Order determines the
persons required to submit a declaration of assets, the procedure, the type and manner
of submission of relevant declarations, the monitoring procedure and any other relevant
details.
c. A decision of the Minister for Public Order shall determine when declarations of assets
of the above persons are to be submitted.
3. “a. Declarations of assets by staff working for the Coast Guard, as well as their
spouses and children, shall be submitted to and audited by the Internal Affairs Service at
the Headquarters. Declarations of assets by staff actively working for the Internal Affairs
Service (Assets) during its term of office to the Internal Affairs Service are submitted to
Unit C of Control of Declarations of the Authority for the Prevention of Money
Laundering and the Financing of Terrorism and for Control of Declarations of Assets of
Law 3932/2011 (FIU) (A 49)
* * * Clause (a) was replaced as above by paragraph 8 under Article 21 of Law

4058/2012 (Government Gazette A 63/22/03/2012).

b. Declarations of assets by civilian staff working for the Ministry of Merchant Shipping
and public legal entities reporting to it shall be submitted to and audited by the
Inspectors Controllers Body of Public Administration.
“c. A presidential decree issued on a proposal by the Minister for Finance, the Minister
for the Interior, Decentralisation and e-Governance and the Minister for Citizen
Protection, determines the staff of the Hellenic Coast Guard for the submission of asset
declarations, the procedure and method for submitting declarations and their audit, as
well as any other relevant details.”
* * * Clause c was replaced as above by paragraph 8 under Article 21 of Law 4058/2012
(GG A’ 63/22/03/2012)
“d. A decision of the Minister for Citizen Protection shall determine when declarations of
assets are to be submitted by the persons mentioned in clauses (a) and (c).”
* * * Subparagraph (d) was replaced as above by paragraph 8 under Article 21 of Law
4058/2012 (GOVERNMENT GAZETTE A 63/22/03/2012)
“4. During the verification, inspection and investigation procedures performed by the
Inspectors Controllers Body of Public Administration, it is possible to lift the bank,
trading and tax secrecy of persons concerned by a decision of the Special Secretary of
the Body.”
* * * Paragraph 4 was replaced as above by paragraph 7 article 5 of law 3613/2007, GG

A 263/23.11.2007.
“5. The Minister for Citizen Protection may ask the relevant departments to audit
specific Police and Coastguard staff that are obliged to submit an asset declaration,
when there is a signed complaint against them, submitted directly to the Minister by any
natural or legal person or independent authorities or by control bodies of the public
administration or other evidence against them that was otherwise disclosed. If such an
audit is based on a complaint, the complainant shall remain anonymous.”
* * * Paragraph 5 was added by Article 1 (6) of law 3849/2010, GG A 80/26.5.2010.
* * * Articles 8 to 12 were renumbered as 14 to 18 by Article 1 (5) of law 3849/2010, GG

A 80/26.5.2010.
“Article (9) 15 — Transitional provisions”

1. On the first application of this Law, paragraph 3 Article 1 shall be forwarded within
two (2) months from the entry into force.
2. Those belonging to categories of persons for which there is, for the first time, an
obligation to submit an asset declaration, they submit their declaration within ninety
(90) days from publication of this Law.
3. a. Declaration of assets by persons under points (A) to (E) Article 1 paragraph 1 of this
law shall be audited back to 1990.
b. For other categories of declarants, the declarations may be audited as far back as the
year 1990, at the discretion of the five-member Committee.
4. The sale of shares in foreign or Greek companies, listed on the stock exchange or not,
does not fall under the constraints of Article 7 par. 1 of this Law, if those shares were
acquired before the entry into force.
“5. Until the adoption and publication of the ministerial decisions provided for in this
Law, the provisions of Articles 25 to 29 inclusive of Law 2429/1996 (GREEK OFFICIAL
GAZETTE 155 Α) continue to apply. The period referred to in the first subparagraph of
paragraph 2 Article 1 shall apply for the purposes of this paragraph.”
* * * Paragraph 5 was added by Article 13 (4b) of Law 3242/2004, GG A 102/24.5.2004.
* * * Articles 8 to 12 were renumbered as 14 to 18 by Article 1 (5) of law 3849/2010, GG

A 80/26.5.2010.
Article (10)16
The first subparagraph of paragraph 2 of Article 21 of Law 3023/2002 (GG A 146) is

replaced as follows:
‘The Committee shall consist of one representative of each party or coalition of parties
represented in the Parliament and one member of the Council of State, one member of
the Supreme Court and one member of the Court of Auditors, who shall be appointed
together with their alternates by lot by the plenary of the respective courts.”
* * * Articles 8 to 12 were renumbered as 14 to 18 by Article 1 (5) of law3849/2010, GG

A 80/26.5.2010.

Article (11)17
Article 22 (8) Article 4 of Law 3115/2003 is replaced as follows:
“3. Members of the Authority for Information and Communications Security and Privacy
(ADAE) are, during their term of office, suspended from exercising any public function or
profession and may not undertake other duties, paid or otherwise, in the public or
private sector. ADAE members other than the president who is employed full-time and
exclusively, are allowed to undertake duties as members of the teaching staff at
Universities either full-time or part-time.”
* * * Articles 8 to 12 were renumbered as 14 to 18 by Article 1 (5) of law .3849/2010, GG

A 80/26.5.2010.
Article (12) 18 Final provisions
1. From the entry into force of this Law Articles 24 and 29 of Law 2429/1996
(Government Gazette A 155), 7 of Law 2622/1998 (Government Gazette A 138) and 54
of Law 2935/2001 (GREEK OFFICIAL GAZETTE 162 Α).
2. This law is set into force since its publication in the National Gazette.
THE PRESIDENT OF THE HELLENIC REPUBLIC
Hereby adopts the following Law, which has been approved by Parliament:
Code of Civil Servants
[Unofficial translation for the purpose of this assessment.]
Article 28
Financial Status
1. A civil servant is required to state in writing, at the time of his appointment, his
financial status, that of his spouse and children, provided they live with him, as well as
any subsequent significant modification thereof. Civil servants are required to state the
financial status of their spouses, within three (3) months from the date of their

marriage. Any acquisition of moveable assets of a significant value or real assets, by the
civil servant or the persons of the first section, must be reasoned in the statement
submitted. If the civil servant invokes the financial support of persons other than the
ones set forth in the first section in regard with such an acquisition, he must also state
the financial status of those persons.
2. Every two (2) years the competent personnel service is required to request from civil
servants a solemn declaration in regard with any significant modification of their
financial status or not. The information contained in these statements must become the
object of processing.
3. If the modification of the civil servant's financial status is disproportionate to his
income and his general financial status, the competent service is required to conduct an
investigation regarding the origin of the civil servant’s funds. If this investigation should
result to serious indications that the civil servant acquired said funds in á manner
consisting a criminal or disciplinary offence, the competent minister will proceed to the
necessary actions towards the institution of criminal or disciplinary proceedings against
that civil servant. In the case of civil servants working for legal persons of public law,
these proceedings may also be instituted by the bodies responsible for the committal of
civil servants to the civil service council.
4. The provisions of the present Article will also apply to civil servants coming under the
present Code and governed by special provisions.

Declaration forms
[The following are forms for the asset declaration and the declaration of financial
interests. Both were used before the introduction of the e-submission system. The
interface for submitting data on the e-system cannot be displayed here in a feasible
way. However, by and large, the paper forms compare to what is required to declare
under the e-system. The only mayor difference is the absence of the category of
“movables” in the paper form. This category was not subject to declaration when the
paper forms applied. Hence, the paper forms are shown here as unofficial translations in
order to illustrate how declaration of data works in practice. The number of empty lines
in the charts to be filled in have been reduced in below version for the purpose of saving
page space.]

Asset declaration
Protocol Number: Tax Registry Number:
Date:
DECLARATION of Assets for the year 20....

according to law 3213 / 2003
As replaced by article 223 of law 4281/2014
Recipient of the Declaration: Committee for the Control of Asset Declarations of article 3A of law 3213/2003 as added with
article 225 of law 4281/2014 (National Gazette A 160/08.08.2014)
1. Data of the Declarant

Last name...................................................First name...............................................Name of father........................................
Tax Registry Number...............................................................................Competent Public Financial
Services..................................................................................................ID Number..................................................................
Status under which the declaration is submitted....................................................................................................................
Profession.................................................Professional Address.............................................Tel.: ...........................................
Home Address.........................................................................................................................Tel.: ...........................................
Time of first entry at the office..................................................................................................................................................
2. Data of the declarant's spouse

Last name....................................................First name..............................................Name of father........................................
Tax Registry Number.....................................................................................Competent Directorate of Financial
Services...........................................................................................ID Number.........................................................................
Capacity under which the declaration is submitted....................................................................................................................
Profession.................................................Professional Address...................................................Tel.: .....................................

Data of underage children

3.1 Last name.......................................................First name. ...................................................................Birth year................
Α. State of Assets.
Α.1.1 Income from any source during the past year.
FISCAL YEAR……. OTHER TYPES OF

INCOME (FINANCIAL
NO CODE OF THE DECLARANT INCOME SUBJECT TAX FREE
AID, LOANS, GIFTS,
TO TAXATION INCOME
ETC.)

Α.1.2 Immovables and in rem rights to immovables
PAID OR
CODE OF STATE MUNICIPALITY GROUND BUILDING IN SOURCE NUMBER
TYPE OF YEAR OF RIGHT MANNER OF RECEIVED
NO THE OR PREFECTURE OR LOCATION AREA IN AREA IN REM OF OF
IMMOVABLE ACQUISITION IN % ACQUISITION PRICE
DECLARANT CHANGE COMMUNITY M2 M2 RIGHT MONEY CHANGE
(IN €)
Α.1.3 Shares to Greek and foreign companies, bonds and any type of debentures: mutual funds, derivative financial products.
NO CODE OF THE STATE STOCK EXCHANGE – INVESTME-NTS BROKER TYPE OF DEBT TITLE OF DEBT QUANTITY MANNER OF VALUES OF ACQUISITION OR
DECLARANT OR SECURITY SECURITY ACQUISITION DELETION (IN €)
CHANGE VALUE OF VALUE OF
ACQUISITION DELETION
Α.1.4 Bank, saving bank and other credit institutions deposits in Greece or abroad.
NO CODE OF THE ACCOUNT NUMBER AMOUNT OF THE DEPOSIT TYPE OF DEPOSIT CURRENCY OF THE CREDIT COUNTRY OF FOREIGN SOURCE OF DEPOSITED
DECLARANT DEPOSIT INSTITUTION ACCOUNT DEPOSIT MONEY

Α.1.5 Floating and airborne means of transport and other types of vehicles.
NO CODE OF THE STATE TYPE OF VESSEL – VEHICLE CAPACITY PORT OF REGISTRATION % OF OWNERSHIP YEAR OF MANNER OF PAID OR RECEIVED SOURCE OF
DECLARANT OR VEHICLE REGISTRY ACQUISITION ACQUISITION PRICE (IN €) MONEY
CHANGE NUMBER
Α.1.6 Holdings in any type of enterprises.
NO CODE OF THE STATE OR TYPE OF TYPE OF ENTERPRISE YEAR OF ENTRY CAPITAL CONTRIBUTION (IN €) % OF OWNERSHIP SOURCE OF MONEY
DECLARANT CHANGE HOLDING

THE DECLARATION IS ACCOMPANIED BY

1. A copy of the declarant's tax income declaration (E1) of the year of control
2. A copy of the last E9 (Declaration of Immovable Assets)
DOCUMENTS
The declarants shall submit copies of all necessary documents to the competent
authorities, as requested.
DEADLINE OF SUBMISSION
The declaration is submitted by the declarants within 90 days after obtaining their
capacity (initial declaration). In the following years, the declaration is submitted annually
during their tenure, the exercise of the activity or the maintaining of their capacity. and
for one (1) year after the loss or the end of this capacity. Especially the declarants of
clauses a-e of article 1(1) of law 3213/2003 shall declare their assets for three (3) years
after the loss or the end of their capacity, and at least three (3) months after the end of
the deadline for the submission of their tax income declaration.
The Asset Declaration includes, in detail, the existing assets in Greece and abroad, up
until 31 December of the previous year. Especially, the initial statement includes the
existing at the time of the submission assets. After the initial declaration, the annual
declaration only declares the changes occurred during the time related to the
submission.
Athens, …………………………….20…..
THE DECLARANT THE SPOUSE
(signature) (signature)
(each of them is signing separately for their personal data and together with regard to the assets of
underage children)

GENERAL GUIDELINES ON HOW TO FILL OUT THE DECLARATION FORM
Please note that in case some board(s) do not suffice, additional ones should be filled out.
Α) In Chart A1.1 the declarant fills out income from any sources, during the previous year,
as they were declared in the tax income declarations (form E1).
MORE SPECIFICALLY:
1. Position 1 is filled out with 0 for the declarant, 1 for the spouse and 2 for the underage
children.
2. Position 2 is filled out with the income subject to taxation, as well as the income subject
to separate or special taxation.
3. Position 3 is filled out according to the above, with the tax-free income.
4. Position 4 is filled out with the total amount of the rest of the income from any source
(financial aid, loans (except of those that were spent to acquire assets that are mentioned in
relevant charts).
Β) Chart Α1.2 is filled out with the immovable assets, as well as in rem rights with regard to
those (article 2 of law 3213/2003).
MORE SPECIFICALLY:
1. Position 1 is filled out with 0 for the owner, with 1 for his/her spouse and 2 for his/her
underage children.
2. Position 2 is filled out with the state or the type of change that occurred with regard to
the immovable: 0 for the immovable pre-existing the period related to the declaration and still
exists at the time relevant to the declaration, 1 for the immovable acquired at the time relevant
to the declaration, 2 for the immovable that was sold out,3 for the owned immovable that is
under construction during the period relevant to the declaration.
3. Position 3 is filled out with the Prefecture, where the immovable is located.
4. Position 4 is filled out with the Municipality or the Community, where the immovable is
located.
5. Position 5 is filled out with the Street or the Location of the immovable.
6. Position 6 is filled out with the type of the immovable. (see CHART I)
7. Position 7 is filled out with the ground area of the immovable in (m²).
8. Position 8 is filled out with the ground area of the buildings in (m²).
9. Position 9 is filled out with the year the immovable was acquired.
10. Position 10 is filled out with the in rem right on the immovable. (see CHART VIII)
11. Position 11 is filled out with the ownership percentage of the declarant relative to the
immovable.
12. Position 12 is filled out with the manner of acquiring the immovable. (see CHART VII)

13. Position 13 is filled out with the price paid for acquiring the immovable or the price
received for deleting the immovable.
14. Position 14 is filled out with the source of the money, in case the immovable was
acquired. (see CHART II).
15. Position 15 is filled out with the title of the change of the immovable (e.g. purchase
contract number, building permit number, parental provision contract number, etc.).
Note :For immovables that in position 2 were categorized as a 0, the declarant shall not fill out
positions 12 and 13, given that these positions were filled out during the year of acquisition.
C) Chart Α1.3 is filled out with shares of national and foreign companies, listed or non-listed, any
types of bonds, hedge funds, financial derivatives.
MORE SPECIFICALLY:
1. Position 1 is filled out with 0 for the declarant, 1 for his/her spouse and 2 for underage
children.
2. Position 2 refers to the state or change that occurred to the titles and is filled out with 0
for titles pre-existing the time of reference of the declaration and are still existing at the time of
the declaration, with 1 for titles acquired during the time of reference of the declaration and 2
for the titles that were sold.
3. Position 3 refers to the stock exchange and investments broker, namely the Investment
Services company, the Mutual Funds Managing Company or any other organization that
facilitated the acquisition of the title.
4. Position 4 refers to the type of the title (see CHART III).
5. Position 5 refers to the publisher of the title.
6. Position 6 refers to the quantity of the title.
7. Position 7 refers to the manner of acquisition of the title (see CHART VII)
8. Positions 8a and 8b refer to the price paid for the acquisition of the title or the price
received in case of the title was sold.
D) Chart A1.4 is filled out with national or foreign bank deposit and other credit institutions
account.
MORE SPECIFICALLY:
1. Position 1 is filled out with 0 for the declarant, 1 for their spouse and 2 for their
underage children. Declarants must also declare any accounts they hold as co-beneficiaries with
third parties.
2. Position 2 is filled out with the account number.
3. Position 3 is filled with the amount of the deposit in the account.
4. Position 4 is filled out with the type of the account (Time Deposits, Savings Accounts,
etc.)
5. Position 5 is filled out with the currency of the account.

6. Position 6 is filled out with the Credit Institute where the account is held.
7. Position 7 is filled out with the country of the respective credit institute, in case it is a
foreign one.
8. Position 8 is filled out with the source of the capital deposited. (see CHART II)
Ε) Chart A1.5 is filled out with the floating and airborne means of transportation, as well as
vehicles of any use.
MORE SPECIFICALLY:
Position 1 refers to the owner of the transportation means and is filled out with 0 for the
declarant, 1 for their spouse and 2 for their underage children.
Position 2 refers to the state or the change occurred to the transport means and is filled out with
0 for the transport means that is pre-existing the time of reference of the declaration and is still
existing at the time of the declaration, 1 for the means of transportation acquired during the time
of reference of the declaration and 2 for the transport means that was sold.
Position 3 is filled out with the type of the transport means (see CHART IV)
Position 4 is filled out with the number of the vessel or vehicle registry number.
Position 5 is filled out with the capacity or the cubism of the vessel/vehicle.
Position 6 is filled out with the port of registration, in case of floating vessels.
Position 7 is filled out with percentage of ownership.
Position 8 is filled out with the year the transport means was acquired.
Position 9 is filled out with the manner of acquisition.
Position 10 is filled out with the price paid for the acquisition of the transport means or the price
received, in case the transport means was sold.
Position 11 is filled out with the source of the money that was spent on the acquisition of the
transport means (see CHART II)
NOTE I For transport means that in Position 2 were filled out with 0, Positions 9, 10 and 11
should not be filled out.
NOTE II Chart A1.5 does not include leasing of transport means.
F) Chart A1.6 is filled out with holdings in any kind of enterprises.

MORE SPECIFICALLY:
Position 1 refers to the shareholder and is filled out with 0 for the declarant, 1 for their spouse
and 2 for their underage children.
Position 2 refers to the state or the change occurred to shares and is filled out with 0 for shares
that are pre-existing the time of reference of the declaration and still exist at the time of the
declaration, 1 for shares acquired during the time of reference of the declaration and 2 for shares
that were sold.
Position 3 is filled out with the type of shares. (see CHART V)
Position 4 is filled out with type of the enterprise (see CHART VI).

Position 5 is filled out with the year of acquisition.

Position 6 is filled out with share capital.
Position 7 is filled out with the source of the money that was paid to acquire additional shares of
the same enterprise, or new ones. (see CHART II)
Note: For holdings that in position 2 were filled out with 0, position 7 should not be filled out.
CHART Ι TYPE OF IMMOVEABLE
1 APPARTMENT
2 LAND PARCEL (for agriculture)
3 PARCEL
4 PASTURE
5 MANUFACTURING PLANT
6 RESIDENCE
7 FORREST
8 STORAGE PREMISES
9 PARKING SPACE
10 BUSINESS PREMISES
11 OFFICE PREMISES
12 OTHER
CHART TYPE OF TRANSPORT MEANS

IV
1 PASSENGER
2 CARGO
3 MOTORCYCLE
4 MOTORBIKE
5 RECREATIONAL CRAFT
6 SAILING BOAT
7 SMALL BOAT
8 HELICOPTER
9 AIRPLANE
10 OTHER
CHART VI TYPE OF ENNTERPRISE

1 COMMERCIAL
2 INDUSTRIAL
3 SERVICE PROVIDER
4 CONTRACTING
5 INDIVIDUAL
6 AGRICULTURAL
7 STOCK-FARMING
8 CRAFT INDUSTRY
9 OTHER
CHART VIII IN REM RIGHT

1 FULL OWNERSHIP
2 JOINT OWNERSHIP
3 BARE OWNERSHIP

4 USUFRUCT
5 OTHER
CHART II SOURCE OF INCOME

1 ANNUAL INCOME
2 SOLD ASSET
3 INCOME OF PREVIOUS YEAR
4 GIFT
5 LOAN
6 PARENTAL PROVISION
7 COMBINATION OF MORE OF THE ABOVE
8 OTHER
CHART III TYPE OF TITLE

1 SHARES TO NATIONAL NON-LISTED COMPANIES
2 SHARES TO NATIONAL LISTED COMPANIES
3 SHARES TO FOREIGN NON-LISTED COMPANIES
4 SHARES TO FOREIGN LISTED COMPANIES
5 BONDS
6 DEBENTURES
7 MUTUAL CAPITAL SHARES
8 FINANCIAL DERIVATIVES
9 SHARES IN FOREIGN CURRENCY
10 OTHER
CHART V TYPE OF HOLDING

1 S.A. SHAREHOLDER
2 LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY SHAREHOLDER
3 GENERAL PARTNERSHIP
4 LIMITED PARNTERSHIP
5 INDIVIDUAL ENTERPRISE
6 SILENT PARTNERSHIP
7 OTHER
CHART VII ASSET ACQUISITION

1 PURCHASE
2 INHERITANCE
3 PARENTAL PROVISION
4 GIFT
5 DOWRY AGREEMENT FOR ACQUISITIONS BEFORE 1983
6 OTHER

Financial interest declaration
FINANCIAL INTERESTS DECLARATION

Submitted by the same persons subject to the submission of asset declarations and
within the same deadlines, according to article 229 of law 4281/2014 to the Committee
for the Control of Asset Declarations (Article 3A of law 3213/2003 as added by article
225 of law 4281/2014). The declaration includes the interests and activities with the
regard to the financial year previous to the submission. The declaration is signed
separately by the declarant or his/her spouse for each of their data.
Declarant
Last Name:
First Name:
Spouse
Last Name:
First Name:
I, the undersigned, declare responsibly and with full knowledge of the provisions of
article 229 of law 4281/2014 that:
(Α) According to article 229(a) of law 4281/2014, I declare my professional activities

No Code of the Declarant Professional Activity or
Participation

(Β) According to article 229 (b) of law 4281/2014, I declare my participation to the
management of any type of legal entities and companies, associations of persons and
nongovernmental organisations
No Code of the Declarant Participation or activity
(C) According to article 229(c) of law 4281/2014, I declare any type of paid regular
activity that I undertake in parallel with my civil servant or self-employed duties:
No Code of the Declarant Activity

(D) According to article 229 (d) of law 4281/2014, I declare any kind of paid occasional
activity (including writing, teaching and consulting activities) that I undertake in parallel
with the execution of my duties, in case the total reward for these activities exceeds
5,000 EUR per year:
NO Code of Declarant Occasional Activity in case the
total reward exceeds 5,000 EUR
per year 5000 ευρώ σε ένα
ημερολογιακό έτος
(Ε) According to article 229 (e) of law 4281/2014 I declare any type of shares held to
companies or α consortium of companies, in case these shareholdings could affect
public policies or enables me to substantially influence issues related to this company or
consortium of companies:
NO Code of Declarant Shareholdings to company Shareholdings that
or consortium that could enable influence
affect public policies

(F) (To be filled out only by elected public officials).

According to article 229 (f) of law 4281/2014 I declare any financial support by third
parties, in human or material resources, that is granted to me because of my public
activities, if the total value exceeds 3,000 EUR:
NO Code of Declarant Financial Support (*) Granted by
NO Code of Declarant Support in human (*) Granted by

resources
(*) Identity of the involved third party(/parties).

(G) According to article 229 (g) of law 4281/2014, I declare any other financial interests
that may affect the execution of my duties:
NO Code of Declarant Financial Interest
Athens, 20…..
THE DECLARANT THE SPOUSE
(signature) (signature)
(υπογραφή) (υπογραφή)

oecd.org/corruption

Technical Report On Asset Declarations Greece en

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Technical Report On Asset Declarations Greece en

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Technical Report On Asset Declarations Greece en

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Greece-OECD Project:

Technical Support on Anti-Corruption

Technical Report on Asset

TECHNICAL REPORT ON ASSET DECLARATIONS IN GREECE

About the OECD

About the Greece-OECD Project

TECHNICAL REPORT ON ASSET DECLARATIONS IN GREECE

Overview: Asset declarations in Greece ...................................................................... 13

TECHNICAL REPORT ON ASSET DECLARATIONS IN GREECE

TECHNICAL REPORT ON ASSET DECLARATIONS IN GREECE

Recommendation 1: Consider expanding the electronic database to declarations

TECHNICAL REPORT ON ASSET DECLARATIONS IN GREECE

Recommendation 6: Review to what extent the obligation to declare precious

TECHNICAL REPORT ON ASSET DECLARATIONS IN GREECE

Recommendation 19: Experiences with a multitude of oversight bodies should be

Recommendation 27: Review options in line with constitutional principles on data

TECHNICAL REPORT ON ASSET DECLARATIONS IN GREECE

TECHNICAL REPORT ON ASSET DECLARATIONS IN GREECE

Figure 1. Flow chart

Submission Verification Sanctions

TECHNICAL REPORT ON ASSET DECLARATIONS IN GREECE

Overview: Asset declarations in Greece

TECHNICAL REPORT ON ASSET DECLARATIONS IN GREECE

Evaluation report Greece: Fourth Evaluation Round, Corruption prevention in respect of

TECHNICAL REPORT ON ASSET DECLARATIONS IN GREECE

EU Anti-Corruption Report, Annex Greece, 2014:12

TECHNICAL REPORT ON ASSET DECLARATIONS IN GREECE

Transparency International Greece

National Integrity System Assessment Greece (12 February 2013):15

There are no further reports on asset declarations, such as by the International

TECHNICAL REPORT ON ASSET DECLARATIONS IN GREECE

A myriad of separate Laws and regulations relate to the declaration system:

TECHNICAL REPORT ON ASSET DECLARATIONS IN GREECE

As a remarkable feature, the declaration system extends to the leadership of political

TECHNICAL REPORT ON ASSET DECLARATIONS IN GREECE

TECHNICAL REPORT ON ASSET DECLARATIONS IN GREECE

TECHNICAL REPORT ON ASSET DECLARATIONS IN GREECE

TECHNICAL REPORT ON ASSET DECLARATIONS IN GREECE

TECHNICAL REPORT ON ASSET DECLARATIONS IN GREECE

TECHNICAL REPORT ON ASSET DECLARATIONS IN GREECE

TECHNICAL REPORT ON ASSET DECLARATIONS IN GREECE

distribution” or “illegal retransfer of capital contributions”. Another problematic

Recommendation Consider explicitly including and defining

Recommendation Consider including in the declaration large non-

TECHNICAL REPORT ON ASSET DECLARATIONS IN GREECE

Increase in market values

Machine readable data

Loans received by declarant

Loans granted by declarant

TECHNICAL REPORT ON ASSET DECLARATIONS IN GREECE

Bitcoins and similar

Balancing income and expenditures

TECHNICAL REPORT ON ASSET DECLARATIONS IN GREECE

Recommendation The Law 3213/2003 or a similarly binding regulation

Illicit enrichment is not an offence in Greece (anymore) – see below at section ‎0

TECHNICAL REPORT ON ASSET DECLARATIONS IN GREECE

Recommendation Data in the initial declaration should be as of the day

Conflict of interest aspect

Recommendation Oversight bodies should adopt a methodology for