CCPE(2016)1Prov

Strasbourg, 28 January 2016

CONSULTATIVE COUNCIL OF EUROPEAN PROSECUTORS(CCPE)

1.         Does the prosecution service in your country work strategically with ensuring quality in the work of prosecutors? If yes, how is that done?

In Greece, the inspection of the quality of the work efficiency of the prosecutors is effective and is achieved by some inspectors appointed every year to this end following a ballot conducted by the Higher Judges Council of the Supreme Court (Areios Pagos), who are Supreme Court Judges and Supreme Court prosecutors and work exclusively for one year; they prepare personal reports, namely a report relates to each prosecutor and is a basic criterion for their progress in the service.

2.         Which criteria are considered crucial in your country for securing the highest quality and efficiency of the work of prosecutors: their independence, impartiality, human and material resources, conditions of work etc.? Please briefly describe.

The scientific training, the judgment and the perception, the diligence and the hard work are sine qua non conditions to achieve higher quality and efficiency in the work of prosecutors. In any case, the moral qualifications, to wit, the moral standards, the courage, the personality and the behavior (in the service and in the community) of the prosecutors are taken into account and assessed.

3.         Are there any indicators, formal or informal, used in your country in order to assess the quality and efficiency of the work of prosecutors, for example, the number of cases considered, the length of the consideration, the complexity of the cases considered etc.? Please briefly describe.

The various instructions and orders of the Supreme Court (Areios Pagos) Prosecution (that are compulsorily enforceable by the current prosecutors, without of course being related to the substantial ruling of the prosecutors for the cases they handle) determine, in addition to the scientific training, the indicators that are taken into consideration during the assessment of the work of prosecutors (time limit of legal file processing based on the difficulty of the cases, compliance with the flagrante procedure, way to prepare motions and ordinances, etc).

4.         Is there a formal or informal procedure for evaluation of the work of prosecutors, how often it is evaluated, by whom, and with what consequences? Do the prosecutors have the right to raise formal or informal objections to the results of the evaluation and to its consequences?

In accordance with the Court By-Laws Code and Court Officers Status, the work of prosecutors (with the exception of the prosecution officers serving in the Supreme Court Prosecution) inspected and evaluated every year by the inspectors appointed to this end (Supreme Court judges and deputy Supreme Court prosecutors), who prepare a related personal report for each one of the inspected prosecutors, the specific reports are taken into account for their progress in the service, especially in view of their imminent promotion.  The foregoing Code provides for the possibility of the prosecutors to raise objections to the report regarding their personal evaluation before the proper Inspection Council (consisted of a Supreme Court vice-president exclusively engaged in, a Supreme Court judge and a Supreme Court deputy prosecutor).

5.         As regards the fight against organised crime and terrorism, are there any specific conditions, criteria, procedures or indicators created for prosecutors in your country in order to:

         - facilitate their work?

         - evaluate their work?

a) First part of the question: In Greece, by decision of the Supreme Court Higher Judges Council, a prosecutor is appointed in the Hellenic Police Direction for the Security Police of Attica and a prosecutor is appointed in the Direction for the Security Police of Thessaloniki, fully and exclusively engaged in, for three (3) years, to inspect and to guide the work of the above services in the fight against organised crime and terrorism.  The foregoing prosecutors are briefed about all the information and charges received by the above services, whilst they may order or conduct a preliminary investigation or a preliminary examination of crimes provided for in articles 187 and 272 of the Penal Code (article 4 of Law 2265/1994, as amended by articles 18 par.1 of Law 2622/1998, 12 of Law 3424/2005, 23 par.4 of Law 3511/2006 and 54 par.1 of Law 4249/2014).  The prosecutor that inspects the preliminary work of the Direction for the Security Police of Attica and the work of the Hellenic Police Direction for the Intelligence Administration and Analysis during the exercise of its powers, related to the collection, processing and evaluation of information and data (article 22 par.5 and 6 of Law 4249/2014, as par.5 and 6 thereof were added by article 231 par.4 of Law 4281/2014).

In the other Greek cities that are part of the jurisdiction of the regional Hellenic Police Directions for the Security Police (save Attica and Thessaloniki), the inspection and guidance of the work of the proper Directions for the Security Police in the fight against organised crime and terrorism is part of the work the respective prosecutors that have the local jurisdiction.

Furthermore, by decision of the Minister of Public Order and Citizens’ Protection, a Coordination, Analysis and Investigation Council is established to fight organised crime and terrorism, and it functions under the direct supervision of the Minister of Public Order and is consisted of thirteen (13) members and in particular, by one prosecutor, as chairman, who is appointed by decision of the Supreme Court Higher Judges Council fully and exclusively engaged in, for three years, that may be extended, six (6) officers of the Hellenic Police, graduates of Higher Education Institutes or with special knowledge and experience in matters of fighting against organised crime and six (6) scientists, holders of postgraduate diplomas (Master or PhD) in the sciences of Criminology, Law, Political Sciences, International Relations, Economics and Informatics, as members. The duty of this Council is to examine and analyse the forms of the organised crime and in particular, of the special violence crimes, to systematically examine and analyse the existing data in relation to such crimes, to prepare programmes and to create guidelines for the proper organisation of the prosecution authorities and the training and further training of their personnel in order to fight effectively against such criminal phenomena and to efficiently protect the country against the risk of such a criminal activity coming from other countries. The Council is also in charge of collecting from the proper services the individual assessments of a terrorist threat, of further processing and assessing them and of preparing a report every six months that will assess on a national level the existence of a terrorism threat (National Assessment of a Terrorist Threat). To this end, the proper Police Services, the National Intelligence Service, the General National Defense Staff and the Harbour Corps are required to work together. Also, all the related information of any state authority or service is available to this Council. The Council may take knowledge of all data of the preliminary investigation of such crimes committed in the country, at any stage of the procedure. The Council also develops a direct cooperation with the proper departments of the security services, on general matters or in specific cases of criminal activity and especially, has an ongoing cooperation with the Director of the Sub-Direction for Fighting against Special Violence Crimes to deal with the special violence crimes. In case of examination, review of analysis of special matters of which the Council has the authority, scientists specialised in these matters may also participate in the Council who work under an assignment employment contract or work for the Ministry of Public Order under a work relationship of any description.  By decision of the Ministers of Public Order and National Defense, officers of the Armed Forces may also participate in the Council.  If the prosecution authorities conduct according to the provisions of the Criminal Procedure Code, a preliminary investigation or a preliminary examination of special violence crime cases, the prosecutor who is a member of the council, conducts by himself, in addition to his duties exercised based on the provisions of the presidential decree issued as per par.5 of the same article, to his judgment,  the above preliminary investigation or preliminary examination (article 4 of Law 2265/1994 in conjunction with article 1 of PD 14/1995).

b) Second part of the question: The assessment of the work of the prosecutors, who responsible for the inspection and the guidance of the Hellenic Police services in the fight against organised crime and terrorism in Greece, is not specialised, but it is made by the proper instutitional agents that are common for all prosecutors.

6.         Are there in your country recent legislative reforms to fight more effectively against organised crime and terrorism and how are these reforms seen in relation to the quality and efficiency of the work of prosecutors? Please briefly describe.

The Greek legislation on the fight against organised crime and terrorism remains as it is in terms of criminal offences (articles 187 and 187A of Penal Code) whilst, by articles 6 of Law 4267/2014 (Government Gazette A-137/12-6-2014, harmonisation with article 14 of Directive 2011/93/EC) and 5 of Law 4274/2014 (GG A-147/14-7-2014), the provisions of article 187B of PC were amended and are now as follows:

«Clemency measures

1.       If any of the liable for the acts of establishing a terrorist organisation or criminal conspiracy or of participation therein as per paragraphs 1 and 3 of article 187 or of establishing a terrorist organisation or of participating therein as per paragraphs 4 of article 187A notifies the authority of the prevention of the commission of one of the contemplated crimes or in the same manner substantially contributes to the dismantling of the criminal organisation or criminal conspiracy or terrorist organisation, they are discharged of the sentence for such acts. If no criminal prosecution has been exercised yet, the prosecutor at the misdemeanours court abstains with an reasoned provision from the criminal prosecution and submits the legal file to the prosecutor at the appeal court, who acts according to article 43 par.2 of the Criminal Procedure Code.

2.       If in the case of previous paragraph, the liable person has committed one of the pursued crimes described in paragraphs 1 and 3 of article 187 or has committed one of the crimes described in paragraph 1 of article 187A, the court inflicts on him/her a reduced sentence as per article 83. In exceptional cases, the court, by evaluating all the circumstances and especially the danger of a criminal organisation, of a criminal conspiracy or a terrorist organisation, the extent of participation of the liable person therein and the extent of his/her contribution in its dismantling, may order the suspension of the enforcement of the sentence to three to ten years, and articles 99 to 104 will apply with regard to the remaining circumstances.

3.       Anyone who denounces punishable acts committed against him/her by a criminal organisation as per article 187 or by liable persons as per articles 323, 348A, 348B, 348C, 349 and 351, the prosecutor at the misdemeanours court, if the a denouncement is speculated to be grounded, it may, following an approval of the prosecutor at the appeal court, provisionally abstain from the criminal prosecution for violations of the law on aliens and extraditable persons on a reward, as well as for violations due to their participation in criminal activities, provided such participation was direct due to the fact that they were victims of the offences described in articles 323, 348A, 348B, 348C, 349 and 351, until a final court order is issued for the denounced acts. If the denouncement proves to be grounded, the abstention from the criminal prosecution becomes final. 3a) A liable person for any criminal act, save those described in article 187A of the Penal Code, for whom, before his/her final sentence, it is ruled that he contributed by providing information on his/her own initiative to the discovery or dismantling of a criminal organisation or enabled upon a notice to the authority the prevention of the commission of a criminal act or the discovery and arrest of absconders or fugitives from justice for acts of terrorism as per article 187A of the Penal Code, extenuating circumstances are acknowledged. If, for the discovery or dismantling of a terrorist organisation or for the prevention of the commission of a terrorism act or the arrest of absconders or fugitives from justice, it is necessary for such acts to provisionally release the foregoing liable person, the council at the misdemeanours court may order by decree the provisional suspension of the criminal prosecution of the foregoing and his/her provisional discharge from prison for a certain period in order to verify the aforementioned information. If, after the suspension of the criminal prosecution and release of the liable person, as set out above, the information provided by him/her were not true or it did not involve any criminal organisation or criminal acts described in article 187A of the Penal Code, the related decree is revoked, and the imprisonment of the liable person is again ordered and the suspended criminal prosecution against him is continued, unless there is a case of application of another favourable provision.  For the information provided by the liable person, a report of sworn witness examination is prepared, which is sent to the proper prosecutor at the appeal court in order to take knowledge.  The sworn witness report is kept in a special archive of the Prosecution, in which a report of the proper authority is sent and kept, which effected on the basis of the foregoing information the dismantling of the terrorist organization, the prevention of terrorist act or the arrest of the absconders or fugitives from justice for acts of terrorism. Only the members of the proper court council or court take knowledge of the foregoing reports, which examine also ex officio whether to issue or not the benefits provided for in the previous paragraphs. The provisions of paragraphs 1 and 2 of this or other laws providing for favourable measures or clemency measures, are not affected from the provisions of this paragraph.

4.       The deportation of aliens that are illegally in the country and denounce offences described in articles 323, 348A, 348B, 348C, 349 and 351 or committed by a criminal organisation of article 187, may, by an ordinance of the prosecutor at the misdemeanours court and approval of the prosecutor at the appeal court, be suspended until a final court order is issued on the denounced acts. As far as the suspension of deportation is in force, the aliens are issued with a residence permit notwithstanding the effective legislation on aliens».

7.         Do you consider that current international conventions, as well as international organisations, like Eurojust, Europol and Interpol, are sufficient to effectively fight against organised crime and terrorism?

We consider that the extension and broadening of the international, police and judicial cooperation is necessary for, in application of the effective international conventions and with the contribution of the existing international organisations Eurojust, Europol and Interpol, the assurance of the direct exchange of information necessary for the fight against the organised crime and terrorism, among the proper authorities of the EU member-states, as the case may be.

8.         What are the major challenges in your country as regards the quality and efficiency of the work of prosecutors and, in particular, their fight against organised crime and terrorism?

To assure the financial resources for the necessary support of the material-technical infrastructure and human resource (judges, prosecutors, court clerks, special policemen) that constitute determinant agents for the quality and efficiency of the work of prosecutors in the fight against organised crime and terrorism.