Court of Audit: Court of Audit documents ‘vague rules’ and gaps in the protection of public space

A new audit report by the Court of Audit documents a “vague regulatory framework” and gaps in the application of rules governing the protection of public space in Greece.

On 21 June 2025, the Court of Audit, Greece’s supreme fiscal court, constitutionally established under Article 98, published an audit examining whether Greek authorities, particularly municipalities, effectively monitor compliance by food and beverage establishments that have been granted permits to use public space for outdoor seating.

The Court found that municipal control mechanisms do not effectively safeguard public spaces. Specifically:

No coherent regulatory framework at local level: Municipal regulatory decisions defining which public spaces may be granted to private operators and under what conditions are outdated, incomplete and fragmented.
No unified or fully updated electronic registry, nor interoperability with other municipal departments involved in the audit process (revenue services and municipal police).
Permit issuance lacks proper legal procedure and substantive checks, allowing unlawful occupation of public space to go undetected.
Audit mechanisms are ineffective: There is no rational inspection planning based on risk assessment (area, season, type of business). In many regional municipalities, inspections are minimal or non‑existent. The justification of staff shortages is not considered convincing.
No user‑friendly system informing citizens about the terms of public‑space permits, limiting their ability to participate in protecting public space. The development of the “mystreet” application is deemed crucial.
Violations result mainly in fines, without monitoring whether public space is restored. Removal of permanent structures is extremely difficult due to multiple authorities being involved and significant delays (sometimes years). There is a large discrepancy between fines assessed and fines actually collected.

Based on these findings, the Court of Audit concluded:

Municipal concessions of public space to food and beverage establishments must balance local economic activity with residents’ and visitors’ quality of life — including their right to unobstructed access to public space. The audit shows this balance is not achieved: many establishments occupy public space unlawfully or beyond their permit.
Audit mechanisms are not used effectively. When they do operate (and in many regional municipalities they are practically non‑existent), they must act within a vague regulatory framework and without planning based on risk factors.
Violations are treated leniently. Sanctions are limited to fines, without ensuring restoration of public space. The process for removing permanent unlawful structures is so slow that de facto situations and permanent environmental alteration arise.

Read also

Report Issues in tendering and contracts concerning the public procurement of…

Report Exceptional public procurement procedure for contracts for flood protection studies…

Report Court of Audit: Court of Audit documents ‘vague rules’ and…

Report Concerns surround the establishment of the new governmental committee for…

Unlawful occupation of public space also results in loss of municipal revenue. Both concession fees and fines are sources of income. If local authorities seek additional resources, they must first manage existing ones more effectively.
Effective and up‑to‑date inspection and re‑inspection mechanisms are necessary to prevent unlawful use of public space, avoid repeat violations, protect vulnerable groups’ access to public space, prevent environmental degradation, and reduce the likelihood of violations by concessionaires.
A significant step forward will be the operation of the new digital tools — the “Registry of Public‑Space Use Permits” and the “mystreet” application. Their implementation, however, requires cooperation among local authorities.

The Court of Audit issued the following recommendations to address the shortcomings identified:

Update and codify municipal regulatory decisions defining public spaces that may be granted to private operators and the terms of use.
Create and continuously update a registry of concessions providing reliable information on permits, conditions, inspection history and violations.
Conduct on‑site inspections during permit issuance, respect legal deadlines for renewals, and carry out substantive checks of supporting documents.
Plan and conduct annual inspections based on risk criteria (area, season, type of business). Cross‑check operating businesses with the updated registry. Re‑inspect businesses with a history of violations.
Until “mystreet” is operational, ensure citizens are informed about permit terms for establishments using public space.
Prepare concise inspection manuals and ensure inspectors have direct access to concession data during inspections.
Impose legally prescribed fines and administrative measures to restore public space when violations are identified. Monitor implementation of measures. Issue fines as close as possible to the time of violation. Expedite removal of unlawful permanent structures.

Where is the problem with the rule of law?

Under the rule of law, public authorities must establish and apply an effective legal framework that protects public space.

However, the Court of Audit’s report documents a “vague regulatory framework” and significant gaps in the application of rules intended to safeguard public space in Greece.

Thodoris Chondrogiannos

More

Court of Audit: Court of Audit documents ‘vague rules’ and gaps in the protection of public space

A new audit report by the Court of Audit documents a “vague regulatory framework” and gaps in the application of rules governing the protection of public space in Greece.

1. Via bank transfer (alphabank)

2. Via PAYPAL

3. Via DONORBOX (monthly or annual contribution)