REPORTS
Failure of the administration to comply with a Council of State ruling on the refugee facility in Malakasa
On July 15, 2025, the Ombudsman issued a public statement regarding the prolonged failure of the administration to comply with a decision of the Council of State (CoS), despite the constitutional obligation set out in Article 95(5), which stipulates that the administration is obliged to comply with judicial decisions.
Let us examine the background of the case in detail (here we will analyze the full set of relevant documents issued by the Ombudsman: the two letters addressed to the government and the public announcement).
On February 2, 2025, the Ombudsman sent a letter to the Ministries of Migration and Environment, pointing out that they had not yet complied with Decision No. 1532/2023 of the Council of State, which ruled that the refugee facility in Malakasa, located at the Gerakini military camp, was not operating lawfully .
According to the decision of the Council of State, the area of the Gerakini military camp has been declared reforestable twice. The establishment and construction of a facility within a reforestable area is constitutionally permissible only on the condition that no other non‑reforestable and suitable areas can be found for this purpose, and that the execution of the project in this location is absolutely necessary and imperative.
In examining the case, the country’s highest administrative court ruled that in the present instance, however, the case file does not show that the Administration conducted any investigation regarding the existence of other suitable areas, based on the criteria mentioned above, which are not subject to the protection of Article 117(3) of the Constitution (concerning the obligation of reforestation), nor that it reached, with the required specific reasoning, the conclusion that no such areas exist. As a result, it does not appear that the execution of the project in this particular reforestable area, before it regains its forest character, is absolutely necessary.
The Ombudsman’s letter to the Ministries of Migration and Environment also noted that, in a previous ruling (Decision No. 1287/2022), the Council of State had granted the administration a six‑month deadline to follow the required environmental licensing procedure for the Malakasa refugee facility. Within that period, the administration was obliged either to issue an act subjecting the project to Standard Environmental Commitments or to issue a decision rejecting the request for the siting and operation of the facility in the disputed area, following, among other things, the necessary opinion of the forestry authority. However, the administration did not follow the procedure indicated by the Court to remedy the identified deficiency, according to the Independent Authority.
At this point, it should be emphasized that both the Constitution and ordinary legislation impose on the administration (including ministries and government bodies) the obligation to comply with judicial decisions.
According to Article 95(5) of the Constitution, the administration is obliged to comply with judicial decisions. Furthermore, under Article 94(4)(b) and (c) of the Constitution, the jurisdiction of civil and administrative courts includes the adoption of measures to ensure the administration’s compliance with judicial decisions, while judicial decisions are enforceable against the State, local government authorities (i.e. municipalities and regions), as well as legal entities under public law.
Indeed, pursuant to Article 1(1) of Law 3068/2002 (Official Gazette A’ 274/14.11.2002), the State, local government authorities and other legal entities under public law are obliged to comply without delay with judicial decisions and to take all actions required to fulfill this obligation and to execute the decisions. Judicial decisions, within the meaning of the previous sentence, include all decisions of administrative, civil, criminal and special courts that create an obligation of compliance or are enforceable under the relevant procedural provisions and the conditions set by each decision.
In his first letter of February 2, the Ombudsman requested that the government execute the decision of the Council of State (CoS) and provide information on the measures that had been taken or were to be taken during the transitional period for the relocation of refugees. These measures, he stressed, must ensure their safe and dignified living conditions, taking into account the special care required for vulnerable persons.
The Independent Authority followed up with a new letter to the Ministries of Migration and Environment on April 23, 2025, informing the new leadership of both ministries (following a cabinet reshuffle) of the need for the administration to comply with the CoS ruling. Both the Ombudsman’s second letter and his public announcement of July 15, 2025, indicate that for a considerable period the Greek government failed to comply with the recommendations of the Independent Authority and the aforementioned decision of the country’s highest administrative court.
In a state governed by the rule of law, the administration is obliged to comply with the decisions of the judiciary.
However, despite the explicit provision in Article 95(5) of the Constitution, in the case under examination the Greek government, and more specifically the competent Ministries of Migration and Environment, have to this day failed to fulfill their obligation to comply with Decision No. 1532/2023 of the Council of State concerning the establishment of the refugee facility in Malakasa at the Gerakini military camp.
Bank Account number: 1100 0232 0016 560
IBAN: GR56 0140 1100 1100 0232 0016 560
BIC: CRBAGRAA
In a time where the very foundations of democracy are gradually being eroded by the rise of extreme nationalism, alt-right movements, the spread of disinformation and corporate capture, the efforts of organisations such as Vouliwatch are more relevant than ever.
We rely on the generosity of each and every one of you to continue with our efforts for more transparency and accounta
By financially supporting Vouliwatch you support our litigation strategy, our campaigns for transparency and accountability in the political system, the development of new civic tech tools, our research projects and last but not least our impartial and accurate
