a. Freedom of the Press
The constitution and law provided for freedom of expression, including for members of the press and other media, and the government generally respected this right. An independent media, an effective judiciary, and a functioning democratic political system combined to promote freedom of expression, including for media members. Domestic and international agencies, however, reported that journalists and media outlets faced pressure to avoid criticizing the government or reporting scandals.
The constitution and law protected freedom of expression but allowed restrictions on speech inciting discrimination, hatred, or violence against persons or groups based on their race, skin color, religion, descent, national or ethnic origin, sexual orientation, sex “identity,” or disability.
Physical Attacks, Imprisonment, and Pressure
On October 11, an Athens first instance court rejected a lawsuit filed by former chief of staff to the prime minister Grigoris Dimitriadis against several media outlets and journalists for defamation following their reporting on a wiretapping scandal. In his lawsuit, which the International Press Institute had called “a startling example of a strategic lawsuit against public participation,” Dimitriadis alleged he had lost his job and suffered reputational harm due to their news stories concerning the scandal. The court ruled the journalists’ publications were made in the public interest and did not intend to harm Dimitriadis’ reputation.
A July EU Rule of Law Report found seven cases of harassment or intimidation of journalists in the country, compared with 16 during the previous year. In a joint statement, several media-freedom-related organizations asserted that the EU report was misleading, overly positive, and at odds with “the alarming reality experienced by journalists, activists, and civil society organizations on the ground.” The statement argued the EU report would embolden the government’s “crackdown on independent media and civil society.”
On May 14, reporter Rena Kouvelioti was physically attacked by an unknown individual while Kouvelioti was reporting on unauthorized building near a construction site. The Journalists’ Union of the Athens Daily Newspapers denounced the incident.
Censorship by Governments, Military, Intelligence, or Police Forces, Criminal Groups, or Armed Extremist or Rebel Groups
The government did not censor media. Major outlets tended not to publish unflattering news, which humanitarian groups attributed to pressure from media owners, concerns about safety or job security, or vulnerability to criminal defamation.
National television and radio media service providers had to register with the National Radio and Television Council. The government also maintained a register of accredited local websites that were required to display their certification on their homepage. A similar electronic registry was in place for regional and local press.
Efforts to Preserve the Independence of the Media
In March, the government adopted the EU European Media Freedom Act, aiming to safeguard media freedom, media pluralism, and editorial independence.
b. Worker Rights
Freedom of Association and Collective Bargaining
The law provided for the right of workers to form and join independent unions, conduct labor activities without interference, and strike.
For a trade union to be formally established, the law required a minimum of 20 founding members. The law generally protected the right to bargain collectively. Trade unions meeting the statutory minimum membership could engage in collective bargaining. If no trade union was present in an enterprise, the law allowed associations of five or more workers to engage in collective bargaining. Unions stated this allowed employers to bypass unions and bargain with smaller and less powerful associations, undermining efforts to organize genuine unions. The law allowed company-level agreements to take precedence over sector-level collective agreements in the private sector, but in all cases, the law mandated a statutory minimum wage applicable for all.
Only trade unions could call strikes. Any such decision had to be made by at least one-half of the union’s active registered members. The law permitted trade unions to convene meetings virtually. Under the law, a decision to strike could not be made if members of a union were not provided a virtual means to take part in the discussion and vote.
Courts could declare a strike illegal and abusive for a number of reasons, including if the risk of financial ruin for the enterprise disproportionately superseded the employees’ benefits. On March 14, the Civil Servants’ Confederation (ADEDY) reported that since the beginning of the year, courts declared four public servants’ strikes unlawful.
On October 22, a first instance court in Athens found a strike by the Federation of Teachers of Greece, announced for October 23, unlawful on several grounds, including the absence of the union’s general assembly approval, the limited warning period, and the absence of skeleton staff. Despite the court’s decision, the strike took place in the context of a wider call for strike by ADEDY.
The law prohibited antiunion discrimination and required reinstatement of workers fired for union activity. Legislation also prohibited the recruitment of strikebreakers throughout the duration of a lawful strike and lockouts. If calling a strike, a union had to defend the right of employees who did not take part to travel freely to and from work without hindrance or threat of corporal or psychological violence. If this clause was violated, the strike could be suspended.
The law gave authorities the right to commandeer services in national emergencies through civil mobilization orders. Anyone receiving a civil mobilization order was obliged to comply or face a prison sentence of at least three months. The law exempted individuals with a documented physical or mental disability. The law prohibited the issuance of civil mobilization orders as a means of countering strikes.
The government enforced laws protecting freedom of association, collective bargaining, and the right to strike for workers. Penalties were commensurate with those for analogous crimes, but procedures to resolve labor problems were subject to lengthy delays and appeals. Penalties were regularly applied against violators.
Forced or Compulsory Labor
See the Department of State’s annual Trafficking in Persons Report at https://www.state.gov/trafficking-in-persons-report/.
Acceptable Work Conditions
Wage and Hour Laws
The government set the national minimum salary above the poverty level for private-sector employees and unspecialized workers. The maximum legal workweek was 40 hours, although legislation provided for the ability of employees in certain private businesses, operating on a 24/7 basis, and for limited periods of time, to work an additional two hours per day or an additional eight-hour shift with wages increased by 40 percent.
Some sectors were required to issue digital work cards, allowing authorities to monitor staff hours and leave in real time. Employers could be fined for any violations of wage and hour laws, and the government could suspend business operations in case of repeated violations. Courts were required to promptly examine and issue rulings regarding employee complaints of delayed payment.
Occupational Safety and Health
The law provided minimum standards of occupational safety and health (OSH) applicable for all industries. It placed responsibility for identifying unsafe situations on occupational safety and health experts rather than workers. Workers had the right to file a confidential complaint with the Labor Inspectorate regarding working conditions and to remove themselves from such situations without jeopardizing their employment. Owners who repeatedly violated the law concerning safety standards could face temporary closure.
The government proactively identified unsafe conditions and responded to workers’ occupational, safety, and health-related complaints. Sectors in which alleged violations of OSH standards were common included manufacturing, food service, hotels, agriculture, and construction.
Wage, Hour, and OSH Enforcement
The government enforced minimum wage, hour, and OSH laws, mostly in the formal sectors of the economy and when complaints were filed. The Labor Inspectorate was responsible for enforcement of all labor laws, other than those pertaining to mining and marine shipping, which fell under the Ministry of Environment and Energy and the Ministry of Maritime Affairs and Insular Policy respectively.
Inspectors had the authority to make unannounced inspections, impose fines, and initiate sanctions. The number of inspectors was not sufficient, especially in the islands and during the tourist season. The most common offenses included digital-card-related violations; undeclared labor; nonpayment of wages, salaries, and benefits; and failure to provide data to government authorities. Penalties for violations were commensurate with similar violations such as fraud or negligence and were applied regularly.
During prolonged summer heatwaves, the Ministry of Labor banned outdoor work in the afternoon under threat of fines. Archaeological sites were closed nationwide.
Trade unions maintained that enforcement of labor standards remained inadequate in shipping, tourism, construction, manufacturing, catering, agriculture, small businesses, and the informal economy, particularly for vulnerable and marginalized groups, including migrant workers. Overtime work was not always registered officially or paid accordingly.
The informal sector accounted for approximately 20 percent of the economy and was largely concentrated in tourism, agriculture, and service sectors. Informal workers were not protected by wage, hour, occupational safety, or health laws.
c. Disappearance and Abduction
Disappearance
There were no reports of enforced disappearances by or on behalf of government authorities.
Prolonged Detention without Charges
The constitution and laws prohibited arbitrary arrest and provided for the right of any persons to challenge the lawfulness of their arrest or detention in court. The government generally observed these requirements.
On February 23, several media reported that 36 Egyptian asylum-seeking shipwreck survivors remained detained for two months in Corinth despite the ombudsperson’s call for their release. The nongovernmental organization (NGO) Equal Rights Beyond Borders stated that following the ombudsperson’s report, police officers conducted strip searches and searches in the detainees’ rooms, which the NGO interpreted as an effort to intimidate the detainees.
The law provided for the right of any person to challenge the lawfulness of their arrest or detention in court. The law prohibited arbitrary arrest and required judicial warrants for arrests, except during the commission of a crime. The law required detainees be promptly informed of the charges against them at their first court appearance.
The law required police to bring detainees before a magistrate, who should issue a detention warrant or order the detainee’s release within 24 hours. There was a functioning bail system as well as other options for release pending trial. Detainees were allowed prompt access to a lawyer of their choice, or one provided by the state. The law provided for a state-provided lawyer after a person was formally charged with a criminal offense rather than from the outset of custody.
These rights were generally respected. Indigent defendants facing felony charges received legal representation from the bar association. NGOs and international organizations provided limited legal aid to detained migrants and asylum seekers.