Greece spyware scandal deepens as four appear in court

A courtroom in Athens is set to hear the case against four privately connected individuals linked to the marketing of Predator spyware, intensifying Greece’s long-running national-security controversy and raising fresh questions about state surveillance and accountability. The four defendants—two Greeks and two Israelis—face misdemeanor charges connected to the sale and promotion of the pervasive spyware, which has become a symbol of a broader crisis that has implicated political power, the judiciary, and intelligence services.

The spyware, marketed by the Athens-based Israeli company Intellexa, can access a device’s messages, camera, and microphone, effectively turning a target’s phone into a surveillance tool. The dispute first erupted publicly in 2022 when Nikos Androulakis, then a member of the European Parliament and heading Greece’s main opposition party PASOK, was told by the EU Parliament’s IT experts that his phone had been infected with a malicious text containing Predator. He subsequently learned that he had been tracked for what officials described as “national security reasons” by Greece’s National Intelligence Service, the EYP. The case quickly intersected with a political earthquake: within a year of taking office in 2019, Prime Minister Kyriakos Mitsotakis had placed the EYP directly under the prime minister’s supervision. In the fallout, the head of the EYP, Panagiotis Kontoleon, resigned, as did the prime minister’s top aide and nephew, Grigoris Dimitriadis, who acted as the liaison between the EYP and the PM’s office.

Predator’s reach, according to the Hellenic Data Protection Authority, extended beyond individual investigations: it had been used in attempts to entrap at least 87 people, with 27 of those targeted being monitored by the EYP, including serving ministers and senior military officers. Although the government and its supporters argued that the targets were coincidence and that no law-enforcement agency had used Predator, critics pointed to a broader pattern of surveillance that appeared to span both the intelligence community and the political leadership. After the scandal broke, the government introduced a new law in 2022 intended to regulate the confidentiality of communications and place guardrails around state use of surveillance technology. Critics, however, argued that the legislation weakened the right to know whether one had been spied upon and failed to fully disclose who was behind the surveillance.

The inquiry has been punctuated by parliamentary and judicial turnover as well as intense public scrutiny. The Guardian and BBC reports, among others, have highlighted how questions about possible government involvement have persisted even as legal and institutional processes unfolded. In July 2024, a report by Greece’s Supreme Court, seen by the BBC, concluded there was “clearly no connection” between Predator and government officials. Government spokesperson Pavlos Marinakis said the report’s findings supported the view that there was no direct government involvement, although Marinakis did not respond to subsequent requests for comment by the BBC. The BBC’s reporting follows a wider European inquiry into Pegasus‑style spyware and has fed into a broader debate about how democracies handle advanced surveillance technologies.

The four defendants now in Athens face misdemeanor charges tied to the marketing of Predator. Two of the accused are reported to have ties to state officials, though critics say the investigation did not adequately explore those links. “What began as a political scandal has now evolved into an institutional scandal, tainting both the judiciary and the independent authorities,” said Thanasis Koukakis, a financial investigative journalist who has long covered Greece’s corruption cases and was among the targets of dual surveillance. His comments reflect a broader concern that oversight mechanisms may have been compromised or captured by political interests. Eliza Trintafyllou, an Inside Story journalist who has followed the affair since its inception, warned that some citizens may be left with the impression that the surveillance capabilities normally reserved for state security were being used in ways that undermine political pluralism and press freedom. “If someone has not followed the wiretapping scandal, they would think that four individuals, on their own initiative and for their own personal reasons, tapped the phones of 87 people in Greece, using advanced spyware that is otherwise marketed exclusively to state intelligence services and law enforcement authorities worldwide,” Trintafyllou said.

The case has raised enduring questions about government accountability, especially given the 2019 reforms that put the EYP under direct ministerial supervision and the subsequent long-running investigation into what happened to high‑level officials, including Konstantinos Floros, then the Chief of the National Defence General Staff, and Kostis Hatzidakis, a former cabinet member who now serves as deputy prime minister. Critics argue that if such surveillance occurred at the upper echelons of government, it would have wide implications for democracy and civil liberties. In Athens, the government has argued that legal safeguards were established and that any allegations of a broad conspiracy are unfounded, while opposition parties have pressed for more transparent inquiries into who authorized or captured surveillance activity.

The investigation into Intellexa’s operations in Greece also drew attention to law enforcement’s ability to raid the company's offices in Athens, a search that yielded little immediate evidence about the extent of state involvement. “There is a prosecutor’s report and the answers are clear. Justice has spoken. There is no doubt in what it said,” government spokesperson Pavlos Marinakis told reporters after the Supreme Court’s 2024 conclusion, though critics noted that such statements do not close the door on more politically sensitive questions about the role of senior officials in surveillance practices. The BBC has repeatedly sought comment from government officials on these matters but has not received a response to specific inquiries.

Among observers, the debate has shifted from a focus on the legality or illegality of Predator to a broader assessment of Greece’s democracy and its capacity to police powerful tools of surveillance. The European Parliament’s inquiry into Pegasus and similar spyware, PEGA, has included Greece as a focal point of scrutiny, with rapporteur Sophie in ’t Veld indicating that governments have sometimes sought to “conceal the truth” about surveillance activities. In parallel, Greece’s own ADAE, the independent Authority for the Information and Communications Security, has acknowledged the difficulties of balancing security needs with civil liberties, especially as new laws purportedly tighten confidentiality rules for communications while critics warn that such rules can obscure oversight.

As the Athens court prepares to hear the four defendants, observers say the outcome could reverberate beyond the courtroom. A verdict that stops short of addressing possible ties between private marketers and state officials could fuel ongoing questions about oversight, transparency, and the independence of Greece’s checks and balances. Analysts suggest that the case may serve as a touchstone for how Greece handles future revelations about surveillance technology, especially as international partners push for stronger governance of spyware and similar tools. The court’s decisions in the coming days will be watched closely by journalists, civil rights advocates, and policymakers in Athens and across Europe, who have warned that the misuse of surveillance technologies can have a chilling effect on democratic dissent and investigative reporting.