The revelations published by Greek newspaper Efimerida ton Syntakton (EFSYN), which indicated the government’s National Intelligence Service (EYP) had secretly been conducting monitoring of Malichudis, pose serious questions over journalistic source protection and the right to privacy in Greece, which is already facing growing questions over a decline in media freedom.

The November 14 report revealed that the EYP, which gathers intelligence on national security, had requested information on citizens, including a lawyer, a journalist, a worker for a United Nations agency focused on migration and protest organisers. The information was leaked to the newspaper by a whistle-blower. The newspaper redacted the names and private information of the journalist and others who were monitored. However, Malichudis recognised the description of events and identified himself as the journalist in the story.

The alleged surveillance relates to an article that Malichudis and the director of Solomon, Iliana Papangeli, had published in April 2021, seven months prior to the newspaper’s revelations. Their article had reported on a 12-year-old boy from Syria living in a refugee holding camp on the island of Kos, whose artwork was exhibited in a museum and then published on the website of the French newspaper Le Monde. In April, Malichudis, a freelance journalist who works for AFP, is a member of Solomon and collaborates with Investigate Europe and Reporters United, had tried to track down the boy to interview him about his artistic success and the experiences of his family reaching Europe. The journalists had not informed anyone outside Solomon of their plans.

A redacted file published by EFSYN showed that while Malichudis was researching the story, officials at EYP’s headquarters sent a request to colleagues based on Kos asking them to confirm whether the boy and his family were being held in the camp and to gather information. The request included Malichudis’s name and ID number and said the EYP had information “from a source of high reliability” that the journalist was planning to speak with the family. Solomon was also mentioned by name. It also requested information on an employee of the International Organization for Migration (IOM) in Greece, a source with whom Malichudis had spoken on the phone before the conversation switched to an encrypted messaging app.

#Greece: IPI is deeply concerned by reports that investigative journalism outlet @we_are_solomon & @AFP reporter @Malichudis were secretly monitored by the National Intelligence Service.@EFSYNTAKTON @reporters_gr @MediaFreedomEU https://t.co/t87XjpPXl4

— IPI-The Global Network for Independent Journalism (@globalfreemedia) November 16, 2021

The Greek authorities have yet to deny the alleged surveillance of the journalist. Given the seriousness of the allegations, and the paucity of information provided by authorities so far, our organisations urge the government to provide immediate answers to parliament as to why the National Intelligence Service had knowledge of Malichudis’s reporting before it was published. Information should also be made public about exactly how this information was gathered and the nature of the “reliable sources” the EYP had on his work. Details must also be provided about why a request was made to monitor the journalist’s confidential source, with whom he spoke only in a telephone call and an encrypted messaging app, and how the EYP had knowledge of these private communications.

The evidence provided so far indicates that Malichudis and possibly other members of the team at Solomon have had their communication illegally monitored without their knowledge and that this information was then shared with a state security agency tracking their work. In addition to raising serious privacy concerns, this surveillance would constitute a clear interference in the freedom of the press and a serious violation of the confidentiality of journalistic sources, which is protected under Article 10 of the European Convention of Human Rights. These rights are a fundamental element of media freedom, and confirmation of their violation would have a chilling effect on watchdog journalism and undermine transparency by discouraging whistle-blowers to come forward.

Given that the EYP’s mandate is to investigate threats to Greece’s national security, we also question why a journalist’s reporting on a refugee’s experience in a holding camp should even be justified as a legitimate target for intelligence gathering of any form. Immediate justification should be provided as to why this was the case. If such a human-interest story drew the attention of the EYP, it then begs the question to what extent the security services are monitoring the work of investigative journalists probing an issue such as illegal pushbacks. We hope this case is not the tip of the iceberg of wider surveillance of journalists by state authorities, which we have recently observed in other EU member states. The longer the Greek government remains silent or dodges questions, the longer it will invite scrutiny. The Special Standing Committee on Institutions and Transparency should examine this case as a matter of priority.

Our organisations stand in solidarity with Stavros Malichudis and the journalistic team at Solomon, which is a current grantee of the Investigative Journalism for Europe (IJ4EU) fund led by the International Press Institute (IPI), and whose work documenting the stories of unaccompanied minors in Moria’s refugee camp was nominated for a major European journalism award. Moving forward, we will continue to monitor this case closely and will demand concrete answers from the government on this issue during an MFRR media freedom mission to Greece later this year. In the meantime, we also urge the European Commission and European Parliament to seek immediate responses from the Greek government about these extremely serious allegations.

This statement was coordinated by the Media Freedom Rapid Response (MFRR), a Europe-wide mechanism which tracks, monitors and responds to violations of press and media freedom in EU Member States and Candidate Countries.

On 17 November 2021, Beugel, a Dutch freelance correspondent, revealed she planned to leave the country over fears for her safety after she experienced an aggressive smear campaign online and in pro government media following her questioning of PM Kyriakos Mitsotakis on 9 November over allegations of his country’s illegal pushbacks.

During the joint press conference with the Dutch PM Mark Rutte, Beugel openly asked the Greek PM when he would “stop lying” about the pushbacks, to which Mitsotakis responded: “Look, you will not come into this building and insult me. Am I very clear on this?” The exchange was shared widely on social media, garnering both praise and criticism.

Beugel was then targeted with insults and accused of spreading Turkish propaganda. She was also the focus of attempts to discredit her by numerous media in Greece, including comments which accused her of spreading lies and being a “pro-Turkish” agent. Other reports delved into her personal life. Recently, she was hit by a stone thrown at her by a man in a dark street, who called her a “Turkish spy”.

“The threats and violence against Beugel, as well as her involuntary departure from Greece, are unacceptable”, IPI Deputy Director Scott Griffen said. “Journalists fulfilling their watchdog role and asking uncomfortable questions – however pointedly – about a matter of clear public interest should never face such extreme intimidation. The shameful and coordinated attempt to discredit Beugel work and bully her out of the country raises yet more worrying questions about press freedom in Greece. IPI stands in full solidarity with the journalist and will offer practical assistance through the Media Freedom Rapid Response project.”

Since the press conference, the threats directed at her have become increasingly severe, Beugel told IPI. “I cannot return to the island of Hydra where I have a house, because people will throw stones and tomatoes at me, and I will be attacked. I cannot leave the house unaccompanied anymore. Some newspapers now write multiple negative stories about me each day. My life here has become very unsafe.”

Beugel, who is a permanent resident and has lived in Greece for 40 years, said that the online harassment and threats she was facing had made it impossible to remain in the country. “People write that my head should be shaved, that I should drown together with the refugees, that I deserve to be tarred and feathered. Many of the comments are very sexist. I cannot read it anymore.”

#Greece 🇬🇷: Attempts to discredit Dutch journalist @IBeugel after exchange with PM Mitsotakis

Read the alert 👉🏻https://t.co/64MoszJobL
Report new threats 👉🏻 https://t.co/t9qqwS3PAd
#MFRR #ReportIt pic.twitter.com/zyZQKDjeKm

— Media Freedom Rapid Response (MFRR) (@MediaFreedomEU) November 10, 2021

Beugel said the harassment was part of a wider campaign to silence critics of Greece’s migration policies. “They intimidate, demonize and criminalize aid workers and NGOs that help refugees, and all those who question the policies and the pushback of migrants”, she said. “Many journalists on the Aegean islands are arrested and interrogated, their material is taken from them and from TV crews. Many get slapped with court cases. I have two court cases against me. The only goal is to make people afraid and to have a chilling effect on others to speak out.”

Beugel made the decision to leave the country after security advice from the Dutch Foreign Ministry and the Dutch embassy in Greece, as well as the Dutch Journalists’ Association NVJ. “They all told me my safety is not guaranteed here”, she said. “Then the only right decision is to come home for a while at this point.” She said she would return home for an “indefinite period” and one day wished to return to Greece.

The journalist will file a complaint with the Greek police over some of the threats she received. When exactly she will return to the Netherlands has been kept a secret for her safety. She was previously arrested in June 2021 and is currently facing trial in Greece on charges of illegally hosting an Afghan refugee in her house, which carries a 12-month prison sentence and fine of €5,000.

Despite the threats, her questions at the press conference have also led to some positive development, she added: “After my remarks, a fierce debate has finally exploded in Greek society about the close government involvement in the media”, she said. People tell me that I have brought both matters – lies about pushbacks and the quality of journalism – on the political agenda with just one question.”

IPI is concerned about Greece’s deteriorating state of press freedom, after multiple violations against journalists occurred this year. On April 9, the Greek journalist George Karaivaz was brutally murdered by unknown individuals in a suburb of Athens. More recently, parliament voted to approve a vaguely-worded legal amendment to the criminal code which allows journalists to be prosecuted and jailed for publishing “false news” deemed capable of causing “concern or fear to the public or undermining public confidence in the national economy, the country’s defense capacity or public health”. On November 15, the Greek journalist Stavros Malichudis was reported to have been secretly surveilled and monitored by the National Intelligence Service over a report about a refugee child from Syria.

This statement by IPI is part of the Media Freedom Rapid Response (MFRR), a Europe-wide mechanism which tracks, monitors and responds to violations of press and media freedom in EU Member States and Candidate Countries.

On 19 October 2021, the cooperative journalistic website Alterthess in Thessaloniki received the lawsuit filed against them by Efstathios Lialios, an executive at the firm Hellas Gold. It demanded €100,000 in damages over an article the site had published on 27 October 2020, alleging it had illegally processed his “sensitive personal data”  when it reported his criminal conviction. It argued the plaintiff’s names should not have been published and that Lialios’s reputation was damaged as a result, jeopardising his ability to find new work. The lawsuit also threatened Poulimeni with criminal sanctions.

The article, ‘Two high-ranking executives of Hellas Gold were convicted of water pollution in North Halkidiki’, reported the first instance conviction of Lialios and a colleague, the then CEO of Hellas Gold, for the company’s responsibility in the systematic pollution of the local water in Halkidiki with heavy toxic metals and liquid waste. The pair were accused of failing to monitor, control or report to authorities the pollution of surface water, which vastly exceeded the legal limit and caused serious environmental degradation. Hellas Gold is a subsidiary of the Canadian Eldorado Gold Corporation.

The article by Poulimeni reported the initial verdict, which was made by the Court of First Instance of Polygyros. The Court of Appeal of Thessaloniki later confirmed the verdict on 1 September 2021, with the two executives handed a suspended sentence. Shortly after this second decision, Lialios filed the lawsuit:  a full year after the original article was written. The legal case against Alterthess and Poulimeni is due to be heard in court on 25 November 2021.

Rather than aimed at settling a legitimate legal dispute, our organisations believe it is clear that this lawsuit is aimed at silencing Alterthess and Poulimeni by forcing them into a time-consuming and costly legal battle, draining them financially and discouraging them from further reporting. For the last decade, Alterthess and Poulimeni have documented the impact of Hellas Gold’s mining operations on the environment and the local community. The extortionate financial demands seem to be an attempt to intimidate the publication and drive it to financial ruin. We therefore consider this a Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation (SLAPP).

The grounds for the lawsuit are baseless. Court reporting by journalists and media is legally protected because of the importance of informing the public at large how justice is done. The trial was held in open court, without reporting restrictions, and the verdict was publicly available. Given the seriousness of the environmental crimes, publishing the names of the plaintiffs was both standard journalistic practice and overwhelmingly in the public interest. We cannot avoid the conclusion therefore that this lawsuit is an effort by Lialios to shield himself and Hellas Gold from critical coverage and punish Alterthess for its reporting.

This lawsuit is not a proportionate or principled attempt to seek legal redress. We therefore urge Mr. Lialios to withdraw the claim and refrain from trying to weaponise civil law in the future. If the case ends up before a court, our organisations hope that the court will take into consideration the European Court of Human Rights standards on article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights. Concerningly, this is not the first time that Hellas Gold has used the threat of legal action to bully those critical of its operations. This is, however, the first time that a media outlet has been the target.

This case is yet another reminder of the need for an EU Anti-SLAPP Directive that creates preventive measures and procedural safeguards to better protect journalists from abusive lawsuits by rich and powerful individuals. The overwhelming adoption by MEPs on 11 November of a report on SLAPPs was a timely reminder of the seriousness and urgency of this issue, one that sends a clear message to the European Commission that far-reaching legislation is needed. Our organisations stand by to assist the Commission and are preparing our submission to its public consultation on anti-SLAPP regulation.

With such a Directive in place and legislation implemented at the national level, we hope cases such as this involving Alterthess will be immediately dismissed or avoided altogether. Until then, the MFRR expresses our full support and solidarity with the affected journalists and all other battling abusive gag lawsuits. We will continue to monitor this case closely, have reported the lawsuit to the Council of Europe’s platform for the protection of journalism, and will provide immediate financial support to help fund Alterthess’ legal defence.

This statement was coordinated by the Media Freedom Rapid Response (MFRR), a Europe-wide mechanism which tracks, monitors and responds to violations of press and media freedom in EU Member States and Candidate Countries.

The proposed amendments to Article 191 of the Criminal Code, brought forward by the Ministry of Justice, would include penalties for those found guilty of disseminating “false news that is capable of causing concern or fear to the public or undermining public confidence in the national economy, the country’s defense capacity or public health”. It adds: “If the transaction was performed repeatedly through the press or online, the perpetrator is punished with imprisonment of at least six months and a fine”. The publisher or owner of a media outlet responsible would also face prison and financial penalties.

Our organisations understand the serious threat that misinformation poses to Greek society and other states around the world. Globally, online falsehoods and conspiracy theories are distorting reality, undermining democracy and jeopardising the fight against the Covid-19 pandemic. Social media companies, individual citizens and governments themselves all have a role to play in countering the spread of harmful misinformation online.

However, the passing of heavy-handed legislation by governments which grants regulators or prosecutors the power to decide true from false and levy punitive fines on the press is not the correct response and would result in more harm than good. As we have seen around the globe, subjective interpretation of such vaguely worded laws can open the door to censorship of legitimate reporting. Media in Greece already face threats from abusive litigation and jail sentences for criminal defamation. Strengthening Article 191 would only create an additional avenue for journalists to face prosecution and jail time. Even when not applied directly, the potential for self-censorship under such legislation is enormous.

Like other similar legislative proposals around the world, the amendment contains no clear definition of “false news”. The term is ambiguously defined, broadly applicable and open to misuse. Particularly problematic is the sanctioning of reports “capable of causing concern” or which “undermines public confidence” in state authorities. Journalism which holds power to account naturally shakes the public’s trust in government, just as investigative reporting causes legitimate public concern or anger. Under such a vaguely worded law, this kind of vital watchdog journalism could be targeted by political leaders intent on limiting criticism of their policies. Journalistic unions in Greece have rightly criticised the amendment, warning it could lead to journalists being jailed or fined for reporting on issues such as the pandemic.

Rather than improving the existing Article 191 of the Criminal Code, which is already problematic, the government of Prime Minister Kyriakos Mitsotakis would take a major step backwards if this law were eventually passed and send a worrying signal about the administration’s commitment to media freedom. Within the European Union, similar knee-jerk reactions to tackling misinformation during the pandemic were attempted in Romania and Bulgaria: both were either vetoed or withdrawn after staunch criticism from EU institutions. The only country to press ahead was Hungary, which criminalised the spread of misinformation deemed to undermine the authorities’ fight against Covid-19 with fines and prison sentences.

We urge the Greek Ministry of Justice to withdraw the amendment immediately and, should the government decide to press ahead, call on lawmakers to reject the proposal. In an era where politicians increasingly accuse critical journalism of being “fake news”, in the wrong hands such a law would be extremely dangerous. The Ministry of Justice should meet with Greece’s journalist unions and international media freedom organisations to listen to their concerns. Ultimately, the best way to address misinformation is not through government regulation. Rather, what is needed is a strong, professional, pluralist and independent press which can provide the public with reliable sources of information. If the Greek government is serious about tackling the spread of false information, initiatives to protect the safety of (investigative) journalists, develop media literacy and ensure a strong and vibrant media market with a high degree of pluralism are far better places to start.

Correction: This statement was changed to reflect that the proposed amendments pertain to the Criminal Code and not the Civil Code