A column with the case behind it

On Thursday, 22 October 2026, Vasilis Floridis, a deputy prosecutor at Greece's Supreme Court (Areios Pagos) and brother of Justice Minister Giorgos Floridis, published a column in Kathimerini titled 'Vein of corruption in the justice system'. The piece criticised fellow Supreme Court officials over a council ruling that sent a close relative of a government minister, together with ten other defendants, to trial. Floridis wrote that he had taken over the case at the Supreme Court after the defendants applied, sought annulment of the second-instance ruling and their acquittal, and saw the council reject that request. He also wrote that four prosecutors who had opposed the referral recorded that the evidence behind the charges was rotten. Describing the referral itself, he wrote:

“In this case, it was not an expression of judgment behind which a judge could hide. It was the construction of a judgment.”

The column argued that corruption erodes the legitimacy of state authority and public trust in the impartial application of the law. Floridis wrote that this point has not yet been understood by everyone who holds constitutional powers in Greece.

Supreme Court leadership hits back

In a joint statement issued early on Friday, 23 October, the president and the prosecutor of the Supreme Court said that prosecutorial proposals do not bind courts or judicial councils. They added that a prosecutor who disagrees with a ruling has the legal remedies available, and that writing newspaper articles about cases he handled is not among them. The statement addressed publications about a pending case due to be heard at first instance soon, saying they contain reproaches and vaguely accuse the judges handling it of being corrupt. The statement put it this way:

“Such publications, which concern a pending case before the court of first instance, fall outside the limits of any criticism of judicial decisions and council rulings.”

Supreme Court judge Eftychis Nikopoulos and deputy prosecutor Eleni Skeparnia, who acted as press representatives for the court and the prosecutor's office, also criticised the column in statements issued the same morning. Both statements framed the matter as a question of institutional trust rather than the merits of the case.

Unions and the wider reaction

The Judges and Prosecutors Union, along with other judicial associations, condemned the column. It described the claims as built on 'fabricated judicial judgments' and noted that judges at first instance, on appeal and at the Supreme Court had all referred the case to trial. The union also recalled that Floridis had written in To Vima in 2016 that judicial officers with relatives active in politics should abstain from cases involving political figures. The Prosecutors' Union of Greece issued a sharper rebuke:

“Strict criticism of judicial and prosecutorial decisions is legitimate. Disagreement, however, even the belief that a decision is wrong, is not enough to ground allegations of corruption.”

The union cited Council of State ruling 705/2026, which it said requires an adequate factual basis for serious allegations against a judicial officer's integrity and independence. It argued that the responsibility to document public statements carries particular weight when they come from a serving senior prosecutor discussing a case he handled himself.

Disciplinary route and the wiretapping case

According to reports, only the justice minister can start disciplinary proceedings against a prosecutor. Because of the close family tie, the minister is reportedly expected to assign the matter to Deputy Justice Minister Ioannis Bougas, and the government has reportedly been informed. Zacharias Kessés, the lawyer for victims of illegal wiretapping, linked the column to that case. He said the 'vein of corruption' reaches the heart of the rule of law and that the wiretapping case demands answers. He also alleged that the investigation was closed without key cross-checks and that the case file was taken from three first-instance prosecutors shortly before charges were to be brought. These are his allegations, and the articles do not establish them.

What comes next

The Supreme Court's statement says the pending case is due to be heard at first instance soon, which is where the column's claims will be tested. The disciplinary question remains open, and the articles do not report a decision on it or a timetable for one.