GREECE Law and Practice Contributed by: Petros Machas, Dimitris Zanganas and Katerina Chrysi, Machas & Partners
and does not infringe the procedural rights of those involved. In practice, Greek tax and anti-money laun - dering authorities already employ digital systems and analytical tools to detect and investigate offences such as tax evasion and money laundering. However, the use of technology is subject to legal constraints. General safeguards – such as data protection rules, fair trial guarantees, and the principle of proportional - ity – apply. More intrusive measures, particularly the interception of communications, are strictly regulated under Law 5002/2022: they require a reasoned judicial order, must relate to a limited list of serious felony offences, be supported by sufficient indications, and be justified by the absence of less intrusive means of obtaining the information. Such measures are author - ised for a maximum period of two months and may be renewed, up to an overall maximum duration of ten months. 2.5 Internal Investigations and Co-Operation Internal investigations are not mandatory under Greek criminal law, but companies often use them to under - stand what has happened and to co-operate with the authorities. In this context, businesses may carry out internal audits by entrusting relevant data and infor - mation to independent financial auditors, in order to clarify the facts and ensure that responsibility is prop - erly attributed. Such internal reviews may also serve to assess and test the evidentiary findings of the authorities’ investi - gation or even operate as a means of rebuttal against the conclusions of official audit bodies (for example, the General Directorate of Financial Transaction Audits or other specialised financial and tax control units). Their use is subject to legal limits. Data must be han - dled in accordance with Law 4624/2019 (implement - ing the GDPR). In employment law, employees gen - erally have a duty to co-operate with their employer, including in internal investigations. However, this is balanced by fundamental criminal law protections, especially the right not to self-incriminate. Companies are not obliged to share the results of internal investigations with the authorities. At the same time, authorities have strong investigative powers, such as questioning employees, carrying out search -
es, and seizing documents. However, they cannot, in principle, access material protected by legal profes - sional privilege. Voluntary disclosure or co-operation is not required by law, but it may be positively assessed either dur - ing the adjudication of the case or in determining the penalties imposed. 2.6 Right to Not Co-Operate or Self- Incriminate Under Greek criminal law, any offence committed in flagrante delicto – including financial crimes – may lead to arrest and immediate presentation before the authorities. In cases of non-flagrant offences, the Pub - lic Prosecutor orders a preliminary examination and, where sufficient indications arise, misdemeanours are referred for trial, while felonies lead to the initiation of a main investigation. A person accused of a felony is legally required to appear in person before the investi - gating judge to give a statement. Failure to do so may result in the issuance of an arrest warrant. Both suspects and accused persons have the right to remain silent and the privilege against self-incrim - ination, as provided under the Code of Criminal Pro - cedure (Article 104) and the European Convention on Human Rights (Article 6). By contrast, witnesses are generally under a legal obligation to co-operate. They must appear when summoned, testify under oath and cannot refuse to testify or be represented by another person. Limited exceptions apply, notably in cases of professional privilege (eg, lawyers, doctors and clergy). If a duly summoned witness fails to appear without justifica - tion, a warrant for compulsory appearance may be issued and a financial penalty imposed. Continued refusal to appear or to testify without lawful grounds may lead to criminal liability for disobedience (Article 231, CCP). Furthermore, a witness who appears but refuses to testify or provides false testimony may be prosecuted for false testimony (Article 224, CCP). 2.7 Pre-Charge Powers Asset freezing constitutes one of the most commonly applied coercive investigative measures in the context of financial crime investigations. It is provided for both
75 CHAMBERS.COM
Powered by FlippingBook