Water pricing was a key topic in the Grand Plenary of the Council of State following a petition for annulment submitted by six federations, unions (including employees of EYDAP and EYATH), and 20 individual water consumers.

The Grand Plenary of the Council of State, presided over by Michalis Pikramenos, with State Councilor Olga Zygoura as the rapporteur, will examine the plaintiffs’ arguments, which call for the annulment of the September 26, 2024, JMD as unconstitutional and in violation of both European and Greek legislation. The contested decision concerns the “determination of general rules for the costing and pricing of water services, improvement measures, procedures, and methods for recovering the cost of water services in various uses.”

Essentially, the Plenary is called to decide, among other things, whether transferring the authority for regulating water service pricing—previously handled by the State and Local Government Organizations (OTAs)—to an independent regulatory authority, namely the Waste, Energy, and Water Regulatory Authority (RAAEY), ensures that water services remain under public interest terms. The goal is to guarantee that water remains affordable for all citizens, as required by the Constitution.

Additionally, the Council of State will determine whether the contested decision adopts a pricing methodology for water supply and sewerage services that, in effect, turns water into a commercial product, without ensuring the provision of affordable services to citizens or effectively protecting water resources.

From the perspective of the unions, it was emphasized that the real aim is to increase provider revenues by raising consumption rates, while also shifting operating costs onto consumers—something that would lead to continuous price hikes.

Furthermore, the plaintiffs argued that the contested JMD of September 26, 2024, essentially reinstates regulations that the Council of State had already annulled in 2022 on the same issue. The new JMD merely replaces and removes certain articles from the previous 2017 decision, but its core content remains unchanged from the annulled version.

According to the plaintiffs, the contested decision violates European Directive 2000/60/EC, domestic legislation, and constitutional provisions, including Articles 5, 21, 25, and 106 of the Constitution.

They also pointed out that the constitutionally mandated public and municipal oversight of this vital public service is being weakened, leading to “uncertainty regarding the continued provision of water services under public service terms—meaning with security, universal access, high quality, and affordable pricing.”

On the other hand, EYDAP argued that the decision complies with the European directive and that its implementation in Greece follows the same model used in other European countries, such as France, Germany, Spain, and Italy.

EYDAP clarified that cost recovery would occur gradually and could, under certain conditions, reach full cost recovery in specific river basins in the future. Full cost recovery is not prohibited by the European directive.

Additionally, EYDAP emphasized that industrial and agricultural water use—both of which place the greatest strain on the environment—are subject to significantly higher charges based on the “polluter pays” principle.

The Waste, Energy, and Water Regulatory Authority (RAAEY) has acquired certain responsibilities, but this does not mean that the duties of municipalities, regional authorities, decentralized administrations, and the Ministry of Environment have been abolished, EYDAP concluded.

Interventions in favor of the contested JMD were made by EYDAP, EYATH, and RAAEY, which were present during the hearing.

Finally, outside the Council of State, employees of public and municipal water management enterprises, environmental organizations, and citizens gathered to defend the public character of water and to ensure that “water does not become as expensive as electricity.”

The Plenary has reserved its decision for a later date.