The Administrative Plenary Session of the Greek Supreme Court, sitting behind closed doors, rejected as inadmissible, by 72 votes to 10, an appeal lodged by the European Public Prosecutor’s Office (EPPO), headed by European Chief Prosecutor Laura Kovesi.

The appeal sought to annul a recent decision of the 11-member Supreme Judicial Council for Civil and Criminal Justice of the Greek Supreme Court, which extended the terms of office of the three Greek European Delegated Prosecutors — Popi Papandreou, Charikleia Thanou and Dionysios Mouzakis — by two years, without taking into account the decision of the College of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office, which had renewed their mandates for five years.

The EPPO appeal was rejected on the grounds that Greek legislation governing the service status of judicial officers provides that only judges and prosecutors themselves may appeal to the Supreme Court’s Plenary Session, and only if they have received at least two votes in their favour (a minority position) before the Supreme Judicial Council. In this case, however, the decision had been unanimous.

The court therefore ruled that the EPPO appeal was inadmissible, meaning that it had no legal standing to appeal on behalf of the three European Delegated Prosecutors.

During the Plenary Session, which Laura Kovesi did not attend, constitutional law professor Spyros Vlachopoulos presented arguments focusing on the primacy of European Union law. He stressed that the five-year renewal had been decided for all European prosecutors by the EPPO College in Luxembourg and argued that individual member states could not renew mandates at their own discretion, as this would jeopardise the unity of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office.

Mr Vlachopoulos further argued that, in order to definitively clarify which body has jurisdiction over renewals, given that the EPPO is a relatively new institution, the Supreme Court Plenary Session should submit a preliminary reference to the Court of Justice of the European Union. This position was supported by the minority within the Plenary Session, both regarding whether Laura Kövesi had the right to lodge the appeal and regarding which authority is competent to renew the mandates of European Delegated Prosecutors.

Proceedings before the Administrative Plenary Session were very brief, with Mr Vlachopoulos being given only six minutes to present his arguments.

It is recalled that last November the College of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office, composed of the European Chief Prosecutor and 24 European Prosecutors, one from each participating EU member state, unanimously renewed — following a proposal by Ms Kovesi — the mandates of the three Greek European Delegated Prosecutors for a further five years. That decision by the College had reportedly caused dissatisfaction among judges and prosecutors at the Greek Supreme Court.

However, Justice Minister Giorgos Floridis followed the formally prescribed procedure ahead of the expiry of the terms of office of the three Greek European Delegated Prosecutors at the end of June and submitted the relevant questions to the Supreme Court.

The 11-member Supreme Judicial Council convened last month (11 May 2026) and unanimously decided to extend the mandates of the three Greek European Delegated Prosecutors by two years. The Council included Supreme Court President Anastasia Papadopoulou and Supreme Court Prosecutor Konstantinos Tzavellas, while Vice-President Panagiotis Lyberopoulos served as rapporteur.

The 11 senior judicial officials participating in the Council concluded that the terms of office of the three Greek European Delegated Prosecutors should be extended and that they should remain within the EPPO for a further two years in order to complete the pending case files currently under their responsibility.

At the beginning of the disputed session, Council members first examined whether the mandates of the three prosecutors should be extended at all. Once they approved an extension in principle, they subsequently determined that it should be for a period of two years.

This was because Council members concluded that, under the Greek Constitution and applicable legislation, the authority to renew, extend or decline to extend the mandates of European Delegated Prosecutors falls exclusively within the jurisdiction of the Supreme Judicial Council.

As a result, the Council did not renew the mandates of the three Greek European Delegated Prosecutors for five years, as decided by the EPPO College, but instead opted for a two-year extension.

The issue of renewing the mandates of the three Greek European Delegated Prosecutors has attracted considerable political and judicial attention in recent months due to case files forwarded by the EPPO to Parliament concerning the OPEKEPE affair.

Nevertheless, the EPPO filed an application before the Supreme Court Plenary Session seeking the annulment of the Supreme Judicial Council’s decision granting a two-year extension to the three prosecutors.

The EPPO argued that the only competent authority to renew the mandates of Greek European Delegated Prosecutors is the College of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office, which has already decided on a five-year renewal.

The EPPO further maintained that the Supreme Judicial Council established under Article 90 of the Greek Constitution is competent only in matters such as promotions, appointments, transfers and related issues concerning Greek judges and prosecutors within Greek territory, and not in matters relating to the mandates of Greek judicial officers serving within a European institution, for whom specific provisions of European Union law apply.

This is particularly so, the EPPO argued, given that the Greek judicial officers concerned had already been appointed to European positions through the lawful procedures provided for by the European Union.

At the same time, the EPPO argued that the relevant European regulation provides for a five-year renewal of the mandates of European Delegated Prosecutors, rather than a term extension, as decided by the Supreme Judicial Council.