In response to the recent arrest of 12 Public Health Supervisors implicated in an extortion ring, the Attica regional governor, Nikos Hardalias, has placed all involved on immediate leave. This extortion ring also included employees from the Municipal Police of Athens and the Ministry of Culture.

According to authorities, of the 12 arrested, nine were employed in the audit services of the Central Sector and three in the Northern Sector. Following a previous crackdown in the Directorate of Transport, the regional governor is expected to implement significant changes in the health control services to ensure transparency and prevent illegal activities.

The upcoming changes will focus on three main areas:

1. Implementation of Safety Measures: Establishing safeguards within control mechanisms to prevent corruption.
2. Strengthening Internal Audit: Upgrading the Internal Audit service from a department to a full Directorate.
3. Restructuring Health Control Crews: Implementing a lottery system for crew assignments, with results announced at the last minute.

“Zero tolerance for any illegal action that tarnishes the district’s prestige and insults the citizens,” stated Hardalias, overseeing these reforms in the health control service.

PASOK Members Involved and Suspended

Two employees of the Ministry of Culture, who are also PASOK members, have been implicated in the extortion ring. Following reports of their involvement, PASOK/KINAL suspended their party membership. These individuals, an archaeologist and a craftsman, were listed as accomplices but were not arrested with the ring’s 14 main members.

The PASOK-Movement for Change Ethics Committee announced: “Due to their alleged involvement in a criminal case now in the public domain, the Ethics Committee has suspended the party status of two members until the end of the criminal proceedings.”

Ministry of Culture Actions

The Ministry of Culture, under Minister Lina Mendonis, has also suspended the two employees from their duties. The Ministry’s announcement on Tuesday stated: “Following documentation from the Greek Police on the criminal and disciplinary actions of Ministry employees, Minister Lina Mendonis has decided to immediately suspend the implicated officials, adhering to the Civil Servants Code and the prescribed zero-tolerance policy.”

Three Ministry of Culture employees are involved in the ring’s activities, which include extorting shopkeepers, hotel owners, and property owners for hefty fees. The ring was dismantled after a thorough investigation and coordinated operation by the Internal Affairs Service of the Security Forces.

One key figure, a 63-year-old architect-engineer employed in the Service of New Monuments and Technical Projects of Attica, Eastern Central Greece, and the Cyclades, held a high-ranking position and played a significant role in the organization. This individual is among the 14 arrested, facing charges of membership in a criminal organization and other offenses.

While maintaining constant communication with the woman alleged to be the leader of the network and following her explicit orders, the Ministry of Culture employee drafted fake certificates using her department’s stamp and attempted to influence the council members examining her clients’ requests to secure the necessary permits for their building works.

Given the high protection fee for these particular property owners and the high risk involved in her illegal activities, the 63-year-old was one of the best-paid members of the organization, with her earnings estimated to be between 6,000 and 10,000 euros per case.

She also operated in Mykonos.

It’s worth noting that among the cases the Ministry of Culture employee was involved in was the construction of a new, luxurious clothing and accessory store by a famous foreign designer in Mykonos town, which was recently inaugurated. To secure the necessary documents for this store and another under-construction store on Ermou Street in Athens, she allegedly received a payment of 6,000 euros, which, as revealed from the communications held by the authorities, she collected in her office from the brother of the ring leader, who acted as the collector-treasurer.

The Ministry of Culture employee, who was arrested in flagrante delicto, faces charges of being part of a criminal organization, bribery, falsification of documents, breach of official secrecy, and dereliction of duty, all committed professionally and continuously. Additionally, she is accused of violating the Immigration Code, possibly related to a ten-year Georgian passport in the name of a 53-year-old Georgian woman, which was confiscated during the search of her home.

The Accomplices

Meanwhile, the second list includes nine individuals who were not members of the criminal organization but assisted in at least one instance of its illegal activity, including two more Ministry of Culture employees. These are a 55-year-old archaeologist and a 54-year-old laborer, both union members, facing charges of bribery, breach of official secrecy, and dereliction of duty.

Since their involvement in the network was not continuous, they were not arrested in flagrante delicto but will be summoned to testify before the competent authorities in the coming days.

Photographic evidence of transactions among the members of the extortion ring of the Municipality of Athens

It should be noted that protothema.gr presented photographic evidence of the transactions between members of the extortion ring, including employees of the Municipal Police of Athens. The organization was dismantled by experienced officers of the Internal Affairs Service of the Hellenic Police, who, after monitoring and analyzing the conversations, proceeded with 14 arrests.

During the investigation, the following photos from the meetings in question were revealed.

In the first photo, a meeting between a municipal police officer and one of the two leaders is depicted. A paper bag can be seen on the chair, which police officers believe contained a sum of money. Other photos show a money transaction between the brother of the alleged leader and a businessman. The money is highlighted with a red circle.

The conversations that incriminated the extortionists

The conversations between the organization members, consisting of private individuals and municipal police employees, were also revealing. The leaders, a 43-year-old woman, and a 64-year-old man, approached shopkeepers primarily in the Athens area, offering them protection to avoid administrative violations.

The conversations reveal that the money involved was substantial, with some businessmen expressing complaints about their treatment by the network. In one conversation, a businessman addresses the 43-year-old woman as “Nancy.”

Businessman: Nancy, I think that giving 12,000 euros this year and 16,000 euros last year and receiving this treatment is not the best. I would appreciate a very serious meeting this week. Certainly, it is not the treatment for someone who gave 16,000 euros last year for this deal. What kind of protection is it to have us closed for two days and have us put a seal? This is the protection we pay for?

In another conversation, the two leaders discuss a store.

Member 1: Keep an eye on the store. You know, the one on F.
Member 2: What should I do now? Are they going there now?

Member 1: They won’t go now. There are many complaints. They will raid it, and we won’t know.
Member 2: Mmm.

Member 1: Just tell him, don’t be too blatant, my friend. Somehow, but where can this person go.
Member 2: What should I say there?

Member 1: Well, what can I tell you, Nancy? I’m just telling you what they tell me so that we can inform them, so they don’t say we don’t inform them. We tell them. There are some things. Now I don’t know why he does that. And he’s taking it upon himself. Because now these people look at electronic complaints, where there is no control over the situation. They just hear some things and prepare to raid without informing. Do you understand? Because supposedly there is a leak. So, through this process, we know something will happen. We don’t know when. Of course, those teams that go out, inform those who can inform and are closer to them that if you go there, you will be very careful. Do you understand? If you encounter our pair, it’s different.
Member 2: (Unintelligible content).

Member 1: If you encounter some other jerk, K. and F., and so on, he will.
Member 2: F. usually goes to F.

Member 1: Yes. All right. If you encounter him, don’t get involved. Do you understand what I’m saying now? I have marked F. for another issue, just so you know.
Member 2: Mmm.

In another conversation, the 43-year-old “leader” talks with a health inspector.

Leader: Did you go to those places you were telling me about?
Health Inspector: We went to one of the two on Friday.

Leader: Can you talk now or not?
Health Inspector: We went to the bakery.

Leader: Ah, the bakery.
Health Inspector: We just write the stupid checklists, and we are in such a phase.

Leader: And? What did he say?
Health Inspector: Nothing, he was making excuses, but it’s a bakery, he didn’t get it right from L. He makes regular bread there.

Leader: Right, I told him too, but he didn’t listen.
Health Inspector: Yeah. Ah.

Leader: What did you tell him?
Health Inspector: This.

Leader: Ah.
Health Inspector: And we found. For the.

The health inspector then meets another unknown person named “Irene” and talks with her.

Health Inspector: And what else did we find, Irene? For the.

Irene: He makes bagels.
Health Inspector: He makes bagels and bread, which is a bakery product. The warmer’s temperature was not correct. What else did he have? I don’t remember now.
Irene: Ah, he didn’t have allergens.
Health Inspector: Allergens. Are you listening?
Leader: Yes, I’m listening to what you’re saying.
Irene: Let’s look at them a bit.
Leader: Tell me, doesn’t this have penalties? Because it’s the second, a re-inspection, doesn’t it have penalties?
Health Inspector: Now because he has done some things, he had done some things, the penalties are not yet in the sense that it’s partial compliance. He has done it. If he had done nothing, it would go for suspension of operation.
Leader: Okay, so you have to wait to go for another re-inspection.
Health Inspector: Yes.
Leader: And then impose penalties if needed.
Health Inspector: Mmm.
Leader: Got it. That’s why he hasn’t called me.
Health Inspector: We didn’t tell you, of course.
Leader: No, but look, he probably asked, if you told him that we would do partial compliance, he would probably fix the rest logically.
Health Inspector: No, we didn’t say even partial compliance, we didn’t tell him anything. We told him the problems he has.
Leader: Okay, good for him, okay. Did you scare him a bit?
Health Inspector: Scared him a bit or?
Irene: A little (unintelligible content).
Health Inspector: Yeah? A little, because I didn’t notice.
Leader: Like that.
Health Inspector: We were so tired we couldn’t see in front of us. (Laughter).
Leader: Great success.
Health Inspector: Walking.
Leader: When will you go to the other one? The one I told you to go to and the one above if needed?
Health Inspector: To the other one, we’ll go God willing on Thursday.
Leader: Ah, you will go and the one above, remember?
Health Inspector: What did you say, the one above?
Leader: J.
Health Inspector: J.
Leader: I’ll send you the location.
Health Inspector: Ah, yeah, send it.
Leader: It’s in-house, got it? Don’t.
Health Inspector: Yeah, yeah.
Leader: Okay, we don’t need to take there.
Health Inspector: Okay.

Conversation between the leader and an urban planning employee.

Urban Planner: Hey. In the binder.
Leader: Hey, it disconnected in the car, so tell me.
Urban Planner: Unintelligible content.
Leader: This probably means archive.
Urban Planner: No, it means archive, maybe someone took it out, we always write archive and in the binders. Maybe someone took it out to use it. I asked M., but he hasn’t been involved. I asked T., he hasn’t been involved. So?
Leader: Well, that’s good.
Urban Planner: I can’t, I can’t find it as a document, but I’ll find it. What do I mean by finding it? It’s never happened that you search for something and don’t find it, it’s just a matter of time.
Leader: Look, I hope it goes to the archive because I want to send it.

The following conversation between the leader and a shopkeeper is also revealing.

Leader: Hey George, it’s Nancy, what’s up?
Shopkeeper: Hi Nancy, how are you?
Leader: Have you left the money for me?
Shopkeeper: Which ones are we talking about now? Remind me.
Leader: A thousand euros for Aristogeitonos Street. We agreed on the 22nd of the month.
Shopkeeper: Was it the 22nd or the 25th we said?
Leader: The 22nd.
Shopkeeper: We said the 25th for the municipal, right?
Leader: We agreed on the 22nd for the first payment. Let me tell you the dates because I’ve noted them down correctly.
Shopkeeper: Ah yes, for (unintelligible content).
Leader: I wrote them down while you were telling me (unintelligible content). So, the 22nd, today, and the 29th for the rest. A thousand on the 22nd, and one thousand two hundred fifty on the 29th. And then after Easter.
Shopkeeper: The thousand euros. Is this for the health department? Ah, no, we split it into two.
Leader: No, no.
Shopkeeper: Yes, okay, okay. A thousand today and one thousand two hundred at the end of the month.
Leader: Okay, on the 29th, which is Monday.

Also significant is the conversation between the two “leaders” of the group regarding the upcoming “tariffs” from the shop.

64-year-old: Christ is risen, happy holidays, my girl.
43-year-old: Indeed, Spiros, what’s up?
64-year-old: I’m good, and you? I was just about to call you.
43-year-old: Let me ask you something.
64-year-old: Yes.
43-year-old: We said the two shops on Fokionos Negri plus the tsipouro (liquor) place are three thousand euros each.
64-year-old: Yes.
43-year-old: The kiosk is a thousand euros.
64-year-old: Right.
43-year-old: The shop on Paleon Patron Germanou, which we couldn’t close because of the Transparency Authority, offers us two thousand euros; we’ll try.
64-year-old: Mm yes.
43-year-old: Paleon Patron Ge.
64-year-old: We’ll try for two thousand euros.
43-year-old: Right because.
64-year-old: Yes, yes.
43-year-old: They had initially said three, and you suggested maybe two and a half, but we agreed on two, better.
64-year-old: Yes, yes, yes.
43-year-old: Right?
64-year-old: Yes, yes.
43-year-old: Am I right?
64-year-old: Yes, say it like that, I’ll try to get it to two.
43-year-old: Great.
64-year-old: From three that they said, I suggested cutting it to two and a half, but I’ll try to make it two.
43-year-old: And Pireos 35, the hotel, how much did you tell me?
64-year-old: The one with the scaffolding.
43-year-old: Exactly.
64-year-old: With the scaffolding. We had said three, now.
43-year-old: No, we didn’t say three for that one because it’s a hotel.
64-year-old: Okay, should we tell him.
43-year-old: We didn’t say three for that one.
64-year-old: Should we tell him two and a half? To make it.
43-year-old: No, for sure, it should be less because it doesn’t have tables and public space.
64-year-old: Fine. Two then, should we say two for that?
43-year-old: Yes.
64-year-old: Great.
43-year-old: And for Paleon Patron and Pireos, two each.
64-year-old: Yes.
43-year-old: Because, you know, overall, they are shops.
64-year-old: I’ll handle it, my dear, don’t worry.
43-year-old: You understand?
64-year-old: I’ll handle it.
43-year-old: And Pireos 35 doesn’t have tables in public space. It’s just a front yard.
64-year-old: Yes.
43-year-old: So, they, you understand.
64-year-old: Great.
43-year-old: We’ll do it.
64-year-old: I’ll try to make it two, my dear.
43-year-old: In the sense that it doesn’t make sense to.
64-year-old: The other hotel, I’ll make it two. The hotel will be two.
43-year-old: The hotel, for sure, in the sense.
64-year-old: Yes.
43-year-old: It doesn’t have outside tables.
64-year-old: Great.
43-year-old: Rooms are upstairs. How would the rooms be a problem?
64-year-old: Okay.
43-year-old: You understand?
64-year-old: Okay, I understand.
43-year-old: I mean, let’s not go crazy.
64-year-old: Yes.
43-year-old: We agreed to make it worthwhile to collect.
64-year-old: Yes, I agree with you. I agree.