- They tried to whitewash cases under investigation by the European Public Prosecutor, with prosecutions already underway.
- OPEKEPE employees who were tasked with investigating the complaints now hold key positions within the organization.
- The four complaints were also forwarded to the Anti-Corruption Prosecutor’s Office, the National Transparency Authority, the Financial and Economic Crime Unit (SDOE), and the Minister of Rural Development at the time, Spilios Livanos.
By Vangelis Triantis
Data Journalists have uncovered new evidence regarding the scandal involving subsidies for pastureland usage managed by the Hellenic Agricultural Payments and Control Agency (OPEKEPE).
At the heart of these revelations is a “confidential audit report” from OPEKEPE’s Internal Audit Directorate concerning four anonymous complaints filed in late 2021. These complaints alleged that approximately 1,300 cases received €32 million from the national pastureland reserve despite having no livestock.
The complaints were submitted not only to OPEKEPE but also to the Anti-Corruption Prosecutor’s Office (now the Financial Prosecutor’s Office), the National Transparency Authority, the Financial and Economic Crime Unit (SDOE), and the Minister of Rural Development, Spilios Livanos.
In June 2022, the Internal Audit Directorate (IAD) inspectors Charalampos Panagopoulos and Sofia Pantou, along with their director Giorgos Kentros, were assigned to investigate complaints, including allegations against OPEKEPE senior officials and staff members specifically named in the reports. They concluded that no wrongdoing had occurred. This judgment was based on an opinion issued in 2018 by OPEKEPE’s Legal and Legislative Support Committee. According to this opinion, for the agency to investigate any complaint, certain criteria had to be met. In essence, the auditors exonerated their colleagues, as well as applicants for national reserve funds, who, according to the complainants, had applied for and received subsidies illegally.
Interestingly, many of the cases mentioned in the four complaints are under investigation by the European Public Prosecutor’s Office. Some have already led to criminal prosecutions for fraud against the EU’s financial interests, and those involved have been referred to trial. Nevertheless, OPEKEPE deemed everything to be in order, citing a legal opinion rather than conducting a substantive investigation into the substance of the complaints.
Anonymous complaints
In October and November of 2021, four anonymous complaints were submitted to OPEKEPE under the title “Report on the Payment of Illegal Subsidies.” According to Data Journalists, the complaints concerned approximately 1,300 cases in which €32 million in national reserve subsidies for pastureland without livestock were allegedly submitted.
OPEKEPE’s audit report, conducted in June 2022 and published by Data Journalists, identified the complainants as “owners and employees of Declaration Reception Centers (KYD) from various regions of Crete.” However, the complaints were reportedly mailed from Attica, not Crete. They included supporting documents from farmers’ applications and references to internal OPEKEPE documents said to be accessible only to employees and management.
The four complaints were forwarded to the Anti-Corruption Prosecutor’s Office (now the Financial Prosecutor’s Office), the National Transparency Authority, the Financial and Economic Crime Unit (SDOE), the Minister of Rural Development at the time, Spilios Livanos, and OPEKEPE’s administration. Dimitris Melas, a political figure affiliated with New Democracy (ND), was the president of OPEKEPE during that period. As previously revealed by Data Journalists, Melas and a former senior agency executive have been referred to trial on charges of document misappropriation and repeated misconduct in public office.
“Nonexistent and Fictitious Livestock Numbers”
Two of the complaints were about applicants for national reserve subsidies from Rethymno, Heraklion, and Chania. According to the complainants, specific individuals were allegedly “encroaching on public and private pastureland” in various parts of the country, such as the North and South Aegean islands, Kastoria, Florina, and Kozani.
The other two complaints involved applicants from other regions of Greece who allegedly occupied public and private pastureland in areas including the Aegean Islands, the Peloponnese, Epirus, Central Greece, and Western Macedonia. According to the complaints, these livestock farmers were allegedly “reporting nonexistent and fictitious numbers of animals.” Furthermore, all four complaints named specific OPEKEPE directors and senior officials who allegedly played a key role in disbursing illegal subsidies. The complaints also described how those subsidies were allegedly granted in detail.
Investigations by European prosecutors
Despite the complaints, the OPEKEPE administration proceeded with payments to most of the 1,300 applicants for national reserve subsidies. In December 2021, an initial audit was conducted using digital records extracted by the IT Directorate. However, the audit report published by Data Journalists noted that “no audit or administrative action concerning the reported farmers had been recorded involving any of the OPEKEPE employees named in the complaints during the years 2019–2021.”
Around that time, a delegation from the European Public Prosecutor’s Office reportedly visited OPEKEPE and met with Mr. Melas. During the meeting, the European prosecutors requested the president’s cooperation in investigating complaints they had received. Simultaneously, the Financial Police were investigating numerous allegations concerning subsidies allegedly granted illegally by OPEKEPE. Among the cases under scrutiny were reportedly some of the 1,300 instances mentioned in the four complaints from 2021.
In June 2022, OPEKEPE finally instructed Charalampos Panagopoulos and Sofia Pantou, two employees from the agency’s Internal Audit Directorate, to investigate the allegations. However, six months had already passed since OPEKEPE received the complaints, and many of the Tax Identification Numbers (AFMs) mentioned had been included in the agency’s subsidy payments.
Audits only under four conditions
The employees began investigating the content of the complaints. According to the audit report they later prepared, the main guideline for examining the allegations was the minutes from Meeting 39/2018 of OPEKEPE’s Joint Legal and Legislative Support Committee. According to this document, “For a complaint to lead to an audit, it must cumulatively meet four basic conditions.”
The first condition was that the complaint “must not be vague.” In other words, it must contain at least one allegation that would result in a legal consequence if interpreted under a legal rule.
The second condition was that the complaint “must be assessed as having a basic level of seriousness.” This means the complaint should “describe with sufficient clarity the facts on which at least one allegation is based so that they can be linked to a legal provision, allowing for an immediate evaluation of whether the complaint’s content alone could constitute a legal violation without requiring an investigation into additional conditions or evidence.
The third condition was that the complaint “must include prima facie evidence.” According to the auditors, this means that the complaint should contain at least one piece of evidence that demonstrates its credibility and can serve as a starting point for the agency’s further investigation.
The fourth condition was that the complaint “must not be submitted abusively.” In other words, the allegations should not be repetitive or persist with claims that have already been examined or addressed by the agency and confirmed to be legal.
“No Omissions by OPEKEPE Employees”
Based on these conditions, the auditors concluded that there were no acts or omissions by OPEKEPE employees named in the four complaints that warranted further investigation. Upon examining each complaint individually, the auditors determined that none met the four criteria set by the agency’s Legal and Legislative Support Committee for further scrutiny. In many cases, the allegations were deemed “unfounded.” In other words, instead of conducting a substantive inquiry into the allegations, the OPEKEPE auditors who investigated the complaints “hid behind a legal opinion.”
It is striking that the European Public Prosecutor’s Office has already filed criminal charges for some of the 1,300 cases referenced in the complaints and referred those involved to trial. Nevertheless, OPEKEPE ruled that it was unable to investigate the allegations based on the criteria established by its Legal Committee.
Those involved in the cover-up now hold key positions at OPEKEPE. Christos Panagopoulos was appointed to the Internal Audit Directorate, and the other two individuals assumed roles within the Directorate of Direct Payments: G. Kentros as director and Ms. Pantou as department head. These appointments occurred under Kyriakos Babassidis’s presidency at OPEKEPE.
The KYPD owner is involved in a grazing land trial in Grammos
A telling example can be found in the audit report’s reference to a specific complaint involving OPEKEPE officials and their alleged ties to Application Support Centers (KYPD). The KYPD plays a crucial role in the subsidy process managed by OPEKEPE. Through these centers, farmers submit their applications for agricultural subsidies.
One of the four complaints explicitly stated the following:
“The two KYPDs (two specific cases are mentioned) maintained close ties with [redacted name], who served as Director of Inspections until Athanasia Reppa took over as the official responsible for allocating the national reserve.” The auditors who reviewed the complaint wrote in their report that it did not meet criteria 1, 2, and 3 of Protocol 39/2018, so it would not be investigated further.
Notably, one of the two KYPD owners mentioned in the complaint is currently facing criminal charges in connection with the Grammos grazing land case. This case involves producers who were falsely listed as tenants of grazing lands in the Grammos region.
ΟΠΕΚΕΠΕ: Διώκουν την υπάλληλο που αποκάλυψε το σκάνδαλο με τις αγροτικές επιδοτήσεις
One of the implicated individuals was a lawyer from Attica who appeared to have leased grazing land in the Grammos region from a Larissa resident. A close relative of the lawyer reportedly did the same, leasing land from the same owner. These lands were then used to apply for national reserve subsidies in 2019. However, an OPEKEPE inspection revealed that the plots declared as leased were classified as public land in previous years. Notably, the two applicants for the Grammos grazing lands were close relatives of the owner of a KYPD (Declaration Reception Center).
Trial alongside Dimitris Melas for document removal
Athanasia Reppa, the longtime head of OPEKEPE’s Directorate of Direct Payments and Market Measures, as well as the Directorate of Technical Works, has been referred to trial before the Athens Misdemeanor Court. She is accused alongside Dimitris Melas, the former president of OPEKEPE and a New Democracy political figure. The charges include the joint removal of official documents, harboring a criminal, and repeated breach of duty, all of which are categorized as misdemeanors.
The trial involves a case file of inspection reports on grazing land application submissions from the national reserve for the 2019–2020 period. Paraskevi Tycheropoulou, the then-head of OPEKEPE’s Internal Audit Directorate, carried out these inspections. In her report, Tycheropoulou explicitly requested that the findings be forwarded to the judiciary. However, Dimitris Melas, OPEKEPE’s president at the time, never did so. This decision contrasted sharply with the previous administration’s approach under Professor Grigoris Varas, who submitted at least three audit reports from OPEKEPE inspectors to judicial authorities. Notably, some of the cases mentioned in Tycheropoulou’s report – those that had been brought to Melas’s attention – have since resulted in criminal prosecutions by the European Public Prosecutor’s Office.
