In response to media reports and references on television programs regarding the appeal filed by the Independent Authority for Public Revenue (AADE) against the decision of the Athens Single-Judge Court of First Instance, to which an employee of the former OPEKEPE and current AADE employee (Note: this refers to Paraskevi Tycheropoulou without naming her), regarding her dismissal from the position of Head of the Internal Audit Directorate of OPEKEPE, the AADE notes the following:
1. The AADE, as a public service, exercises legal remedies and means in accordance with due process, which includes a relevant recommendation from its legal representatives and the State Legal Council (see our March 31, 2026, press release).
The exercise of legal remedies and measures is both a right and an obligation of the Service, for the protection of the public interest. The failure to exercise a legal remedy, despite the relevant positive recommendation to the competent departments of the Independent Authority for Public Revenue (IAPR), raises the issue of disciplinary and criminal liability of the competent bodies of the Service. This is all the more so when the subject of the legal dispute, in cases of this nature, is the payment of sums of money from public funds, as in the present case.
2. Various publications and reports attempt to give the impression that the issuance of the non-enforceable decision by the Single-Judge Court of First Instance in the case in question—which, it should be noted, was heard prior to the integration of OPEKEPE into the AADE, implies an obligation on the part of the AADE to reinstate the employee in question as Head of the Internal Audit Directorate of OPEKEPE.
This is inaccurate, because the position in question has not existed since January 1, 2026, following the integration of OPEKEPE into the AADE, as the specific internal audit responsibilities were transferred to the existing Internal Audit Directorate of the AADE, which has been in operation since the Authority’s establishment on January 1, 2017, and which, according to the AADE’s organizational structure, is always headed by a university-educated civil servant (PE).
Consequently, there is no question of reassigning the employee in question to the abolished position of responsibility as of January 1, 2026, and thereafter, but only of the possible payment of sums from public funds to the employee in question, in the event that the legal remedies are rejected.
3. The appointment of employees to positions of responsibility at the AADE is carried out through open procedures, in accordance with the conditions and criteria set forth in the Law and the Authority’s Statutes. It is not legally possible to appoint someone to a position of responsibility without full compliance with the legal requirements, nor is it possible to circumvent the selection process.
From the above, it is clear that failing to file a legal appeal in this case would constitute not only preferential treatment, but also grounds for seeking disciplinary and criminal liability from the competent bodies of the AADE that failed to take the required actions.
The AADE respects the rights of all 12,000 of its employees and applies the institutional framework uniformly, based on the principles of equality, impartiality, and non-discrimination, with the aim of ensuring the legality and proper functioning of the Administration.
Naturally, it implements all court decisions that impose an obligation to comply. At the same time, it expects its employees to respect the procedures provided for by law and the regulatory framework concerning their employment status and career progression.