PRESS RELEASE
In its judgment, the Plenary of the Council of
State held that a number of contested provisions of the Ministerial Decision
governing the Registry of Non-Governmental Organisations and the Registry of
Members of Non-Governmental Organisations in the migration sector (Ministerial
Decision 82876/8.5.2026) are contrary to the Constitution and the right to
freedom of association.
The judgment marks an important milestone in the long-standing legal challenge initiated by HIAS Greece and Equal Rights Beyond Borders, together with other civil society organisations.
More specifically, by majority, the Court held that the provision authorising the competent Minister to regulate the Registry of Members of NGOs in the migration sector is unconstitutional, as the law itself did not contain the essential substantive rules governing the conditions for registration and certification of prospective members.
The Plenary also held that the provision granting the Secretary General for the Reception of Asylum Seekers of the Ministry of Migration and Asylum discretion to accept or reject organisations’ applications for registration in the Registry, taking into account elements relating to their activities, is contrary to the right to freedom of association and exceeds the limits of the statutory authorisation. By majority, the Court further held that this provision is contrary to the constitutional principles of legal certainty and foreseeability.
The Court also held that the general obligation for organisations to publish information about their subscribers and donors on their websites is unconstitutional and contrary to the right to freedom of association. The same applies to the two-year prohibition on re-registration following removal from the Registry, with the exception of cases where an organisation is removed due to inadequate performance of the work it has undertaken.
At the same time, the Plenary recognised that serious questions arise as to the compatibility of certain provisions with EU law and decided to refer preliminary questions to the Court of Justice of the European Union. The first concerns the compatibility with Article 12 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (freedom of association) of provisions of the law and the Ministerial Decision making registration in the Registry conditional upon (i) the absence of criminal prosecution of the natural persons who manage and/or legally represent the organisation for any felony and (ii) the absence of a final conviction of those persons for the misdemeanour of slanderous defamation.
In addition, the Court referred a preliminary question concerning the compatibility with Article 10 of the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) of the processing of data relating to criminal convictions—namely, criminal record certificates—of natural persons who manage and/or legally represent the organisations.
Since 2020, we have consistently advocated for safeguarding the independence of civil society organisations operating in the migration sector. Today’s judgment vindicates the longstanding positions we have maintained throughout this process: the institutional framework governing the Registry of NGOs in the migration sector was not a tool for ensuring transparency and improving the quality of services provided to migrant populations, but rather an arbitrary regime that granted the Administration unlimited discretion to determine which organisations were permitted to operate in the migration sector and, in practice, a mechanism for controlling and silencing civil society.
For further information
Elli Kriona Saranti