S.A.: Rejected the ICSA’s appeals for the formation of ADAE and ESR – The reasoning of the Court

His appeals (IPA) for the illegal formation of ADAE and ESR were rejected by the Conference of Speakers of the House. The plenary session of the Council of State by two decisions of the Council of State held, by a majority, that the Athens Bar Association (ACC) had no legal interest in bringing proceedings before the Supreme Court. The IACC, with its refugees, called for the annulment of the Justice Minister’s decisions on the appointment of the Vice-President, Deputy Vice-President, two members and two alternate members of the Communications Privacy Assurance Authority (A.D. A.E.) and also the annulment of decisions of the Deputy Minister rather than the Prime Minister concerning the appointment of President, Vice-President and six members of the National Broadcasting Council (E. S. P.). According to the reasoning of the majority of the plenary of the Council of State, the IACC is not legalised against individual administrative acts concerning specific natural persons, such as the selection of ‘third persons in a public position, since, in those circumstances, the application would take the form of a popular treatment’. In detail, the majority of the Chamber of the Supreme Court (President Evangelia Nika and rapporteur Constantina Konidiciotis) with Nos 1639/2024 and 1641/2024, held that the ‘Law of Lawyers legalises the lawyers of the Bar Associations to take actions relating to matters of general interest, including judicial actions, but that is not sufficient, only for the legalisation of the Bar Associations as parties to proceedings before all the courts referred to therein and, in particular, before the Council of State for the exercise of an application for annulment and the application for annulment of individual administrative acts, concerning particular natural persons, as in the present case of the selection of third parties in a public position, since, in these circumstances, the application would be subject to the character of a popular action, as not established by the Constitution and relevant legislation’. In any case, the plenary session of the Supreme Court points out that the contested decisions that they “do not affect the interests of members of the IAC as a professional class in relation to the confidentiality of law, which concerns a different matter, concluded with the obligation to confidentiality of the lawyer to his principals for the sake of strengthening the relationship of trust between them.” The majority of the plenary of the Supreme Court expressed its opposition to the formation of the A.D.A. and the ESR. As pointed out in the minority’s reasoning, issues relating to the legality of acts of incorporation of the A.D.A. and the ESR, are, “in the sense of the provisions of the Code of Lawyers, a matter of general social interest and are included among the issues for which the Bar Associations are entitled to exercise judicial remedies”. As far as A.D.A. is concerned, the minority of the plenary of the Council of State points out “the contested acts, with which there is a wide change in the composition of A.D.A.E., which, according to the Constitution, has been included as an independent authority with similar guarantees, including those relating to the procedure for the selection of its members, in order to prevent government and more generally unilateral influences, are the basis for the adoption of all individual and regulatory administrative acts of the authority and affect its overall action. In view of the particular nature of these acts, where the critical legal order and the rule of law harm them by any illegality affects, in essence, a very wide circle of persons, the acceptance of assistance of the requirement of the legitimate interest, justified and because of the alleged position of the Bar Associations in society, contributes to the timely and effective provision of legal protection. In the circumstances referred to above, there is the specific link between the applicant Association and the contested acts and this is not a mere interest in restoring legality. With regard to the ESRP, the minority expressed the view that ‘in view of the importance of the constitutionally enshrined independent principle in order to ensure pluralism and objective and equal conditions for the transmission of information, news, speech and art products, issues relating to the legality of the acts of the establishment of the E.S.R., are, within the meaning of the provisions of the Code of Lawyers, a matter of general social interest and are included among the issues for which the Bar Associations recognise the right to exercise judicial aid’.