“The Office of the Legal Adviser of the Ministry of Culture has forwarded the full text of the 761/2024 decision of the Council of State, which confirmed the revocation of the concession – on behalf of the Ministry of Culture – to the Association of Greek Archaeologists (S.E.A.), of the property of 134-136 Ermou Street, which has been classified as a “work of art” and is a declared newer monument.

The Court judged the revocation of the concession to be lawful, as it was documented by the documents in the documentation that the Ministers of Culture – in 1982 and 1996 – granted the property exclusively to the S.E.A. for actions of its member archaeologists, compatible with the monument. In addition, they never gave the SA, either directly or indirectly, the right to make the property available to third parties for their own activities. Instead, the S.E.A. systematically and over a long period of time, granted the monument to third parties for their own activities of any nature.

The decision expressly states and takes into account the following:

1. The actions of third parties within the monument, which the (then) President of the S.E.A. herself voluntarily made known to the Minister of Culture in her letter 120/4.8.2023 (indicatively: Annual festivals of Alsace, Mexico, various bazaars, school events, book sales, etc.),

2. The actions of third parties within the monument, which were established by the National Transparency Authority and/or proven by the evidence in the file (indicatively and for a fee: Sales of yoga products, party of the Photojournalists of Greece, pie cutting of the residents of Kastaniani, feast of Icarians, meeting of the Union of Accountants, etc.),

3. The written statement of 4.8.2023 by the (then) President of the S.E.A. to the Minister of Culture that the event of 18.7.2023 for the shipwreck of Pylos, was an event of third parties, in addition and that the S.E.A. had agreed to undertake the security and arrangement of the monument the third organizers, the musicians and even the visitors of the event,

4. The continued violation of the concession of the monument by the S.E.A. to third parties, even after the concession was revoked by the Administration. The decision states, by way of example, that the S.E.A., after the revocation decision, allocated the monument to a group identifying itself as the “March 8 Assembly”, which organized a party for feminism,

5. The written invitation of 11.8.2024 from the Minister of Culture to the S.E.A. to submit, if it wishes, a request for the allocation of property as a headquarters and the letter of the (then) President of the S.E.A. (no. 153/15.9.2023), in which he stated to the Minister that the S.E.A. wished to have a property, not for a headquarters, but only for temporary accommodation, namely for the specific period until the decision of the CoE is issued (the S.E.A. also admits this choice in the Press Release of 31.10.2023). It is noted that the Ministry has made available to the S.E.A. a property at 19 Panos Street, in which the S.E.A. has placed its archive and library, and has committed in writing that it will hand it over to the Ministry exactly on the third calendar day, after the CoE’s court decision is issued, without any harassment or other procedure. However, S.E.A. violated even this temporary concession, as the 761/2024 decision of the CoE has already been published on 29.5.2024, but S.E.A. has not delivered the property at 19 Panos Street, until today.

Finally, and with regard to the trade union rights, which the S.E.A. relied on, that it possesses, the Court found that there is not even the basic condition required by law for an association to be considered a trade union organization, namely, its registration in the Registers of Trade Union Organizations of the country. It should be noted that the S.E.A., never denied the fact that it has not been registered in the said Books, but stated that it considers this finding of the Court as “insignificant” (31.5.2024 Press Release).

Following the above, the Supreme Court of Appeal of the Country concluded that the S.E.A. is free to carry on activities in accordance with its statutory purposes, but not within the monument at 134-136 Hermou, the concession of which it has systematically violated.”