Institutional successes and failures
I was seven years old on July 24, 1974, as Thessaloniki celebrated, and the chant “he’s coming!” sounded from cars, the streets and balconies. The optimism of those days was vindicated. Fifty years on, Greece is vastly different from what it was in 1974. There have been many changes, but I will focus on the institutional ones.
In 1974, the Third Hellenic Republic began. The two previous periods ended ingloriously. The First Republic (1822-1827), during the revolution against the Ottoman Empire, faded when Ioannis Kapodistrias demanded the suspension of the Troezen Constitution. This was followed by 16 years of authoritarian rule (1828-1843) until the Greeks demanded that Otto grant them a Constitution. The second began in 1924, when, after the Asia Minor Catastrophe, the supporters of Eleftherios Venizelos expelled George II and declared a republic. However, it was overthrown again with the restoration of the monarchy in 1935. These two periods were circumstantial and far from smooth. While their institutional legacy should not be underestimated, they should not be idealized either. They have little to do with the era that began in 1974, which is the best, institutionally, period in the history of the modern Greek state.
The Third Hellenic Republic was born in conditions of national disaster, much like the second. However, the transition from military rule to a modern liberal democracy was so smooth and successful that it serves as a good international example. This success is largely due to Konstantinos Karamanlis, who returned wiser from Paris, with a very clear vision of his goals and the country’s limitations. In record time, Karamanlis transformed the post-civil war authoritarian state into a nation worthy of participating in the most advanced and progressive union of states in the world, the European Economic Community.
Karamanlis’ major institutional achievements were the normalization of political life, the 1975 Constitution and Greece’s entry into the European family. All three continue to yield benefits to this day, which is why they must be preserved. There have been, of course, periods of polarization, but even during the most challenging times, such as the initial phase of the financial crisis (2010-2015), the political system endured. This indicates that the Constitution works. Frequent elections do no harm; on the contrary, they strengthen the legitimacy of our democracy. The most serious problem I identify is the omnipotence of the executive branch, the PM-centric system, which needs to be tempered by strengthening Parliament, independent authorities and the judiciary. The Constitution has a few issues, while the separation of Church and State does not seem to be on the agenda.
The Greek Republic has done well in modernizing institutions. Major reforms in family law (1982-83, 2002, 2024) increased individual freedoms and weakened the patriarchal structure of the Greek family, though it still endures. The nationwide university entrance exams for admission, the Supreme Council for Civil Personnel Selection (ASEP), Diavgeia (the online public registry of public procurements), the improved independence of the judiciary and the end of the state monopoly on the media were all significant breakthroughs that, despite their problems, remain beneficial.
Greece may not be the paradigm of a liberal democracy in Europe but it is a free country with citizens who enjoy political and individual rights and considerable personal autonomy. However, there are many distortions, similar to those observed even in European countries with a long democratic and liberal tradition. This is no excuse for the serious rule of law crisis the country has been experiencing recently, which mainly concerns the lack of transparency in state actions: the wiretapping scandal, the Tempe railway disaster, immigration, ill-considered interventions by both political and judicial leadership in the work of judges… The undermining of institutions was an expected consequence of the crisis. It started in 2010 and intensified in 2015. Today, under conditions of political stability and economic calm, it is inexcusable – as is the silence of those who should denounce it.
The PM-centric system is responsible for these problems. The powerful executive branch controls the entire state apparatus, especially the deep state. It can undermine the work of independent authorities in many ways and restrict the media, not with authoritarian measures but through economic support. Such a powerful state cannot help but abuse its power in an economy that remains state-dependent. It is impossible for political power not to become entangled with economic power if there are no institutional checks to discourage it, nor binding rules of political ethics.
So far, the most positive influence on the Greek political system, society and economy, and especially on law and institutions, is the country’s EU membership. The European Court is the last resort for Greek citizens when the Greek justice system fails to protect them. EU law has modernized Greek legislation, particularly in consumer protection. Europe continues to offer the political and institutional model for the Greek state from 1822 to the present day.
The Third Hellenic Republic has done well, but it could have done much better. The priority has been and will be strengthening the institutional framework necessary for maximizing freedom and prosperity. All the problems Greece continues to face are symptoms of institutional deficits. These are what really led us to the crisis, and they are the ones preventing us from fully overcoming it.
Aristides Hatzis is a professor of philosophy of law and theory of institutions at the University of Athens.
