Greece

White-collar crime in Greece is regulated by the GPC (Law 4619/2019, as amended), as well as by special criminal laws, governing specific types of criminal offences. These special criminal laws include the following:

• Law 5090/2024, which introduces criminal proceedings against legal entities for bribery offences;
• Law 4557/2018 on the prevention and suppression of money laundering and terrorist financing;
• Law 5104/2024 on tax evasion; and
• Law 1882/1990, which criminalises non-payment of debts to the state.

For the sake of brevity and focus, general criminal law offences not typically associated with economic or corporate misconduct are excluded from this chapter.

Greece is a party to all the main international and regional instruments governing white-collar crime, corruption and financial offences, which apply to both individual and corporate liability. Key treaties include the UN Convention against Corruption (UNCAC) and the OECD Anti-Bribery Convention, which have been transposed into Greek law and underpin offences such as bribery of domestic and foreign public officials. Greece is also bound by EU law, including directives on anti-money laundering, fraud affecting the EU’s financial interests, whistleblower protection and asset recovery, as well as cooperation frameworks such as Eurojust and EPPO. These instruments significantly influence enforcement standards, procedural cooperation and compliance expectations in Greece.

In principle, Greek criminal laws apply to natural persons. However, recent Law 5090/2024 introduced quasi-criminal liability to legal entities for bribery offences committed to their benefit.

Individuals (natural persons)

Criminal liability applies to all individuals who commit, participate in, instigate, or assist in the commission of a criminal offence. This includes:

• employees, officers, directors, and agents of companies;
• public officials and political persons (as specifically regulated under the GPC);
• third parties acting on behalf of a legal entity, where their conduct satisfies the elements of the offence.

Individuals may face criminal prosecution, leading to custodial sentences, monetary fines and ancillary penalties (e.g. confiscation of proceeds), as provided under the GPC and special criminal laws.

Legal entities (corporate liability)

While Greek law traditionally followed the principle of individual criminal liability, recent legislation has established a quasi-criminal liability regime for legal entities, in relation to bribery offences.

More specifically, legal entities may be held liable where:

• a bribery or corruption offence is committed for the benefit of the entity; or
• the offence results from a lack of adequate supervision, compliance mechanisms, or internal controls.

Sanctions against legal entities are autonomous and independent from the criminal liability of the individuals involved and include:

• significant financial penalties;
• exclusion from public procurement and public funding;
• suspension or prohibition of business activities; and
• withdrawal of licences or, in extreme cases, dissolution.

Similarly, under Law 4557/2018, legal entities qualifying as “obliged entities” may incur administrative sanctions for breaches of anti-money laundering obligations, irrespective of parallel proceedings against individuals.

Domestic jurisdiction

Greek white-collar crime laws apply to offences committed within the territory of Greece, irrespective of the nationality of the offender or the place of incorporation of the legal entity involved. An offence is considered to have been committed in Greece where any element of the criminal conduct or its result occurs within Greek territory.

Jurisdiction over foreign entities

Foreign individuals and legal entities may be subject to Greek jurisdiction where the relevant conduct:

• is carried out wholly or partly in Greece;
• produces effects within Greece (including financial harm to the Greek State or market); or
• involves offences against Greek legal or natural persons, including bribery, fraud, or money laundering affecting Greek institutions.

In addition, foreign legal entities qualifying as “obliged entities” under Greek anti-money laundering legislation may be subject to Greek enforcement action where they operate, provide services, or maintain a nexus with Greece.

Extra-territorial jurisdiction

Under Greek criminal law, universal jurisdiction is established by Article 8 of the GPC. This provision allows Greek courts to exercise criminal jurisdiction over certain offences committed abroad irrespective of the place of commission, the nationality of the perpetrator, or the nationality of the victim. Universal jurisdiction constitutes an exception to the principles of territoriality and personality and is justified by the particular gravity of the offences and by Greece’s obligations under international law. Such offences include piracy, terrorism-related offences, crimes related to currency, human trafficking, etc.

Anti-bribery and anti-corruption

• GPC (Law 4619/2019, as amended). Articles 235–237 regulate active and passive bribery of public officials, punishable by imprisonment ranging from one to eight years, depending on the circumstances, and monetary fines. Where the act is committed habitually or involves substantial benefit or damage, aggravated penalties apply, including longer custodial sentences. Article 237A addresses the criminal offence of trading in influence, punishable by imprisonment of up to five years and a monetary fine. Furthermore, Articles 159 and 159A address bribery of political persons, carrying severe custodial penalties, which may reach up to 20 years’ imprisonment, along with significant monetary fines. The private sector is regulated under Article 396 and is punishable by imprisonment of up to five years and a monetary fine.
• Law 5090/2024. Under Articles 134–135, Greece has established a quasi-criminal liability framework for legal entities regarding bribery and corruption offences. This regime imposes autonomous sanctions on corporations when bribery is committed for their benefit by a third party or a high-ranking officer or due to a systemic lack of oversight and internal control. The legal framework provides for financial penalties reaching up to EUR 10 million or twice the entity’s net profits, alongside structural measures such as the permanent prohibition of business activities or exclusion from public tenders, effectively treating corporate misconduct as a distinct punishable offence within the criminal justice sphere.

Fraud and related offences

Greek Penal Code

• Article 375 (embezzlement), punishable by imprisonment of up to five years and a monetary fine, with aggravated forms (e.g. where significant damage is caused) punishable by up to 10 years’ imprisonment.
• Article 386 (fraud), punishable by imprisonment of up to five years and a monetary fine, while aggravated fraud involving substantial financial damage may result in imprisonment of up to 10 years.
• Article 386A (computer fraud), punishable by imprisonment of up to five years and a monetary fine, while aggravated fraud involving substantial financial damage may result in imprisonment of up to 10 years.
• Article 390 (breach of trust), punishable by imprisonment of up to five years, increasing to up to 10 years where substantial financial damage is caused.

Money laundering and proceeds of crime

• Law 4557/2018 (on the prevention and suppression of money laundering and terrorist financing): criminalises money laundering and imposes extensive compliance obligations on obliged entities. Predicate offences include bribery, fraud, tax crimes, and other profit-generating offences. Money laundering is punishable by imprisonment of up to 20 years, depending on the gravity of the offence, plus substantial monetary fines.
  Breaches of AML obligations may also result in administrative fines and/or revocation of licences.

Tax and financial offences

• Law 5104/2024 (regarding tax evasion): regulates tax evasion, non-payment of taxes, and related offences, which are punishable by imprisonment, the length of which depends on the amount of evaded tax, and significant monetary fines.
• Law 1882/1990: criminalises non-payment of debts to the State, which is punishable with imprisonment of up to five years.

Under Greek criminal law, white-collar crime offences committed outside Greek territory may fall within Greek jurisdiction, primarily on the basis of active personality, passive personality, or universal jurisdiction. While Greek law does not use the term “white-collar crime” as a technical category, said offences may be prosecuted by Greek judicial/prosecutorial authorities on that basis.

In Greece, the investigation and enforcement of white-collar crime primarily fall within the competence of the Public Prosecutor’s Office, including the Prosecutor for Financial and Economic Crime, which has authority to initiate and supervise investigations, order investigative acts and bring criminal prosecutions. The Hellenic Police, through specialised economic crime units, conducts investigative operations under prosecutorial supervision. A key role is also played by the Hellenic Financial Intelligence Unit (FIU), which analyses suspicious transaction reports and can freeze assets in money laundering cases. Sectoral regulators, such as the Hellenic Capital Market Commission, the Bank of Greece and the Independent Authority for Public Revenue, possess administrative investigative and sanctioning powers and cooperate closely with prosecutors. At EU level, the European Public Prosecutor’s Office (EPPO) has jurisdiction over offences affecting the EU’s financial interests and operates in parallel with national authorities.

In Greece, there is no formal “leniency” programme for white-collar crime comparable to those in some other jurisdictions, but the legal framework provides for mitigating circumstances, reconciliation proceedings and plea bargaining. Voluntary disclosure of criminal conduct by individuals or companies may be taken into account as a mitigating circumstance under the GPC, particularly where it contributes substantially to uncovering the offence, identifying accomplices or restoring damage. Prosecutors may respond to self-reporting by assessing the scope of cooperation and, where appropriate, engaging in plea bargaining proceedings, which are now available for most financial crimes and may be initiated by either the accused or the prosecutor. Courts have generally treated early guilty pleas and meaningful cooperation favourably, often resulting in reduced sentences or fines, although outcomes remain case-specific and judicial discretion remains central.

Best practices for internal investigations involving potential criminal conduct require a clear scope, independence and early involvement of legal counsel. Investigations should be structured and well prepared, ensure evidence is captured and include document review and employee interviews. In Greece, legal professional privilege primarily protects communications between lawyers and clients for the purpose of legal advice or defence, making external counsel involvement critical, while communication with in-house lawyers may not be covered under legal professional privilege. Key issues include compliance with the General Data Protection Regulation and employment law, protection of whistleblowers and careful assessment of remediation and potential disclosure obligations to authorities.

Whistleblower protection in Greece is governed by Law 4990/2022, which transposed EU Directive (EU) 2019/1937. The Law applies to the protection of persons who report or disclose:

• breaches of EU law;
• breaches affecting the financial interests of the Union as referred to in Article 325 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) and as further defined in relevant EU measures;
• breaches relating to the internal market, as referred to in Article 26(2) of the TFEU, including breaches of EU competition and state aid rules, as well as breaches relating to the internal market in relation to acts which breach the rules of corporate tax;
• breaches of national law regarding offences of bribery and trading in influence; and
• breaches of European Union restrictive measures, as established pursuant to Article 29 of the Treaty on European Union or Article 215 of the TFEU.

Furthermore, pursuant to Article 218 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, witnesses may be granted anonymity or physical protection if there is a substantiated risk of retaliation or intimidation. Recent legislative reforms, specifically Law 5090/2024, have introduced more rigorous oversight by allowing the Public Prosecutor to revoke or modify protection status if the underlying reasons for such measures no longer exist. This shift emphasises a balance between the necessity of witness cooperation and the constitutional right of the accused to face their accusers, ensuring that anonymity is not maintained indefinitely or without continuous justification.

Traditionally, investigations were slow, and enforcement delayed, with limited coordination among authorities and few final convictions in complex cases. In recent years, key bodies such as the Prosecutor for Financial and Economic Crime, the FIU and sectoral regulators have intensified their activity, particularly in corruption, tax evasion and money-laundering cases. Courts have delivered more convictions in high-profile matters, though proceedings remain lengthy. Overall, white-collar crime has become a higher enforcement priority, driven by EU obligations, public pressure and enhanced investigative powers, despite ongoing resource and capacity constraints.

The investigation and enforcement of white-collar crime in Greece have historically been characterised by inconsistency and limited effectiveness, largely due to structural and institutional weaknesses rather than the absence of substantive criminal provisions. In the past decade, frequent and sometimes abrupt legislative changes (including shifts between complaint-based and ex officio prosecution for core financial offences) have created legal uncertainty, disrupted ongoing investigations, and undermined prosecutorial continuity. While the legal framework broadly criminalises corruption, fraud and related offences, regulatory and enforcement bodies (including prosecutors, financial intelligence units and supervisory authorities) are often constrained by limited resources, heavy caseloads and insufficient specialisation fragmented inter-agency coordination, raising ongoing questions as to whether they are able to effectively address sophisticated, large-scale white-collar crime.

Foreseeable reforms are expected to focus on strengthening enforcement and fine-tuning the existing legal framework rather than introducing radical new offences. Recent amendments to the Penal Code and the Code of Criminal Procedure have already expanded anti-bribery provisions, reinstated ex officio prosecution for serious financial crimes (such as large-scale fraud and breach of trust), and promoted procedural tools like plea bargaining to accelerate complex cases. Key areas for further legislative action include enhanced corporate liability and compliance obligations, improved coordination between prosecutors and regulatory authorities, and continued digitalisation of criminal proceedings. A significant recent development is Directive 2026/1021 on combatting corruption, which Member States must transpose by 12 July 2028. The Directive introduces mandatory corporate liability for corruption offences, harmonised sanctions, enhanced protection for whistleblowers and reporting persons, strengthened asset recovery mechanisms, and improved cross-border cooperation. Greece will need to adapt its domestic legislation accordingly, which may involve further amendments to the Penal Code and potentially the introduction of a dedicated corporate criminal liability regime for corruption-related offences. Over the next 12–18 months (and beyond), reform prospects are driven largely by EU law alignment (notably in anti-corruption and anti-money-laundering standards, including the transposition of Directive 2026/1021) and by ongoing institutional discussions on accountability and immunity rules for public officials, with an emphasis on more effective investigation and prosecution rather than substantive decriminalisation.