Tourism Minister Olga Kefalogianni has taken a clear stance that family matters, especially those involving minor children, cannot be subject to political exploitation or pressure, following public debate surrounding her use of recent legislative changes to parental custody laws, which were included in an Agricultural Development Ministry bill for OPEKEPE.
Olga Kefalogianni on the parental custody amendment: “Family matters are not for political exploitation”
In her statement, the minister emphasizes that “family matters, especially when they concern minor children, are not suitable for blackmail or political exploitation,” underlining that “respect, protection, and the psychological security of my children constitute my supreme priority, before and above any other role I am called to serve.” She simultaneously rejects any attempt at political exploitation of a purely family matter, noting that such issues cannot be transformed into a field of public defamation.
As she clarifies, she made use of a legal option available to all parents, without exceptions, which she supported and voted for precisely because she considers it fair and oriented toward children’s best interests. She doesn’t hide that in her personal life she faces a difficult reality, describing that her four-year-old children are forced to change homes every two days, noting that at such a sensitive age, stability constitutes a basic prerequisite for their normal psychological development.
The catalyst for the public discussion was an extrajudicial notice from the Tourism Minister’s former spouse, alleging that Olga Kefalogianni used the specific provision. At the same time, parapolitika.gr revealed that the minister has also sent an extrajudicial notice to her former spouse, in which she accuses him of creating artificial tensions, using blackmail tactics with deprecating and ironic behavior, as well as failing to comply with both their mutual agreements and the court decision.
Sideris: An institutional procedure for reviewing family decisions is necessary
Regarding this case, parapolitika.gr sought legal opinions on the controversial amendment.
Lawyer Ilias Sideris emphasizes that “beyond the political confrontation that has begun, it would be advisable to examine procedures for reforming judicial decisions when circumstances change. Especially in family law, where relationships sometimes break down and sometimes are restored, a procedure for reforming decisions should be provided, not necessarily through courts, but, for example, through mediation, with the possibility of subsequent recourse to Justice, provided that the conditions of family relationships have changed so substantially — either for better or worse — that waiting for an appellate decision is unreasonable.”
He adds that “appeals judge specific issues, while a legislative tool for addressing changing family relationships would be particularly useful, especially in matters concerning children, since children’s needs change very rapidly. This, of course, should be done comprehensively, with good legislative rules, and not fragmentarily, because otherwise the essence of the legislation itself is violated.”
For his part, lawyer Konstantinos Gogos emphasizes to parapolitika.gr that “modifications to family law cannot constitute secondary legislative text, as they concern the entirety of Greek society, especially in an era when low birth rates constitute a major political and social issue.” As he points out, “any change, as an addition to an article irrelevant to family law, initially raises issues of proper legislation, since even the legal community understandably delayed in understanding the passage of the provision.”
Gogos: Issues of constitutionality and legal uncertainty
Mr. Gogos explains that “the disputed modification concerns two different provisions, both in the Civil Code and in the Civil Procedure Code. Specifically, it radically changes the provision of Article 1536 of the Civil Code. Article 1536 concerned precisely the possibility of issuing a new judicial decision regarding parental custody if and when circumstances change. It therefore concerned a general provision, for those cases where new facts emerge, so the legislator reasonably established this specific safety valve for substantial changes to a judicial decision.
The new regulation, however, has additional paragraphs and refers to cases where a decision has been issued, an appeal has been filed against it, and the possibility is given to re-examine the legal issue not only of parental custody but also of care and communication. And not only that, but Article 593 of the Civil Procedure Code is also modified so that these applications are examined as a priority.”
Mr. Gogos also emphasizes to parapolitika.gr that this can practically mean legal uncertainty. “The successful litigant, despite the issuance of a judicial decision, can never ‘rest’ from legal battles since the issue of custody and communication with minor children can be re-examined at any time. Second, it raises constitutional issues, since the court that issues the decision is a first-instance court and issues a final decision. Therefore, with the new provision, a judge of the same level is called upon to overturn the existing decision. Third, it directly violates the constitutional right to two levels of jurisdiction. If an appeal has been filed and before its adjudication a new first-instance decision is issued, the second level of jurisdiction loses its meaning. It is clear that this specific regulation should legally be re-examined, as many issues arise regarding the time and manner of its issuance,” Mr. Gogos concludes.
