Order that archived the case with respect to the four officers, requesting the initiation of criminal prosecution against them as well, as they were involved in the handling of the incident on behalf of the competent bodies of the Hellenic Coast Guard – whose responsibilities had also been highlighted by the Ombudsman's investigation report – including the current Chief of the Hellenic Coast Guard […]. In November 2025, the Prosecutor of the Court of Appeal accepted the appeals and criminal proceedings were brought against all four senior officers of the Coast Guard, including its chief at the time. According to the order "[...] the four (4) officers [...] actively participated in the management of the incident, as they were constantly and personally informed of its progress, participated in meetings to assess and plan the necessary actions, and ultimately approved (as they themselves admit) the decisions that were taken, each of them having [….] an independent legal duty to protect life at sea and, by extension, a specific legal obligation to rescue (given that they agreed to or at least shared the specific decisions that were taken), and any deviation or failure to fulfill this obligation establishes their independent criminal liability [...], while, in other words, "[...] they should have realized, based on their experience, their role, their specialized knowledge, and the information available to them, that this was a vessel in distress, they failed to take the necessary and prescribed actions to classify the vessel as a vessel in distress and activate the prescribed and appropriate operational plans [such as, indicatively, Memoranda/Action Cards No. 1 'Vessel in Distress (Regardless of Flag) within Greek SRR' and No. 13 'Major Incident', etc.] for the rescue of those on board the vessel [....]"96 The main investigation before the Piraeus Naval Court is still pending. Developments on investigating and reporting pushbacks The Greek Authorities consistently deny all pushback allegations, 97 which to a certain extent may also explain the lack of any effective investigation into such allegations. In its aforementioned landmark judgment in the case of A.R.E. v. Greece, 98 the ECtHR held that: [f]urther to the foregoing and with regard to the criminal proceedings referred to by the Government, the Court notes that it is very clear from the case-file, and in particular from the information provided by the Government itself, that all the cases in which the competent public prosecutors had opened criminal investigations were discontinued […]. As a result, none of these cases progressed beyond the preliminary investigation stage and, consequently, no proceedings were brought against those who might have been responsible. In the light of the very large number of complaints lodged and the reports of the competent national and international institutions, which point to recurrent shortcomings that hamper the effectiveness and diligence of the criminal investigations into the alleged refoulements […] the Court considers that this situation is such as to cast serious doubt on the effectiveness of the criminal proceedings […] It therefore considers that, in the present state of national practice, a criminal complaint does not constitute a remedy to be exhausted in respect of violations of Articles 2, 3 or 5 of the Convention allegedly committed in the course of refoulement. This conclusion summarises the situation of the ongoing or conducted criminal investigations in Greece for allegations connected to pushbacks. 96 97 98 Greek Council for Refugees et al, Joint Press Release, “Pylos shipwreck: Criminal prosecution on felony charges against the current head of the Coast Guard and senior members of its leadership “ 23 May 2025, available https://tinyurl.com/3kpkd98t See for example Council of Europe, Commissioner for Human Rights, Letter to the Minister for Citizens’ Protection of Greece, the Minister of Migration and Asylum of Greece and the Minister of Shipping and Island Policy of Greece, 3-5-2021, CommHR/DM/sf 019-2021, “I am deeply concerned that the official reaction of the Greek authorities has often been to simply dismiss allegations of pushbacks despite the overwhelming body of evidence that has been presented in recent years”, available here. ECtHR, A.R.E. v. Greece (Application no. 15783/21), 7 January 2025, para. 198, available in French here. 42