Illegal OPEKEPE subsidy ring: 22 arrested from Crete referred to investigating magistrate
The European Public Prosecutor's Office has brought felony charges against 22 defendants for fraud exceeding €3 million against OPEKEPE in Crete.
European Public Prosecutor's Office brings four felony charges for €3 million fraud in agricultural subsidies
The 22 individuals arrested in the police operation in Rethymno, Heraklion and Lasithi were brought before the courts at the former Hellenic Army Officer Academy building, after spending approximately five hours at the European Public Prosecutor's Office offices in Athens. According to ERT, the total damage attributed to the alleged ring exceeds three million euros.
The European prosecutors examined the voluminous case file before bringing felony charges on a case-by-case basis concerning four offences in total. The charges relate to the operation of an alleged criminal organisation, with the aim of illegally receiving European agricultural subsidies through OPEKEPE.
Following their referral to the investigating magistrate, the 22 defendants are expected to request a period of up to five days to prepare their defence statements, as is provided for in similar felony prosecution cases.
Two alleged leaders and two accountants among the arrested
Among the 22 arrested are the two alleged leaders of the organisation, as well as two accountants who are said to have played an active role in the case. The case file includes a further 116 persons, though the exact details of their involvement have not yet been disclosed. The authorities note that the investigation is ongoing.
Parallel case in Northern Greece with €4.5 million damage
Cross-checks on OPEKEPE subsidies brought to light a second case of illegal agricultural subsidies, this time in Northern Greece. The related case file includes 317 defendants, whilst 17 arrests have already been made. The estimated damage to the organisation exceeds €4.5 million.
The focus of investigations into the northern case is the area of Vasilika, where one of the Declaration Reception Centres (ΚΥΔ) operates through which subsidy applications were submitted. The centre continues to operate normally, however in recent days a new inspection was carried out by officers from the organised crime prosecution authorities.
During the operation, police officers obtained specific declarations from farmers for extensive cross-checks with tax data, such as form E9, as well as with bank accounts. Electronic files were also seized, which are being examined thoroughly, whilst reports indicate that further arrests are not ruled out depending on findings.
ΚΥΔ staff deny responsibility for checks
Staff at the Declaration Reception Centre in Vasilika maintain that their role is limited to processing applications and not to checking the accuracy or legitimacy of the information submitted by applicants. The evaluation and cross-checking of data, they state, falls within the remit of audit mechanisms.
Disruption in local community — suspicions that were not reported
Considerable disturbance prevails in the farming community of the area. Farmers and residents are demanding immediate completion of checks and the return of illegal amounts to OPEKEPE, so that subsidies can be directed to the genuine beneficiaries.
According to accounts from the Lagkada area and other regions of Northern Greece, the existence of suspicious enrichment was known to a section of the local community. Residents report cases of individuals with no visible professional activity who suddenly displayed significant economic comfort, a fact which raised questions. Despite the suspicions, several note that there were no formal complaints, with the result that the alleged practice remained behind the scenes for years.
Cleaner in the case file — defendants cite OPEKEPE system deficiencies
Among the persons included in the case file is a cleaner, who according to reports claimed to the authorities that she was unaware of the details that appeared in her E9 form. According to her claims, an agricultural plot had been registered in her name with the promise that it would help her secure a farm pension.
On the other hand, several defendants maintain that they were legitimate subsidy beneficiaries and that they carried out genuine agricultural activity. At the same time, they attribute part of the responsibility to deficiencies in the OPEKEPE system, pointing out that there was no full connection with the Land Registry. The judicial and prosecutorial authorities continue to examine the extent of the activity of those involved and possible connections between the two cases.
Source: ERT