Appeals filed against Spartans Party acquittal for voter deception case
The Spartans political party will once again face trial following an appeal by the Athens Court of Appeals Prosecutor’s Office against the initial acquittal in a high-profile voter deception case.
The appeal challenges the decision of the Single-Member Court of Appeals, which had previously ruled there was insufficient evidence to prove that voters were misled during the 2023 elections. Prosecutors argue, however, that the case file contains substantial evidence supporting the full indictment.
Central to the appeal are conflicting statements made by Vasilis Stigas, the party’s leader. Initially, Stigas testified before the Supreme Court Prosecutor, alleging mafia-style practices within his party and direct coordination with Ilias Kasidiaris, a convicted former member of the far-right Golden Dawn party. However, Stigas later retracted his testimony, attributing his original remarks to emotional stress and external political pressures.
According to sources, the Court of Appeals Prosecutor noted significant discrepancies between Stigas' official testimony and his later public statements, particularly following a mass parliamentary boycott by Spartans MPs. The appeal specifically questions his credibility, stating:
“The reliability of the witness is seriously in doubt. The court should have more carefully evaluated his deposition and highlighted the contradictions.”
The appeal further suggests that Stigas may have changed his story to avoid the possible annulment of his party’s parliamentary representation — a matter still pending before Greece’s Supreme Special Court (ΑΕΔ).
Eleven current and former Spartans MPs, along with one lawyer and Ilias Kasidiaris, were defendants in the original case. The charges stemmed from accusations that the party was being covertly directed by Kasidiaris, in violation of Greece’s electoral laws.
Despite the seriousness of the allegations, the trial court president had stated at the time of the acquittal:
“We must judge based on the case file. There is insufficient evidence to prove deception of the electorate. Therefore, the defendants are acquitted.”
With the appeal now in motion, the case is set to return to court for a fresh hearing.
