Relatives gather outside court as prosecutor delivers recommendation
Dozens of relatives of the 104 victims of the deadly Mati wildfire (Greece, 2018) have gathered outside the Athens Court of Appeal, demanding justice as they await the prosecutor’s recommendation.
From early Wednesday morning, victims’ families stood outside the courthouse holding two large banners. The first read “We are burning – Mati 23/07/18“, and the second displayed “Justice” on one side and “Felony” on the other, as they called for the conviction of the defendants.
“We have not heard a single apology”
“We are here to hear what the prosecutor has to say. If the truth does not emerge from this courtroom, we hope that those of us here today will spread the message far and wide. We lost 160 people in Mati. To this day, we have not heard a single apology—not even the slightest commitment from any authority to ensure that such a tragedy never happens again. And, of course, justice must be served,” said Kalli Anagnostou, president of the Association of the deceased and burn victims.
“We demand justice”
Among those present was Varvara Fytrou, who lost her entire family—her husband Grigoris, her 11-year-old son Andreas, and her 13-year-old daughter Evita, who fell off a cliff while trying to escape the flames. She called for public support:
“We need everyone’s support, even at this final moment, in the hope that a miracle happens. Because at this point, that is all we can hope for—a miracle that something changes in this trial, in this world. Those of us left behind only ask for one thing: justice. And that is what we cling to.”
In addition to those who lost their lives, 57 burn victims still suffer, with some undergoing multiple surgeries to treat their injuries.
Some people outside the court wore t-shirts reading “Drowning”, referencing the deadly 2017 floods in Mandra, another painful reminder of loss and government mismanagement.
Prosecutor’s plea: Why charges cannot be upgraded to felony
Inside the courtroom, prosecutor Stamatia Perimeni presented her recommendation, addressing legal and factual issues surrounding the case. The most sensitive and controversial aspect of her plea was her explanation to the grieving families regarding why the charges remain misdemeanours rather than felonies.
She clarified that even if a law is flawed, it must be applied as written. She emphasised strongly that upgrading the charges from misdemeanour to felony would risk the case being statute-barred, leading to no punishment for anyone.
The risk of statute of limitations
The victims’ lawyers requested that her recommendation be submitted in writing, but the prosecutor explained that it would be submitted at a later stage:
“Due to the gravity of the case and time constraints, I put myself through a Herculean effort to prepare this for all these people. The reason I would see scenes from this tragedy whenever I closed my eyes and these people whenever I opened them was so I could prepare it. That is why I will submit it in writing later,” she said.
She also stressed that everyone involved in the trial is on the verge of collapse, as they are racing against the deadline to complete the proceedings before the case reaches the statute of limitations.
The prosecutor continued:
“These are the laws, whether we like them or not. I want to say with full awareness, utmost respect, and deep sympathy, with my head bowed, that the court cannot bring justice to the souls of those who perished—this is a metaphysical matter. However, the court will strengthen the sense of security among citizens, ensuring that responsibilities are assigned where they belong, so that tomorrow we can feel safer. At the same time, the defendants must know that they will be judged according to the laws in force.
The law is not made by the courts, but the courts must apply it rigorously to maintain legal certainty.
It is a moral duty to the people whose lives were destroyed, who are condemned to live with loss, death, and the horrific images of their loved ones perishing. They must know exactly what is being judged.”
Criminal omissions and the failure to evacuate
The prosecutor then addressed failures by the Fire Department, Local Authorities (OTA), and Civil Protection, particularly their failure to conduct a preventive evacuation before the fire reached Mati.
“An organised preventive evacuation can only take place when it is still safe to do so, not when the fire is already at people’s doorsteps. However, when the fire is 1, 2, 3, or even 5 kilometres away, at that point, while citizens are not yet in immediate danger, the threat is visible, and this is when a preventive evacuation must be implemented,” she stressed.
At this point, victims’ relatives erupted into applause.
She continued:
“How can a security body decide, ‘I will save these people but not the others’? This could only be justified in times of war. When it comes to the protection of civilians, there are no first- and second-class citizens. There is no hierarchy—only the duty to protect human life, and based on this, resources should have been allocated. This priority has never changed.”
As she analysed aerial firefighting resource deployment, a victim’s relative shouted:
“So if they had told them to go off a cliff, they would have done so?”
The judge ordered the woman to leave the courtroom, prompting protests from other relatives, who cried out:
“Understand our pain!”
The judge responded:
“I respect you, but please step outside for a moment to collect yourself. Everyone here is in pain. Please respect the process.”
The prosecutor added:
“I have nothing but compassion for their pain. They stand here with absolute dignity, and I know they do not want someone to be punished unfairly.”
The audience applauded again.
Courtroom tension over legal classification of charges
As the prosecutor explained legal classifications, highlighting the differences between gross negligence and conditional intent, tensions rose.
“In cases of gross negligence, justice has the means to impose penalties comparable to those of intent.
You cannot change the charges, because doing so would destroy the case, it would be overturned in higher courts, and we also face the risk of statute of limitations.”
At this, the audience erupted in protest:
“You will go down in history as those who acquitted Kolokotronis. No to cover-ups!”
The prosecutor replied:
“I want to be the prosecutor of the Mati case. Can we truly accept that some foresaw the disaster and allowed it to happen?”
The audience responded in unison:
“Yes, yes, yes!”
One victim’s relative shouted:
“They had dead bodies and concealed them! You don’t even know the distance between Kokkino Limanaki and Rafina, yet you say such things!”
Court recess amid rising emotions
At this point, emotions ran high, leading the court to call for a short recess to allow everyone to regain their composure.
Also read: 28/02/2023: Remembering the victims of the Tempi tragedy
Source: To Vima
