You are reading: News / Voices from the Field

Greece’s Constitutional Amendment Proposal: Between Reformism and Distraction

By Dr. Ioannis N. Grigoriadis, 1 July 2026

Prime Minister Kyriakos Mitsotakis speaks in Parliament (credit: Prime Minister's Press Office/Dimitris Papamitsos via Flickr)

Amid declining public trust in the government and state institutions, Greece has embarked on a constitutional reform initiative aimed at modernizing the country's political and institutional framework. While ambitious and far-reaching, Dr. Ioannis N. Grigoriadis argues that the initiative may also serve to divert attention from a series of corruption scandals that have undermined confidence in the government. Given Greece's demanding constitutional amendment procedure and the limited prospects for cross-party support, the reforms, whose final shape will be determined by the parliament elected after the next general election, face an uncertain future.

At a moment of declining public trust in the government and growing concern about the rule of law and the integrity of state institutions, the government of Kyriakos Mitsotakis has embarked on a new constitutional reform initiative. The stated aim is to modernize Greek state institutions, improve the quality of Greek democracy and consolidate the reformist identity of the Mitsotakis administration. In political terms, however, it appears to be an attempt to divert public attention from a series of corruption scandals that have highlighted weaknesses and inefficiencies in key state institutions. It is remarkable that, in many of its reform proposals, the government claims to strengthen the protection of institutions and the integrity of processes it has itself been accused to violate in a systematic fashion.

By launching a constitutional amendment debate, the government aims to reclaim its reformist political momentum, which has substantially declined over the last few years.

If adopted, the proposed reform would constitute the fifth amendment to the 1975 Constitution, following the collapse of the 1967-1974 junta regime and the restoration of Greek democracy. The previous amendments were adopted in 1986, 2001, 2008 and 2019, with those of 1986 and 2001 being the most comprehensive. By launching a constitutional amendment debate, the government aims to reclaim its reformist political momentum, which has substantially declined over the last few years. The proposal includes changes which have been at the heart of political debate for years, while others are meant to address future challenges in a pre-emptive manner or remove unnecessary details which could be addressed through ordinary law instead.

In Greece, according to Article 110 of the Constitution, the constitutional amendment procedure consists of two phases. In the first phase, Parliament decides which articles may be amended but does not define the content of the amendments. This is left to be decided by the Parliament elected in the subsequent elections, during the second phase of the process. This arrangement allows voters to indirectly take part in the process and influence the direction of constitutional reform through their vote. If a qualified majority of three fifths (i.e. 180 votes out of 300) is achieved in the first phase, then an absolute majority of 151 votes suffices in the second phase. Conversely, if the amendment is approved by an absolute majority of 151 votes in the first phase, a qualified majority of three fifths is necessary in the second phase.

Key proposals

The report outlining the proposed reforms was prepared by the New Democracy party, following the deliberations of a committee under Member of Parliament Evripidis Stylianidis. It was then signed by Prime Minister Mitsotakis and the entire party parliamentary group, and submitted to Parliament on 2 June 2026. The most important amendment proposals include the following:

—Extending the duration of the presidential term from five to six years while removing the possibility of a second term. According to the report, the proposal aims to address rising polarization around the head of state and consolidate their unifying role. While the election of Katerina Sakellaropoulou in 2020 was widely interpreted as an overture by the Mitsotakis government toward the centrist, liberal and centre-left voters, the nomination of Konstantinos Tassoulas in 2025 was viewed as an attempt to consolidate the party’s right-wing conservative base.

—Amending the provisions regarding criminal liability of government members to improve transparency and accountability. Here, the government seems to be responding to growing public concern and dismay regarding what appeared as de facto criminal impunity of government members in a series of corruption cases.

—Limiting government intervention and strengthening the role of the judiciary in the appointment of high court leadership. Enhanced judicial participation in selecting senior judicial leaders is to be achieved by having a parliamentary committee appoint top judges (without government involvement) from a shortlist of three candidates proposed by the high courts themselves.

—Improving rules regarding the organization of referendums. This proposal appears to be an indirect reference to the 5 July 2015 referendum, which was called by the SYRIZA-ANEL coalition government on the terms of the bailout agreement negotiated between Greece and its creditors: the European Commission, the European Central Bank, and the International Monetary Fund. According to the proposal, referendum questions should be defined in a clear and understandable manner, and a minimum period of 20 days should separate the promulgation of the measure and the date of the referendum to ensure adequate time for informed public deliberation on the referendum question.

—Lifting the Prime Minister prerogative to request the President to dissolve the parliament in case of “a national issue of major significance” and introducing a parliament prerogative to dissolve itself following a government proposal to “renew the popular order.” This prerogative has proven to be the most convenient mechanism for calling early elections, as in practice, it was not possible to effectively validate the Prime Minister’s claim.

—Introducing performance evaluation principles in the public sector, redefining the concept of permanent tenure for civil servants, and promoting systems that reward merit and performance.

—Introducing a revised formulation governing higher education institutions, aimed at removing all existing limitations on the establishment of private, non-profit universities under the current framework.

—Protecting “national symbols and culture”. This was reflected in the proposal to introduce a constitutional reference to the protection of the Greek flag as “a timeless symbol of the Greek nation,” as well as to protect and promote the Greek language as “a carrier of Greek culture and heritage” and “a living bond with the Greek diaspora”. This proposal appears to be an attempt to appeal to the nationalist-conservative core electoral of the governing party which has, at times, been at odds with the government.

—Introducing innovative provisions and concepts missing in the current constitutional text, such as an extended protection of property rights; the regulation of artificial intelligence, which “should serve individual freedom and societal prosperity, so the risks inherent to it are mitigated and its advantages utilized”; the principle of intergenerational justice and solidarity in decisions affecting economic planning; the right to affordable housing; the state obligation to address the climate crisis, manage water resources, reinforce the use of renewable energy and promote environmental balance and animal protection; principles of good lawmaking, such as pre-legislative deliberation, legislative evaluation and codification; the protection of transparency, accountability and meritocracy; and the lifting of the presumption of competence against decentralized authorities.

Between Reformism and Distraction

While most of the amendment proposals could, in the abstract, be considered as a constructive contribution to the modernization of the Greek Constitution, the political context surrounding the initiative adds a completely different hue to it. Over the past years, the Greek government has faced severe criticism for corruption and undermining the integrity of state institutions and the rule of law on various occasions such as the OPEKEPE, Tempe and Predator affairs. Under these circumstances, it remains a challenge for the government to credibly claim that it is advancing the independence and integrity of state institutions, particularly when substantial evidence appears to point in the opposite direction.

[T]he willingness of most opposition parties to support the constitutional amendment process is likely to be limited (...).

This also suggests that the willingness of most opposition parties to support the constitutional amendment process is likely to be limited, making it unlikely that a qualified majority will be secured in the first phase of the amendment process. Opposition parties, most notably the Panhellenic Socialist Movement (PASOK), have already severely criticized the constitutional amendment proposals. Their criticism has been echoed by prominent constitutional law experts who have also held senior government positions, such as former President Prokopios Pavlopoulos and former Deputy Prime Minister Evangelos Venizelos. They have argued that the government’s true intentions are called into question by its previous policies.

The lack of cooperation with opposition parties further suggest that a qualified majority would be necessary to realise constitutional reform in the second phase of the constitutional amendment process following the next parliamentary elections. At the same time, as opposition parties accuse the government of corruption and collusion with the judiciary, it becomes increasingly difficult for the government to credibly present itself to public opinion as reform-oriented and committed to combating corruption.

Conclusion

While public trust in the integrity of state institutions remains rather low, and several government initiatives have provided ample ground for criticism from the opposition, how realistic is the amendment of the Greek Constitution, which requires consensus across political parties to meet the qualified majority threshold? Many commentators have argued that the government decision to launch this debate is driven by a willingness to divert public attention from the current political agenda to a more abstract discussion on political reform, where it believes it can gain the upper hand against a fragmented and disorganized opposition. Moreover, the inclusion of proposals such as the constitutional protection of national symbols suggests that the initiative may be motivated more by communicative and political considerations than by a genuine commitment to constitutional modernization. In any case, the parliamentary debate has already begun, and Parliament is expected to vote on the proposed amendments soon, leaving the final decision to the Parliament to be formed after the next parliamentary elections, which will take place at the latest in July 2027, when the term of the incumbent Parliament ends.

About the Author

Dr. Ioannis N. Grigoriadis is Associate Professor at the Department of Political Science and Public Administration at Bilkent University and Senior Fellow at the Hellenic Foundation for European and Foreign Policy (ELIAMEP).

Suggested Citation

Ioannis N. Grigoriadis, 'Greece’s Constitutional Amendment Proposal: Between Reformism and Distraction', ConstitutionNet, International IDEA, 1 July 2026, https://constitutionnet.org/news/voices/greeces-constitutional-amendment-proposal-between-reformism-and-distraction