Former PM Antonis Samaras Files Motion Over Predator Spyware Case

Samaras says he has repeatedly asked the government for answers, with no response to date

Former Prime Minister Antonis Samaras has filed a motion with the Supreme Court prosecutor requesting a full investigation into how he was targeted by the Predator spyware. In the filing, Samaras states that he has repeatedly and publicly asked the government for answers on the matter, but has received no response to date.

Back in April, Samaras raised the issue from the floor of Parliament, asking the Prime Minister directly how long a state agency had been looking into why private individuals were monitoring the phone of a former prime minister of Greece, and how they had managed to do so without the state noticing.

A month later, in May, after the government blocked the creation of a new parliamentary committee to investigate the wiretapping, Samaras returned to the subject in Parliament.

He pointedly asked what Kyriakos Mitsotakis had done after learning, in the middle of the night, that surveillance had reportedly targeted half the cabinet, the military leadership and himself.

Samaras also criticized what he called the government’s official version of events, in which four private individuals, two of them foreigners, supposedly outwitted the entire Greek state and monitored specific targets for unexplained reasons.

He raised a series of what he described as obvious follow up questions, including why these four people would have carried out the surveillance, how they operated, where they were based, how targets were chosen, and whether the intercepted material could still be in foreign hands.

The Full Motion:

“Dear Mr. Prosecutor,

I am submitting this filing in relation to the case of illegal surveillance carried out through the Predator spyware, a case that has already received wide publicity and raises legitimate concern for national security and its defense, for the functioning of the institutions, and for the protection of fundamental rights.

Specifically, it has been publicly known for months now that I personally was also a target of this spyware.

I have repeatedly highlighted the fact of my illegal targeting through my public statements. I have raised it clearly and formally from the podium of the Hellenic Parliament, as well as through public debate, insisting that this is a major issue that cannot remain in the dark or in silence, and cannot become the subject of maneuvering or cover-up. In these statements, I have also emphasized, with particular insistence, the extremely serious risks that the operation of such an illegal mechanism within Greek territory entails for national security, especially under conditions of intense geopolitical instability.

It is self-evident that the surveillance of individuals holding key institutional positions constitutes a matter of exceptional institutional and national significance.

Because I have repeatedly asked the Government to investigate the case of my targeting, without any response to date.

FOR THESE REASONS

I REQUEST

The full investigation of my targeting by the Predator spyware.”

The New Gravity of the Motion

Antonis Samaras’s motion carries added institutional weight, since it is being filed with the new Supreme Court Prosecutor, Evangelos Bakelas, right after the change of leadership at the top of the judiciary and the departure of his predecessor, Konstantinos Tzavellas, who stepped down upon reaching the mandatory retirement age for members of the judiciary. It comes in a case whose closure by the outgoing prosecutor had drawn sharp criticism.

The motion may put additional pressure on the four private individuals, including Tal Dilian, founder of Intellexa, the surveillance consortium linked to the Predator spyware.

These individuals were convicted in February 2026 for illegal private surveillance, but the new motion could renew pressure for prosecutors to re-examine the case, as Samaras, being a former PM, raises the stakes as to the potential organization and coordination behind the surveillance, prompting questions such as:

  • who ordered the surveillance?
  • who selected the targets?
  • where did the intercepted material go?
  • does it remain in private or foreign hands?
  • how such an operation could take place on Greek territory without state knowledge or involvement
Thus, this could spark an inquiry into whether the case goes beyond violations of the privacy of individuals and whether it could instead be closely tied to a breach of national security proportions.
Follow tovima.com on Google News to keep up with the latest stories
Exit mobile version