A magazine cover showing a photoshopped image of the Greek Prime Minister with torture scars on his face, in direct reference to the Greek Police’s use of torture, sparked controversy, with MPs maintaining that it is “an invitation to terrorism”. Yet questions over the recent incident where the Greek Police presented to the public a series of photoshopped images of youths arrested on robbery charges in an attempt to hide evidence of brutality, as well as the statement by the Minister of Public Order that this was done so that they are “recognizable”, remain painfully under-addressed, while claims of torture and police brutality keep mounting.
Publishing the photographs and personal information of citizens arrested on various charges, and asking the public to provide additional information on other crimes they may have committed, is one of the most controversial practices favored by the Greek Police today. Greek law states that the publication of photos or data of arrested persons awaiting trial is prohibited, except in cases of public danger. One is hard pressed to understand what sort of “public danger” is averted through the publication of photos of arrested demonstrators or even HIV positive women charged with prostitution, nevertheless the Police keep doing it and the judicial authorities keep supporting the practice.
Recently, however, this controversial practice was taken to a new level. The Police published photos of four youths arrested on robbery and terrorism charges.
When reporters and members of the public pointed out that the photos had evidently been photoshopped, and rather crudely for that matter, the Police finally released several unaltered photos of those arrested. In the second set of photos, it was revealed they had been brutally beaten.
The Minister of Public Order Mr Nikos Dendias was then asked why the first series of photos had been altered. His reply was that it was done so that the accused would be “recognizable”.
The Minister of Public Order when asked why the first series of photos had been altered, replied that it was done so that the accused would be “recognizable”
Internal Affairs were quick to clear the Police of any wrongdoing. A hasty inquiry found that the accused had been wounded during the struggle that led to their arrest. This is hard to believe. For one, the accused were armed with assault rifles and the Police disarmed them, which makes it implausible that the arrest led to the kind of prolonged fistfight that could have resulted in such beatings. Secondly, before the Internal Affairs inquiry was undertaken, local Police Authorities where the arrests took place gave a Press conference in which they mentioned nothing about a struggle during the arrest. On the contrary, they pointed out that no one was hurt. And the lawyers for the accused subsequently reiterated the sadly not unheard of police practice of beating handcuffed detainees.