Constitutional revisions usually serve to improve the function of the polity, the state and the protection of citizens. But Greece's current constitutional revision, argues Dimitra Mareta, merely serves the political programme of the governing party, and has advanced with the help of far-right MPs. This, she warns, could lead the country down a dangerous path
Despite being revised just seven years ago, the Constitution of Greece is under another revision, to secure the current conservative government's ideological principles. The revision does not involve major changes in the relationship between state and society, or in the polity. Rather, it aims to constitutionalise the governing party's ideological and political programme. This revision is therefore not a constitutional process but a deeply political one.
In February 2026, Prime Minister of Greece Kyriakos Mitsotakis announced he wanted, among other minor proposals, to:
Later, Mitsotakis announced measures to prevent an MP being a minister at the same time, but withdrew them after objections from the governing party's MPs.
The next parliament, which will form after the next national elections, will decide on all these proposals and more. Because none won at least 180 votes in this parliament, each will need the support of 180 MPs in the next one, as the Constitution requires.
Following extreme destabilisation and turbulence over recent years, the 300-strong Greek parliament currently has the most independent MPs in its history: 52.
Some come from the Spartans, a 'stillborn' party founded by affiliates of former Golden Dawn member Ilias Kasidiaris. The Spartans are widely seen as existing only to secure parliamentary presence and state funding for Kasidiaris' National Party – Hellenes. The Supreme Court (Areios Pagos) barred the National Party from participating in the 2023 national elections.
Some independents support the government, voting in favour of almost all its bills. In this revision, only MPs from the governing New Democracy party, along with some independent MPs, voted for these proposals. Four of them, along with one MP from the sui generis right-wing party Greek Solution, all voted for several of the current proposals. The second vote, in September 2026, produced a similar result.
This confirms the collaboration of conservatism and the extreme right in Greece. We have seen it before with yearly budgets, a bill introducing 13-hour working days for a specific number of days per year, and opposition to a no-confidence vote against the government.
But seeing it confirmed in the constitutional revision – a revision rejected by every other party – means much more than just adding votes. The governing conservative party claims to be a liberal, moderate, centre-right force. But it has repeatedly espoused extreme-right policies, such as suspending the asylum procedure and closing borders to migrants. Moreover, it has never turned down the votes of far-right independents.
Greece's governing party claims to be liberal and moderate. But it has espoused extreme-right policies, such as suspending the asylum procedure and closing borders to migrants
The government’s willingness to rely on far-right votes when every other party opposes the revision is telling: these MPs back it because they recognise their own ideology in its programme.
Bear in mind, too, that the chair of the parliamentary committee on constitutional revision is Makis Voridis, a New Democracy MP since 2012. Voridis is a longstanding and prominent figure on Greece's far right. In the past he has claimed the right must change state mechanisms so that the left will never again govern the country. And when Voridis says 'the left', he means any non-right actor across the political spectrum.
Abolition of permanent tenure for civil servants could lead to further privatisation of public services, because private contractors could replace dismissed civil servants. It could also make public servants vulnerable to persecution by the government based on their political beliefs or their unions' actions. The pretext for abolishing tenure is that it will combat corruption. But the disciplinary and penal proceedings for weeding out corruption and dismissing those responsible are already provided in public sector law.
Establishing a permanent fiscal balance means institutionalising austerity, because it recognises fiscal balance as the cardinal and ultimate end of every government. Failing to maintain this balance would mean violating the constitution. Every future government must thus comply with the provision, no matter what its priorities are, or the specific circumstances it faces. In political terms, this means that a neoliberal government has introduced and constitutionalised ordoliberalism. The provision aspires to bind every future government to the current government's ideology for years to come, until any next revision is constitutionally allowed.
Finally, there is the foundation of private universities. Private universities are already permitted in Greece under this government's own Law 5094/2024 – a law also voted for by extreme-right MPs.
Ending the state’s monopoly on higher education signifies the ideological victory of the right over the alleged ideological hegemony of the left
According to Article 16 of the Greek Constitution, tertiary education is provided exclusively by the state. Yet in 2025, the Council of State, Greece's supreme administrative court, ruled that Law 5094/2024 was constitutional. So why then revise Article 16 to allow private universities?
Ending the state’s monopoly on higher education is one of the biggest ideological flagships of the government – and of the PM personally. It signifies the ideological victory of the right over the alleged ideological hegemony of the left, which was never, of course, a real thing.
While more proposals are on the table, those outlined in this article show that political, not constitutional, reasons are the motivation for the current constitutional revision. This revision, if finally approved, will oblige every subsequent government to operate within this government's political milieu.
The changes proposed by the current government serve political and ideological aspirations – and undermine the role and meaning of constitutional revision itself
Thus, these changes serve political and ideological aspirations – and undermine the role and meaning of constitutional revision itself. And when they are achieved with a little help from far-right friends, the government’s rationale for revising the Greek Constitution becomes clearer.
Dimitra holds a PhD in political theory on the theory of dictatorship.
She has worked as an adjunct lecturer at various universities, has published numerous academic articles, and participated in national and international conferences.
Her research and teaching interests include political theory of conservatism, the state, neo/liberalism, anti/feminism and women’s studies.
Her chapter on the theory of democracy appears in the Introduction to Political Science (Gutenberg, Athens, 2023) eds. Costas Eleftheriou, Yannis Tsirbas, Panos Koliostasis and Sophia Kanaouti, which presents theories of democracy from Ancient Athens to the present day.
