News

On 21 April 2026, the Council of State ruled on the lawfulness of the prohibition of access to classified information in the case of a Syrian national who was granted refugee status in 2017 and was later subject to a revocation procedure based on classified information indicating that the applicant posed danger to the national security of the country.

In the context of the revocation procedure that was initiated, the applicant submitted a request to access the relevant document on the basis of Article 23 (1) of the Asylum Procedures Directive (APD) and Article 76 (4) of Law 4939/2022. The request was rejected due to the confidential nature of the information the document contained. Eventually, the relevant department of the Asylum Authority issued a decision revoking the person’s refugee status. Following an appeal against the revocation decision, the Appeals Committee was able to examine the classified document and confirmed the existence of revocation grounds rejecting the appeal. The applicant sought to annul that second decision before the Athens Administrative Court and the annulment application was referred to the Council of State as it concerned a matter of general interest that affects many individuals. 

The Council of State examined the relevant provisions of EU primary law, including Articles 78, 72 and 73 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union and the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights, in particular Articles 18, 19, and 47. It emphasised the jurisprudence of the Court of Justice of the EU which has found that the right of defence is not absolute but any limitations to it may not nullify the very essence of Article 47. Referring to Case C-159/21, the Council of State held that, although Member States may withhold classified information where disclosure would endanger national security, they must nevertheless ensure respect for the rights of defence. At a minimum, the person concerned must be informed of the substance of the reasons underlying the decision so that they can effectively challenge it. Therefore, the provision of Article 76 (4) of Law 4939/2022, which allows the relevant authority to prohibit access to classified information where national security grounds exist, cannot be interpreted as precluding access to the essence of the grounds that justified the revocation decision.

The Council of State also held that refugee status may be withdrawn on national security grounds and accompanied by a return decision, but the two assessments remain legally distinct. Even after the withdrawal of status, the person may still qualify as a refugee under international and EU law and therefore continue to benefit from the principle of non-refoulement under Article 18 and 19 CFREU and Article 5 of the Return Directive. Accordingly, the national authorities must ensure at every stage of the return process that the individual is not returned to a country where they face a real risk of persecution, torture, or inhuman or degrading treatment, on the basis of an individualised and up-to-date assessment.