Pursuant to Article 224 of the Penal Code (PK), perjury is punishable by imprisonment of at least one (1) year for anyone who knowingly gives false testimony, whether as a party to proceedings or as a witness before an authority or a court. Perjury is regarded as an offence affecting the administration of justice, and for this reason criminal prosecution against the offender is initiated ex officio.

Many people find themselves charged with perjury without fully realising it, because in the heat of the moment they make a statement before a court or an authority and the opposing side files a criminal complaint in order to pressure them and undermine the value of their testimony. In other cases, of course, individuals knowingly give false testimony in order to assist one side or themselves, where they are the interested party. Whether one is a defendant accused of perjury or wishes to file a formal complaint against someone they believe has committed perjury, the matter requires expert legal handling.

What is perjury?

If a party to civil proceedings knowingly takes a false oath, that party is punishable by imprisonment of at least one year Article 224 § 1 PK. Anyone who, while being examined under oath as a witness before an authority competent to conduct such sworn examinations, or who refers back to an oath previously taken, knowingly gives false testimony, denies, or conceals the truth, is punishable by imprisonment of at least one year Article 224 § 2 PK. The oath is treated as equivalent to the affirmation of clergy on their priesthood, the affirmation that the law allows in lieu of an oath for adherents of religions that prohibit oaths, and any other affirmation that, under procedural law, replaces the oath Article 224 § 3 PK. Perjury is a misdemeanour Article 224 § 1 PK Article 224 § 2 PK Article 18 sub-paragraph 2 PK. Perjury is prosecuted ex officio Article 224 PKArticle 36 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (KPD).

Objective and subjective elements of witness perjury

The objective elements of witness perjury under Article 224 § 2 PK are established when:

• the witness gave testimony under oath before an authority Areios Pagos (Crim.) 707/2013 Article 224 § 2 PK; and
• that authority is competent to conduct the sworn examination of the witness AP (Crim.) 707/2013 Article 224 § 2 PK; and
• the facts stated by the witness are false AP (Crim.) 707/2013 Article 224 § 2 PK.

The subjective elements of witness perjury under Article 224 § 2 PK are established when:

• the perpetrator acted knowingly, in the sense of certainty, that the facts being testified to were false AP (Crim.) 1859/2009 Article 224 § 2 PK; and
• the perpetrator acted with the intention of giving testimony to those false facts AP (Crim.) 1859/2009 Article 224 § 2 PK; or
• the perpetrator acted knowingly, in the sense of certainty, as to the true facts which the witness deliberately conceals or refuses to testify to AP (Crim.) 1859/2009 Article 224 § 2 PK; and
• the perpetrator acted with the intention of concealing the true facts or refusing to testify to them AP (Crim.) 1859/2009 Article 224 § 2 PK.

Knowledge means certainty — full awareness AP (Crim.) 318/2011. The sworn testimony of the perpetrator of perjury under Article 224 § 2 PK must concern objectively inaccurate facts (and not assessments, opinions or beliefs, unless these are inseparably linked to the facts testified to) AP (Crim.) 707/2013. A fact is regarded as objectively false not only when it is contrary to objective reality, but also when it is contrary to what the witness perceived or learned from third parties’ accounts and therefore knew AP (Crim.) 707/2013. A competent authority is also any authority before which, by statutory provision, a sworn statement may be made and which may subsequently be taken into account as a valid evidentiary means by an authority competent to adjudicate the dispute AP (Crim.) 27/2015. The Magistrate (Justice of the Peace) is competent to take sworn witness statements; however, in order for these to be taken into account as a lawful evidentiary means, prior lawful summons of the opposing party of the litigant who arranges the deposition is required, pursuant to Article 270 § 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure (KPolD) — otherwise they do not constitute a lawful evidentiary means and the offence of witness perjury cannot be established for their content, unless they are to be used in interim measures proceedings AP (Crim.) 27/2015. Notaries public, although not granted competence by the courts’ organisational statute to conduct sworn examinations, have become competent to take sworn affidavits where, in the specific case, the use of the sworn affidavit as a lawful evidentiary means is permitted AP (Crim.) 707/2013 Article 1 of Law 1544/1944 Article 1 § 1 (d) of Law 670/1977. The sworn affidavit now constitutes an autonomous evidentiary means AP 204/2017 Article 339 KPolD Article 36 of Law 3994/2011. If what is attested in the sworn affidavit is false, the objective elements of perjury under Article 224 § 2 PK are fulfilled AP (Crim.) 707/2013. If the taking of the sworn affidavit requires that the litigant arranging it has previously served lawful and timely summons on the opposing party to attend the witness examination, and such summons is not effected, the sworn examination is non-existent and as such has no bearing on the proceedings in which it is intended to be used; it does not constitute a lawful evidentiary means, and the offence of witness perjury cannot be established for the facts contained in the sworn affidavit AP (Crim.) 707/2013 AP (Crim.) 1301/2008. The expression of a scientific opinion by the defendant, based on an inspection that he carried out, is not a statement of fact and cannot establish perjury — regardless of whether the opinion is correct or whether it contradicts another opinion the defendant had previously expressed AP (Crim.) 318/2011.

Concurrence or continuing offence

A “continuing offence” is one committed by the same person and consisting of multiple acts of the same kind, separated in time, each of which infringes the same legal interest and contains all the elements of one and the same offence, linked together by the same decision to carry them out AP (Crim.) 506/2015. Whether multiple acts of the same person are to be regarded as one continuing offence or as a true concurrence of offences is left to the discretion of the trial court AP (Crim.) 308/2016.

Content of the judgment on perjury

For the reasoning of a conviction for perjury under Article 224 § 2 PK to be complete, the judgment must set out, among other things:

• the true facts which the examined witness knew and instead of which he knowingly gave false testimony — that is, the true facts must be set out in contrast to those which the court accepted to be false AP (Crim.) 27/2015; and
• the factual circumstances on the basis of which the court accepted that the witness was aware that what he testified to was false AP (Crim.) 27/2015; and
• where perjury is committed through a sworn affidavit, the elements on which the competence of the authority is founded — in the sense that, pursuant to a statutory provision, a sworn statement may be made before that authority, and that statement may further be taken into account by an authority itself competent to adjudicate a dispute AP (Crim.) 707/2013.

Where perjury is committed through a sworn affidavit, and the taking of that sworn affidavit requires the litigant arranging it to have previously served lawful and timely summons on the opposing party to attend the witness examination, the judgment must state that the sworn affidavit was taken following lawful and timely summons of the opposing party of the litigant arranging it AP (Crim.) 1301/2008. If, in order for the sworn affidavit to be taken into account by the court before which it is submitted, prior summons of the opposing parties is required, and the conviction for perjury under Article 224 § 2 PK concerning that sworn affidavit makes no relevant mention of this — nor does it indirectly appear whether the defendant’s sworn affidavit before the notary was taken following prior summons of the opposing parties in the proceedings where the sworn affidavit was used — the ground of cassation under Article 510 § 1 (D) KPD is established AP (Crim.) 707/2013.

• See also article Defamation
• See also article Bodily Harm
• See also article Narcotics
• See also article Fraud
• See also article Forgery
• See also article Embezzlement
• See also article Negligent Homicide
• See also article Tax Evasion

FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS ABOUT PERJURY – DEFENCE LAWYER

1. What sentence do I face if I am charged with perjury?

Perjury is a misdemeanour and is punishable by imprisonment of at least one year under Article 224 of the Penal Code (PK). In practice, however, the sentence ultimately imposed can be significantly reduced through various legal tools. Mitigating circumstances are recognised under Article 84 PK, such as a prior honest life, subsequent good conduct, or remorse. At the same time, suspension of the sentence’s execution under Article 99 PK is available, as is conversion to a monetary penalty or community service. The lawyer assesses the factual data and raises the appropriate standalone pleas, so as to avoid a custodial sentence.

2. Is it possible to avoid conviction altogether?

Yes, and acquittals are not uncommon. Perjury requires direct intent in the form of certainty — that is, the defendant must have known with absolute certainty that what he testified to was false. If the testimony concerned assessments, opinions, impressions, or a mistaken recollection of events, the offence is not established. Furthermore, if the sworn affidavit was taken without lawful and timely summons of the opposing party, it does not constitute a lawful evidentiary means and perjury cannot be founded on it. Finally, the competence of the authority, the accuracy of the facts alleged to be true, and the defendant’s very knowledge are all open to challenge.

3. What do I do if I have been summoned as a defendant for perjury?

The first and most important step is immediate contact with a lawyer, before giving any explanation or defence statement. During the preliminary investigation and the main investigation, the defendant has the right to silence and the right to be represented by counsel. A rash defence statement may worsen the defendant’s position, whereas a carefully crafted line of defence, with documentation of the actual facts known to the defendant, often leads to acquittal. Defence counsel studies the case file, identifies formal defects, and prepares the documents and defence witnesses. Making proper use of the deadline for filing a memorandum is critical.

4. How long does a perjury case take to come to trial?

The time required depends on the workload of the competent court, the complexity of the case, and the number of witnesses. As a rule, between the filing of the criminal complaint and the trial before the Three-Member Misdemeanour Court, one to three years elapse. The pre-trial stage includes the preliminary examination, the bringing of the prosecution, and the summons to court. In the event of conviction, an appeal may be lodged within ten days, suspending the sentence’s execution. At the same time, there is the eight-year statute of limitations for misdemeanours, the completion of which results in the discontinuation of the prosecution.

5. What documents and evidence do I need for my defence?

All the documents from the civil or criminal proceedings in which the disputed testimony was given are gathered: the minutes of the hearing, the sworn affidavit or witness deposition, and the summons of the opposing parties, where applicable. Crucial are any items demonstrating what the defendant actually knew or perceived at the time of giving the testimony, such as correspondence, photographs, messages, videos, accounting records, or bank transactions. Witnesses confirming the defendant’s version of events are also useful. Defence counsel evaluates the usefulness of each document and decides what will be submitted, in order to highlight the absence of intent.

6. What is the role of the lawyer in a perjury case?

The lawyer takes on the case from the preliminary examination stage, studies the case file, and devises the defence strategy. He identifies formal defects in the charge, such as lack of competence of the authority, invalidity of the sworn affidavit due to failure to summon, or vagueness of the charge. He drafts memoranda, represents the defendant at the hearing, examines witnesses, and raises standalone pleas for mitigating circumstances. In the event of conviction, he lodges an appeal and cassation. Our firm’s many years of experience in criminal cases ensure comprehensive coverage of the client at every stage of the proceedings, with the aim of the most favourable outcome.