Organisations entrusted with vulnerable lives should face scrutiny before a scandal breaks.
The public is asked to look at the child.
Someone else should be looking at the account.
An appeal for a seriously ill child asks us to make a quick, human decision. Give something. Share the link. Help a family whose circumstances we hope never to understand.
The questions about who controls the money should already have answers.
In the investigation involving Paidiki Chara, the Greek organisation headed by Konstantinos Firinidis, police estimate alleged unlawful financial benefit of approximately €2.83 million, following financial inquiries and interviews with parents of 34 beneficiary children.
Their announcement contains another detail that deserves equal attention: investigators identified 92 fundraising drives for 74 intended beneficiaries. Police say the collections were conducted without the permission required by law. [1]
Ninety-two drives.
The criminal case will examine the alleged offences. There is also a public question: what was supposed to detect these collections before investigators began reconstructing the money trail?
Firinidis faces allegations awaiting judicial examination. His reported defence is that the money and valuables alleged to demonstrate illicit enrichment were not found and that his residence was rented. [2]
His guilt or innocence cannot settle the separate question of how fundraising is supervised.
Greece already has a permit framework. The government’s application service directs organisers to regional authorities. Central Macedonia’s guidance lists legislation governing fundraising permissions and the accounting required of licensed organisers. These arrangements sit separately from the civil-society registration framework established under Law 4873/2021. The Interior Ministry also lists legislation introducing a civil-society observatory in 2026. [3–5]
There are institutions and rules. Their existence does not tell a family what happened to the money raised in its name.
That is where accountability should become tangible.
Every named appeal should produce a family donation statement.
The beneficiary, or their authorised representative, should receive a monthly account of what was collected, what was paid for their benefit, which costs were deducted and what remains. The statement should also explain how any surplus will be used.
The family whose photograph helped raise the money should not have to beg for that information.
A dishonest statement would still be possible. The obligation therefore needs verification and a remedy. For significant appeals, an independent accountant should reconcile the figures with bank records and invoices. Smaller appeals could use a standard statement subject to spot checks.
Each appeal should identify the authority responsible for receiving complaints. A family disputing the figures should receive acknowledgement and a timetable for review. Persistent refusal to account should trigger an assessment of whether further collections must be restricted, while protecting legitimate payments for care. Restrictions should carry written reasons and a right of appeal.
These proposed safeguards would give families a practical right they could exercise while help still matters.
We also need to establish what happened under the rules already in place.
The police announcement does not identify which public authority, if any, neglected a duty. Answering that requires the permit history, the allocation of jurisdiction and any complaints or enforcement records. Those records should show whether authorities lacked information, lacked powers or failed to use powers they possessed.
Until they are examined, an accusation against an unnamed “system” offers the appearance of accountability without identifying anyone who must answer.
Other European cases show what scrutiny can uncover, and what failure can cost.
At Ireland’s Console, investigations exposed serious financial and governance concerns. Reporting on an HSE audit described an organisation dominated by its founder and difficulties obtaining satisfactory explanations. In 2024, director Patricia Kelly pleaded guilty to failing to keep proper accounting records; other charges against her were not pursued. [6–7]
The consequences reached beyond the accounts. After Console collapsed, counselling and support services had to be transferred to other providers at short notice. Ireland’s Corporate Enforcement Authority also described damage to confidence and donations elsewhere in the charity sector. [7]
People seeking help inherited the disruption.
In Britain, the Charity Commission’s inquiry into Fashion for Relief found serious misconduct and/or mismanagement, including poor financial governance and inadequate records. The inquiry recovered approximately £345,000 and protected a further £98,000. These were regulatory findings. [8]
That case demonstrates why independent scrutiny is worth having. It can establish facts, recover funds and impose consequences. Its value should be measured partly by how soon it intervenes.
These examples cannot tell us what proportion of charities are corrupt. They do show why public admiration is an inadequate financial control.
A celebrated founder still needs a board capable of challenging them. An organisation with a moving story still needs records that withstand examination. People dependent on its services need somewhere safe to complain.
Independent charity regulators already operate within the European Union. Ireland’s Charities Regulator registers and regulates charities, has a mandate to promote accountability to donors and beneficiaries, and can appoint inspectors to investigate their affairs. [9]
EU institutions have a different role. OLAF investigates fraud affecting EU financial interests. The European Public Prosecutor’s Office investigates and prosecutes relevant crimes. Neither serves as a general regulator of every charity receiving private donations across Europe. EPPO explicitly directs crimes outside its financial jurisdiction to national authorities. [10–11]
A donor’s €20 does not become an EU-budget matter simply because it was given in an EU country.
National oversight therefore matters. Every member state should ensure that charitable fundraising, including private donations, falls within clear supervisory responsibility. Whether that requires strengthening an existing regulator or coordinating several authorities will depend on the country. Families should not have to solve that administrative puzzle themselves.
For organisations providing care, financial scrutiny must sit alongside safeguarding. An accurate balance sheet cannot establish that residents are treated properly. Inspectors need access to people receiving support, independently of those managing it.
Requirements must be proportionate. A neighbourhood volunteer group should have simple reporting tools. An organisation handling millions should expect independent examination. Legitimate salaries and safeguarding costs deserve explanation, rather than automatic suspicion.
The question is whether expenditure was authorised, honestly disclosed and consistent with the purpose for which the money was entrusted.
Public fundraising subject to licensing should display a verifiable authorisation reference. Donors should be able to check it without searching several government websites. Families should be able to obtain their statement without first making a public accusation.
Governments need constraints too. Inspection criteria should be public, decisions open to challenge and scrutiny independent of political convenience.
Political friendship must buy no exemption.
Honest organisations would gain from a system that makes their work verifiable. They should not have to compete for trust solely against whoever can produce the most affecting appeal.
Nor should the public be pushed towards the exhausted conclusion that everyone is fraudulent. When that belief takes hold, the next genuine appeal arrives before people who have learned to look away.
After a serious case, the responsible authorities should publish what checks applied, which were performed and whether warnings were missed. A prosecution may establish what defendants did. An oversight review should establish what needs to change before the next family asks for help.
Every organisation entrusted with donations to support vulnerable children, migrants or people without a home should face continuing, independent oversight. Calling itself an NGO, a charity or an association should make no difference to that obligation.
The responsible body must have the resources and powers to trace payments, investigate complaints and refer evidence of theft for prosecution. It should conduct proportionate checks, including unannounced inspections where appropriate, and protect essential services when wrongdoing is uncovered.
Where such institutions already exist, the demand is for demonstrable enforcement. Where responsibility is scattered, governments should close the gaps.
Nobody should have to wait for a scandal before someone checks the accounts. Nobody’s reputation should place them beyond inspection.
Enough with discovering where the money went after the people who needed it have gone without.
If an organisation raises money in someone’s name, an independent authority should be able to verify that it reaches them or pays for the help promised. The people whose suffering made the appeal possible deserve that protection.
Sources
[1] Hellenic Police, 31 October 2026 Official announcement on the investigation into fundraising through an association–NGO Primary source for the 92 drives, 74 intended beneficiaries, permit allegation and estimated €2,829,516 unlawful financial benefit. These are police allegations and investigative findings, subject to judicial examination. www.astynomia.gr
[2] Naftemporiki, 2 November 2026 Paidiki Chara: investigation details and reported defence Includes the reported defence concerning alleged proceeds and the rented residence. www.naftemporiki.gr
[3] Gov.gr Permission for fundraising, lotteries and charitable sales Official application service directing applicants to regional authorities. www.gov.gr
[4] Region of Central Macedonia Fundraising authorisation: requirements and governing legislation Lists the permit framework and subsequent accounting rules. This guidance alone does not establish jurisdiction over every appeal examined in the case. odigos-politi.pkm.gov.gr
[5] Greek Interior Ministry Civil-society registration: questions and answers · Civil-society directorate: legislative framework, including 2026 provisions Official information on registration and the legislation establishing the observatory. www.ypes.gr
[6] RTÉ, 28 June 2016 Interim report raises concerns over Console Reports the HSE audit’s concerns about governance, financial management and difficulties obtaining explanations. www.rte.ie
[7] RTÉ, 22 February 2024 Widow of Console founder fined over accounting failures Reports the accounting conviction, the decision not to pursue other charges, and the consequences of Console’s collapse. www.rte.ie
[8] Charity Commission for England and Wales, 26 September 2024 Charity inquiry: Fashion for Relief Official regulatory findings and details of funds recovered and protected. www.gov.uk
[9] Ireland’s Charities Regulator What is a charity? The regulator’s role and powers Describes registration, regulation, accountability and investigatory powers. www.charitiesregulator.ie
[10] European Anti-Fraud Office, OLAF What we do Explains OLAF’s mandate concerning EU financial interests and its administrative investigations. anti-fraud.ec.europa.eu
[11] European Public Prosecutor’s Office Reporting a crime: jurisdiction and limits Explains which crimes fall within EPPO’s mandate and directs matters outside it to national authorities. www.eppo.europa.eu
Reporting note: This opinion draws on published reporting and official findings. No direct requests for comment were made. Paidiki Chara’s permit history, registry status and the allocation of administrative responsibility have not been independently verified. The family donation statement and proposed oversight arrangements are policy recommendations.
