Greece is moving forward with sweeping constitutional changes designed to place artificial intelligence under explicit democratic constraints, reflecting growing concerns that private technology platforms have accumulated data and power beyond effective public accountability.
Conservative Prime Minister Kyriakos Mitsotakis outlined the proposed revisions 1 day ago, arguing they are necessary to protect democratic governance and individual liberty as AI becomes increasingly central to modern life. The constitutional amendment would establish that "Artificial intelligence shall serve the freedom of the individual and the prosperity of society, ensuring that risks are mitigated and that the advantages it provides are fully realized."
Mitsotakis framed the changes as essential protection for future generations. Speaking to lawmakers from his governing center-right party, he stated, "It's very important that, in this process of constitutional revision, we take care of the world that will host our children." He emphasized that AI represents "this great revolution" that "must also be constitutionally placed at the service of individual freedom and social well-being."
The Constitutional Framework
The proposed revision is part of a broader set of constitutional changes that would reshape Greek governance across multiple domains. Beyond the AI provision, the amendments include expanding postal voting, increasing mandatory schooling from nine to 11 years, and banning retroactive taxation. The constitutional revision process is lengthy, involving a series of votes by two successive parliaments and typically requiring some cross-party support.
Mitsotakis identified AI alongside climate change and water resource protection as defining challenges of the era. He stated, "These challenges already dominate today: from the climate crisis and protection of water resources to renewable energy sources, but above all the use of artificial intelligence."
Private Power and Democratic Oversight
Some constitutional experts in Greece argue that explicit constitutional language is necessary because major private technology platforms now hold enough data and power to operate beyond effective public oversight. This concern has prompted the government to take additional measures to constrain platform influence over citizens, particularly the young.
Last month, the government unveiled plans for a full social media ban for children younger than 16, stating it was intended to pressure the European Union to adopt similar rules. The move reflects a determination to reassert governmental authority over technologies that shape public discourse and individual development.
Evripidis Stylianidis, the government's lead lawmaker on the constitutional revision, emphasized the stakes involved. He told state radio that "The protection and proper use of artificial intelligence touches all human rights in daily life and is something that must concern us in the constitutional revision." He also noted that "Many issues today are defined at the international level," suggesting that constitutional protections are necessary precisely because global technology companies operate across borders beyond traditional regulatory reach.
Greece's Technology Trajectory
Greece has been an eager adopter of AI and modern technology since emerging from a major financial crisis eight years ago. The country has upgraded border surveillance, rebuilt its tax administration, and deployed a powerful government services platform that now manages everything from obtaining a divorce to buying tickets for domestic soccer matches.
This embrace of technological advancement stands alongside the constitutional caution reflected in the proposed amendments. The government's approach suggests a pragmatic recognition that technology adoption and technological constraint are not contradictory but complementary—that societies can harness AI's benefits while establishing legal guardrails to preserve democratic accountability and individual rights.
Why This Matters:
Greece's constitutional approach to AI governance raises important questions about how democracies can maintain institutional control over transformative technologies. By embedding AI constraints directly in constitutional law rather than relying on regulatory agencies or legislative statutes, Greece is attempting to create durable protections against shifts in political will or regulatory capture. The concern that private technology platforms hold power beyond effective public oversight reflects a real institutional problem: traditional democratic accountability mechanisms were designed for an era when power was more geographically bounded and transparent. The constitutional amendment represents an effort to reassert democratic sovereignty over technologies that transcend traditional boundaries of state authority. Whether such constitutional provisions prove effective in practice, and whether other democracies adopt similar frameworks, will influence how technology governance evolves globally. The simultaneous embrace of AI adoption and constitutional constraint suggests recognition that technological progress and democratic protection need not be opposing forces.