GOA Lawyer Tsougarakis ANAXIOS to Receive An Award

By Lambros Karpodinis

The Hellenic Federation of New Jersey will hold its annual gala dinner on June 7 to honor a charitable foundation and the Archdiocese’s lawyer, George Tsougarakis, with a “Lifetime Achievement Award.”

The charitable organization, part of the Pan-Gregorian enterprises, a cooperative of restaurants, has contributed to many charities and is worthy of the award.

LINK HERE TO SEE THE OFFICIAL ANNOUNCEMENT BY THE NJ FEDERATION HFNJ INVITE 2026 GALA INVITATION

On the other hand, George Tsougarakis, the Archdiocese’s lawyer, contrary to the accolades in the invitation, has not met the criteria to receive any award. Let me explain why that is the case.

1. Tsougarakis has failed to present an image of the Church as loving, Christ-like, and patient. He prefers confrontational, demeaning, and dictatorial actions instead of peaceful, patient mediation, as is necessary in a Christian Church.
2. Tsougarakis has presented the Church as an adversary to longtime parishioners, determined to silence legitimate, evidence-based complaints, proving himself a partisan hack whose main concern is to frustrate and delay complainants until they are exhausted.
3. Tsougarakis has repeatedly threatened members of the Greek Orthodox Church, myself included, with lawsuits, contrary to Scripture’s strict prohibition (Corinthians 6:1).
4. Tsougarakis has publicly humiliated me by referring to me as a liar, as someone less reputable than others, or as “threatening.” None of those characterizations was backed by evidence.
5. Tsougarakis designated me as a “member not in good standing,” despite being a 50-year member of the Church, a former board member, and a significant financial contributor. He never disclosed what this decision was based on, what evidence was presented, or what witnesses were interviewed. He did not even allow me to be present to respond. This improper “decision” was intended to intimidate me. Moreover, he abused his position at the Archdiocese by defaming a lay steward of the Church, whom he has no right to judge.
6. Tsougarakis’s lack of transparency regarding his salary and benefits, paid by parishioners, is an affront to decency, common sense, and Scripture (2 Corinthians 8:21).
7. Tsougarakis’s secular, corporate attitude, which does not belong in a Church, is another black mark against the institution he represents.
8. Tsougarakis’s repeated threats of lawsuits against publications that use images from the Orthodox Observer, whose images are ultimately funded by parishioners, create an atmosphere of suspicion and resentment toward the Church.
9. Tsougarakis’s inconsiderate treatment of a struggling mother of three children, who appealed to him for assistance in a dispute with St. Basil Academy, and his refusal to reply to her, left her vulnerable to homelessness before winter. The matter eventually went to court, where St. Basil’s was found at fault. This points to an obvious lack of empathy for “the least among us,” without which a Church ceases to be a true house of God.
10. Tsougarakis’s threats to sue me, when all of my grievances concern paid Church employees or the board president and are based on truthful information, demonstrate a disregard for my constitutional right to free speech. This proves, without a doubt, his anti-Christian and un-American character.
11. Tsougarakis’s “extensive experience in law,” as described in his biography, is questionable. His threats of litigation against me ignore the protections afforded by Anti-SLAPP legislation, which places the burden of legal expenses on the litigant. This would have required Church resources to be spent satisfying his ego rather than alleviating hunger and suffering, which should be the concern of a Christian Church.
12. Tsougarakis, along with his overseer, Bishop Nektarios, was willing to spend Archdiocesan resources—which do not belong to them, but to God—in order to bully me and force me into submission.
13. Tsougarakis’s access to EthicsPoint gives him the power to delay decisions for months, decide cases without providing proof, disregard submitted evidence, and close cases at will. Once again, this reflects a dictatorial and confrontational approach, with little regard for the complainant’s legitimacy.
14. Proof of his neglect in addressing serious matters can be seen in the recent indictment of the priest of the Buffalo, New York church for the theft of $450,000, as well as the dismissal of the priest at Holy Trinity Cathedral for inappropriate conduct. In the former case, the district attorney took action based on complaints from board members, without Tsougarakis taking any proactive measures to prevent such a significant theft of Church resources. This raises an obvious question: Why is he employed at such substantial compensation if he does not prevent such abuses? The answer is obvious: to intimidate lay parishioners, protect the status quo, and bully those who complain.
15. An example of EthicsPoint misuse under Tsougarakis’s oversight involves my home parish, St. George in Ocean Township, New Jersey. Parishioners are told every Sunday, before the collection tray is passed, that part of the collection will be used for the poor and the sick. The Church budget proves that not a dime goes to the poor or the sick. Despite my complaint, Tsougarakis chose to close the case based on incorrect information.
16. Proof of all of the above is available to anyone who inquires.

Tsougarakis has done his utmost, through ignorance of Scripture and Church traditions, to harm the Church. He has done nothing in his capacity as a Church representative to promote the Church as a loving, Christ-like institution. Instead, he has helped portray it as the very type of “scribe and hypocrite” that Christ condemned in the Sermon on the Mount.

Therefore, Tsougarakis is ANAXIOS of being considered for such an honor. If honors are bestowed upon those who do not deserve them, they cheapen both the honor itself and the institution that grants it.