I don't think the pretension there exists clarity about the issue of graffiti will help further a very much needed discussion.

First of all, there is a difference between aesthetical reflections and recommendations approaching policy levels i.e. what measures to take against those scrawling on walls.

Secondly, graffiti as art form on all kinds of walls translates itself into "my city as a gallery". Therefore, expressions should not be judged as having been completed nor all walls are private spaces.

Thirdly, the legal demand pertaining to 'respect for private and public property' has to do with a value system which allows the owner to do what he likes within certain conditions (with here in Greece often legal and illegal constructions confusing the difference) and the non owner nothing but to respect that piece of property.

Fourthly, there are many forms of communication by which people and especially younger ones wish to express themselves in public without however being seen when doing it hence the question arises who is responsible for these types of actions if not those who attempt to do something in anonymity?

If we wish people to break out of silence and speak their minds, we need to grant them such freedom of expression that they can also make incomplete statements. It is up to the public to take this matter further. Altogether a consensus has to be reached if the image of the city is to be safeguarded and this in more than one practical way. Adoption of cultural monuments and
heritage is one way to reach such a cultural consensus provided everyone gets involved and participates in the planning and implementation process.

Surely the same applies then to those trying to think out aloud was to how to respond to the various forms of expressions put on different types of walls.

There needs to stated collectively how
a) the Plaka and area around the Acropolis should be safeguarded
b) where Graffiti has a place in the culture of Athens
c) what understanding by artists and others has been shown so far for the development of graffiti
d) where freedom of artistic expression ends and respect for property (whether private or public) begins.

Valorization of graffiti is another aspect by which market forces begin to affect these artistic expressions. The painting over as you have pointed out is more often a political will which attempts to leave the city deprived of some real pieces of memory. We had similar cases in Berlin, that is after the squatter movement was either pushed out or domesticated wall murals disappeared even though from a cultural heritage point of view it would have been important for these art works to remain as 'memories of the future' or evidence how times lived then
can still be viewed 50 years later.

Finally in the discussion the question appears whether or not a distinction can be made between artistic expressions in graffiti and mere scrawling on walls?

In some cities movements have been created by youth which use walls but fix on them only temporary graffiti whereby the idea is to make the move so fast before the police can come and catch them. It is an urban sport.

The challenge to all is the way anyone responds even to a child's drawing which is at the very early age just a free flow of lines. Do you make sense of that or deny the fact that it is an expression of something?

ciao
Hatto