The Legal Service has filed an appeal against the acquittal of former House President Dimitris Syllouris and ex-MP Christakis Giovani by the Criminal Court of Nicosia in the ‘Golden Passport’ case.
The announcement was made during a press conference, marking the beginning of a second legal chapter in a case associated with the island’s high-profile “golden passport” scandal, a controversy that had significant repercussions for Cyprus’ citizenship-by-investment programme and its property market.
According to the Legal Service, the 170-page majority decision contains judicial errors which, in the view of the Prosecution Authority, warrant review by the Court of Appeal.
Speaking at the press briefing, the Head of the Service’s Communications Team, Polina Efthivoulou, confirmed that the appeal will focus on specific legal and evidentiary issues raised in the Criminal Court’s ruling.
Senior State Attorneys Andreas Aristides and Christiana Kytheraiotou were also present.
Ms Efthivoulou stressed that judicial decisions are fully respected. However, she underlined that both the Constitution and criminal procedure laws provide for an appeal mechanism where legal errors are identified.
Among the issues cited were:
- The evaluation of witnesses who were not called to testify
- Interpretative legal questions arising from the court’s reasoning
The Prosecution’s arguments will now be developed before the Court of Appeal, while the acquitted defendants retain full rights to contest the appeal.
Split decision in court
Particular emphasis was placed on the fact that the Criminal Court ruling was not unanimous.
Senior District Judge Maria Loizou considered that the two defendants should have been found guilty on the third charge, relating to influence peddling.
The bench of the Criminal Court of Nicosia comprised President Nikolaos Georgiades and Senior District Judges Maria Loizou and Nagia Oikonomou.
Why the Al Jazeera video was not submitted
Responding to questions regarding the footage broadcast by Al Jazeera (below), Ms Efthivoulou explained that the material had been delivered in unedited form and was examined by investigative authorities.
However, for evidence to be admissible in court, it must satisfy strict legal requirements. If a piece of evidence is deemed to be the product of an unlawful act, it cannot be accepted as testimony.
For that reason, individuals who participated in the recorded conversations were called as witnesses, rather than submitting the audiovisual material itself as evidence.
The video was a follow up of an earlier Al Jazeera report, which listed a number of dubious individuals who had been granted citizenship.
The appeal
The filing of the appeal now transfers the case to the Court of Appeal, where the legal issues raised by the Prosecution will be examined afresh.
The case continues to attract political and institutional scrutiny, particularly given its wider implications for Cyprus’ former ‘Golden Passport’ scheme; an investment scheme that resulted in significant foreign investment in the island’s luxury property market before being ‘irrevocably terminated’ amid international criticism from the EU, who launched infringement proceedings against Cyprus.
Golden Passport inquiry
Former Supreme Court judge, Myron Nikolatos, headed an official inquiry into the island’s disgraced Golden Passport scheme in August 2020.
The damning report by the interim inquiry found that citizenship had been unlawfully granted in 51.81 per cent of the cases examined, while others had shortcomings.
It seems incredible that, despite a damning report and multiple investigations, not a single individual has been held criminally accountable for the corruption and abuse surrounding the disgraced Golden Passport scheme.
The following short article was published in the ‘Dark Room’ section of in-Cyprus:
A banana republic with delusions
The Law Office — that most self-important of institutions — has disgraced itself over the Al Jazeera case. And the disgrace deserves scrutiny not only for the acquittals themselves, but for what they do to an already battered public trust in the justice and accountability systems of this country that’s only growing.
This is not simply a matter of poor case management or the competence of those who represented the prosecution. It speaks to corruption, to murky entanglements, and it confirms what many have long suspected: that this so-called European state, planted somewhere in the Middle East, runs less like a democracy and more like a banana republic with a flag.
The Law Office and its leadership stand thoroughly exposed. And one cannot help but wonder — would this same staggering incompetence surface in cases involving ordinary people? Would the prosecution fumble so spectacularly against a grandfather who stole a sandwich, or someone who owes this state of scandals, arrogance, corruption, greed and fraud fifty to a hundred euros?
Is there any salvation for this country? It is becoming increasingly hard to say yes.