Cyprus’ Independent Authority Against Corruption has concluded that there is reasonable suspicion former president Nicos Anastasiades and several senior officials may have committed corruption-related offences.
The findings stem from a two-year investigation linked to allegations contained in the book Mafia State by former presidential aide and journalist Makarios Drousiotis.
The Authority stressed that its conclusions are based on the civil standard of proof, known as the balance of probabilities, and do not constitute criminal convictions. It added that only courts can determine criminal liability under the higher standard of proof beyond reasonable doubt.
The findings place the case at a preliminary legal stage, where evidence is assessed for potential prosecution but not tested in court.
What the findings mean
The Authority is mandated to determine whether evidence reaches the threshold of reasonable suspicion. This standard allows cases to be referred for further legal examination but does not establish guilt.
A finding of reasonable suspicion indicates that the evidence was considered sufficient to justify escalation to prosecutorial authorities. It does not amount to a criminal finding.
No person named in the report has been found guilty of any offence.
What happens next
The case file has been submitted to the Attorney General, who has exclusive authority to decide whether criminal proceedings will be initiated.
At this stage, the Attorney General may:
- request further investigation or clarification
- seek additional evidence
- decide to bring criminal charges before a court
- or close the case without further action
If charges are filed, the matter proceeds to trial, where the prosecution must prove its case beyond reasonable doubt.
Court process (if cases proceed)
Should the case reach court, defendants will have the right to challenge evidence and present a defence. The court will independently assess whether criminal liability is proven.
The Authority’s findings are not binding on any court and serve only as an investigative assessment.
Key limitation of the report
The Authority has confirmed that its findings:
- do not constitute judicial determinations
- do not establish criminal guilt
- are based on investigative assessment under a civil standard of proof
It has also stated that only parts of the full report will be made public, with the remainder withheld due to investigative sensitivity.
Why this stage matters
The case now moves from investigative conclusion to prosecutorial review. The Attorney General’s decision will determine whether the findings lead to criminal proceedings or are closed without charges.
Read more: