A public disagreement between the Attorney General‘s office and Cyprus’s Independent Authority against Corruption has emerged following parliamentary testimony over the former’s decision not to pursue corruption investigations.
Attorney General Giorgos Savvides challenged statements made by the Independent Authority against Corruption during a House session on Wednesday, forcing the watchdog body to issue clarifications about its caseload and investigative procedures.
The controversy arose after Authority representative Makis Konstantinides addressed the House Institutions Committee regarding the European Commission’s 2025 Rule of Law Report for Cyprus, which noted that the Attorney General’s Office decided not to pursue high-profile corruption cases.
Konstantinides had referenced three cases involving the same police officer during discussions about a complaint against Assistant Attorney General Savvas Angelides concerning potential conflict of interest in cases where criminal prosecutions were suspended.
Authority processed 535 complaints since establishment
The Authority revealed it has received 535 complaints through 31 August 2025, completing examination of 273 cases. Officials defined “completed examination” as cases either rejected during preliminary review due to lack of jurisdiction or insufficient evidence, or cases where investigations concluded without establishing corruption.
Fourteen complaints underwent full investigation with varying outcomes: six investigations found no corruption, two recently completed investigations await Authority review, four investigations are at report-writing stage, and two remain ongoing.
Disagreement over witness cooperation prosecution emerges
The Authority confirmed Savvides’s assertion that no corruption cases were forwarded to his office, but clarified a separate disagreement occurred over witness cooperation requirements.
During three simultaneous investigations, the Authority found violations of legislation requiring witnesses to answer all questions during testimony, despite finding no corruption. The Authority requested criminal prosecution of an individual for failing to cooperate fully.
Savvides disagreed with the Authority’s position, leading to a public statement documenting the disagreement.
The Authority said it now considers the matter closed following the recorded disagreement.
Read more: