Cyprus authorities cannot abandon their investigation into MP Nikos Sykas over alleged violence against his partner simply because she withdrew her complaint, former EU Health Commissioner Stella Kyriakidou said, citing binding obligations under the Istanbul Convention.
The Law Office obtained a waiver of Sykas’s parliamentary immunity for investigation purposes despite the withdrawal, triggering debate over whether authorities can proceed—and whether political parties can exclude accused candidates from their ballots.
The Istanbul Convention is unambiguous, according to Kyriakidou, who formerly led the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe. Article 55 prohibits states from making criminal proceedings dependent solely on the victim’s will.
States must ensure prosecution continues even after complaint withdrawal, particularly for domestic violence, physical harm, sexual violence, rape, threats and coercion.
The treaty recognises that victims are often forced or pressured to withdraw complaints and that violence is not a private matter but an issue of public interest. Withdrawal cannot automatically stop criminal proceedings.
Under the convention, victims retain the right to withdraw complaints, but the state must continue investigating if sufficient evidence exists.
The framework transfers responsibility from the alleged victim to the state, removing the burden of prosecution from the victim alone.
Cyprus ratified the Istanbul Convention, making it part of the legal framework for combating violence against women and domestic violence.
The Attorney General and investigative authorities have both the power and obligation to continue criminal investigation and prosecution for domestic violence and sexual assault charges regardless of withdrawal.
Implementation depends on how authorities conduct investigations and gather evidence beyond the complainant’s testimony, Kyriakidou said.
Not every case will automatically proceed without the alleged victim’s cooperation, but authorities cannot abandon cases solely because the victim withdraws.
Sykas wants to stand as a parliamentary candidate, citing the withdrawal and denying his partner’s allegations.
A political party’s decision to exclude from its ballot someone accused of violence against a partner—even when the complaint has been withdrawn—rests on political and institutional criteria, not legal judgment of guilt, Kyriakidou said.
Kyriakidou said that this separation is fully compatible with the presumption of innocence and international commitments under the Istanbul Convention. The presumption of innocence protects individuals from criminal sanctions without a court decision.
Candidacy for public office is not a right but the result of political judgment and collective assessment. Parties never judge whether someone is guilty, she stated.
Excluding a candidate in such cases does not constitute punishment or substitute for justice. It represents a preventive and symbolic political choice aligned with the Istanbul Convention’s emphasis on prevention, deterring normalisation of violence and strengthening public trust.
The decision reflects the distinction between legal innocence and political responsibility—a distinction that strengthens rather than weakens democratic standards, according to Kyriakidou.
“Ultimately, respect for the presumption of innocence coexists with parties’ obligation to set higher political and moral standards,” she said.
“In this way, democracy is not weakened but strengthened, demonstrating in practice that political representation is inextricably linked to the values of equality, dignity and zero tolerance for violence”.
Read more: