Government does not interfere with justice, Spokesman says

The Cyprus government does not intervene or interfere with the administration of justice, Government Spokesman Kyriacos Koushos reiterated on Saturday.

He was asked to comment on the verdict, issued on December 30, 2019, by the District Court of Famagusta, which found a nineteen-year-old British woman guilty on the charge of “public mischief” for making a false gang rape accusation against 12 Israeli men last July.

As Koushos said, it is not appropriate for the government to intervene in the case in any way, as “this would imply that we don’t acknowledge and don’t respect the separation of powers.” Such an act would also imply that the government is interfering, guiding or even manipulating the courts and this is simply not happening, the Spokesman went on to say.

“We have full confidence in our courts” and the administration of justice, Koushos said and noted that no relevant decision has been taken, nor has the matter been discussed pending the court’s final judgment.

He said finally that after the decision is passed by the court “in case the government needs to reflect on something or take any decisions, I assure you that it will do so.”

Attorney General Statements

Recently, the Attorney General clarified that the defendant made serious allegations against the investigative authorities of the Republic regarding the voluntary element of her statement, adding that these allegations should not be left unanswered by a suspension of criminal proceedings but should rather be ruled on by the court before which they were raised, which is what happened.

Since the defendant in the case has argued and continues to argue that the trial was not fair, he added, it is ultimately a constitutional matter which should be raised before the court and should be ruled on by the Court.

Any intervention by the Attorney General, “whether on the grounds of public interest or any other grounds would constitute nothing else but a hindrance in determining the true facts and would be an interference in the judicial work,” he noted.