Government Statements on ‘Public Mischief’ Case

“The government does not interfere with cases before the courts”, Spokesman says

Government Spokesman Kyriakos Kousios has said that the government does not interfere with nor comments on cases before the courts and has expressed full confidence in Cypriot justice.

The Republic of Cyprus has constitutionally established institutions and follows the principle of the separation of powers, the Government Spokesman says in a statement.

In this context, he notes, “the government does not interfere in cases which are heard by the relevant courts of the Republic of Cyprus, nor does it comment on positions or allegations put forward regarding cases which are pending before the courts.”

“The government has full confidence to the Republic of Cyprus’ justice and courts which should be left undisturbed to apply the state’s laws and to administer justice,” Kousios’ statement concludes.

The statement was issued following reactions to a guilty verdict on the charge of “public mischief” handed down by the District Court of Famagusta yesterday to a nineteen-year-old British woman for making a false gang rape accusation against 12 Israeli men in July.

“Intervening in public mischief case would be a hindrance in determining facts”, Attorney General says

Attorney-General Costas Clerides has said that were he to intervene in the criminal case against a nineteen-year-old woman on a charge of public mischief, would constitute nothing else but a hindrance in determining the true facts of the case and it would also be an interference in the judicial process.

Clerides issued an announcement commenting on reports in the press about the case of the Briton who was found guilty of the offense of “public mischief” yesterday by the Famagusta District Court, which ruled that a gang rape allegation she made against 12 Israeli men in July had been false.

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.