The Anti-Corruption Authority is launching four new investigations into alleged corruption cases involving current and former officials and public servants. The inspection officers who will conduct them have already been appointed and are expected to begin work next week.
At the same time, procedures are moving forward for an investigation concerning Assistant Attorney General Savvas Angelides, over the alleged conflict of interest attributed to him in the black spy van case.
New terms of reference to name officials
Politis has learned that new terms of reference are being drafted. They will explicitly name Mr Angelides, as well as the other officials and political figures to be examined. The aim is to avoid a repeat of the recent dispute over the content of the terms of reference the Anti-Corruption Authority sent to the Legal Service.
Attorney General George Savvides had stated that the Angelides case was not included in the terms of reference sent to him. However, Transparency Commissioner Haris Poyiadjis had informed him about it privately, in the presence of prosecutors and of Mr Angelides himself. Mr Angelides left the room when his name was mentioned.
Meanwhile, two investigation reports are before the Authority. They are being assessed, and their findings are expected to be made public in the coming days.
943 complaints, 19 investigations
The scale of the Authority’s workload appears in a memo it sent to the House of Representatives ahead of the debate on its 2027 budget. The House Finance Committee will hold that debate on Monday.
According to the memo, up to 30 September 2026:
- 943 complaints were submitted
- 673 of these were examined
- 19 led to a decision to open an investigation
- 11 of those investigations were completed, with reports issued
Complaints outside the Authority’s remit
The Anti-Corruption Authority rejects dozens of complaints about possible criminal offences on grounds of lack of jurisdiction. This does not necessarily mean the complaints are unfounded. It means that investigating them falls outside the powers the law grants to the Authority.
Under Articles 6 and 7 of the law governing its operation, the Authority examines complaints about specific acts of corruption. These include bribery of a public servant, the giving or taking of bribes by a public official, unlawful acquisition of property benefit and abuse of power.
In the private sector, the Authority may intervene in two situations: where persons from the public or wider public sector are involved in acts of corruption, or where persons from the private sector are involved in the corruption of public officials and public servants. Complaints directed solely against private individuals fall outside its remit.
Where a complaint points to a possible criminal offence outside its competence, the Authority urges citizens to turn to the competent authorities. In serious cases, the Authority may forward complaints to the relevant state services itself, as it has done on several occasions in the past.
Offences identified in four reports
In almost four years of operation, the Anti-Corruption Authority has recommended that the Attorney General open a criminal investigation into possible acts of corruption in the following four cases:
- Nicos Anastasiades and 14 others: The former President of the Republic and 14 other natural and legal persons are under investigation over the matters set out in the Authority’s report on the “Mafia State”. The criminal investigation is ongoing.
- Nicos Kouyialis, Loizos Loizides and Costas Hadjipanayiotou: The former Agriculture Minister, the former director of the Fisheries Department and the former director of the Environment Department are under criminal investigation over the illegal development at Trimiklini and the diversion of water from the Kouris river. This criminal investigation is also ongoing.
- Marinos Sizopoulos: In its report, the Authority attributed possible criminal offences to the former EDEK leader. These were fraud, forgery, making and circulating a forged document, and conspiracy to defraud. The criminal investigation has been completed. The file has been sent to the Legal Service, which will assess whether criminal prosecution is warranted.
- Constantinos Parmaklis: The former general manager of the Larnaca Sewerage Board, now general manager of the Nicosia District Local Government Organisation (EOA), was investigated for possible breaches of public procurement legislation and for awarding a contract to a relative. The criminal investigation has been completed. The file is with the Legal Service, which will assess whether to bring a criminal prosecution.
€960,000 for investigations
The Authority’s 2027 budget amounts to €1,924,419, a reduction of €73,347 compared with 2026. The largest item is the purchase of services, at €960,000. Among other costs, this covers the fees of the inspection officers appointed to investigate complaints.
Inspection officers are chosen from a list the Authority maintains, according to the subject and requirements of each investigation. The list includes retired judges, lawyers, economists and auditors, among others.
Fees depend on several factors: the investigators’ academic qualifications and specialisation, how difficult the case is, and whether the investigators come from abroad. Investigators from abroad bring additional costs for accommodation, subsistence and travel.
The Authority uses foreign investigators in cases involving current or former senior state and elected officials. The aim is to strengthen the independence and credibility of these investigations and to limit challenges to the impartiality of the findings. The Authority took this approach in the investigation concerning former President Nicos Anastasiades, and in the examination of complaints against Assistant Attorney General Savvas Angelides.
Lack of investigative powers
Investigative powers remain a central issue in how the Anti-Corruption Authority operates. Almost four years after it was set up, the Authority still does not have such powers. As a result, the police carry out the criminal investigation of cases arising from its work, under the instructions of the Legal Service.
If the Authority had investigative powers, it could directly appoint independent criminal investigators, including from abroad, in cases involving senior current or former officials. The investigation would then be carried out under the Authority’s own responsibility. Its findings would go to the Attorney General with a substantiated recommendation, for a decision on whether to prosecute.
The absence of such powers remains one of the key institutional issues in the Authority’s operation. The question is whether the Authority can fully carry out its mission when it is responsible for examining complaints and recommending further investigation of serious cases, but does not itself control the criminal investigation.
