What was expected happened. There was no announcement on the ‘Sandy’ case before the parliamentary elections. This was despite alleged informal briefings suggesting that there would be an update – as had been committed – on the investigation completed by the Police and on the examination of the file submitted to the Legal Service.
The dominant question is why the briefing did not take place. The most important reason why no announcement was made after the completion of the Police investigation relates to the report from Europol’s forensic laboratory. Even within the Police there is an assessment that there was a significant delay in the dispatch of the forensic laboratory report, without any explanation having been provided for the delay. Under no circumstances will the case file be closed without including the results of Europol’s examination. This is considered a given.
Parliamentary elections
A competent source speaking to Politis stated that the parliamentary elections did not affect the timing of the briefing on the investigation into the ‘Sandy’ case. In other words, the same source said, if the Europol results had been in the hands of the Police Headquarters’ investigative team one or two weeks earlier, they would have been included in the file and, following evaluation by the Legal Service, the next steps would have been announced.
That said, the indirect link to the parliamentary elections lies in the fact that individuals whose names were mentioned in the context of the allegations were candidates, or had been candidates, on party ballots. This fact alone creates a form of connection, as some individuals were affected positively or negatively by the public exposure of the case at that particular time.
Based on these data, the briefing will take place once the Europol report is delivered. Despite the Police believing that their investigation has produced a clear picture of all aspects of the ‘Sandy’ case, the decision is to include Europol’s findings in order to reinforce the rest of their evidence.
It is recalled that Makarios Drousiotis and Nikos Clerides sent mobile phone devices and files to a certified forensic laboratory in the United Kingdom, so that they would also obtain their own expert report regarding the authenticity of the messages.
From the Police
In recent days there was intense concern between the Legal Service and the Police regarding who would provide the briefing on developments. According to information obtained by Politis, following consultation and coordination it was decided that the briefing would be delivered by the Police.
This decision was taken because, as stated, the Attorney General and the Deputy Attorney General had excluded themselves from meetings with investigators, given that their names were mentioned in the allegations made by Makarios Drousiotis. On behalf of the Legal Service, the position was expressed that the briefing on the ‘Sandy’ case should be delivered by the Police, since the ex officio investigation had begun on the instructions of the Chief of Police, Themistos Arnaoutis.
Beyond the date on which developments in the investigation into Drousiotis’ allegations will be announced, interest also focuses on the content of the briefing. That is, how far the briefing will go and to what extent it will address key questions that have arisen and remain unanswered to this day. There is also strong interest in whether criminal prosecutions will be initiated and, if so, against whom.
Certiorari not affected
Meanwhile, proceedings are under way before the Supreme Court regarding the application by lawyer Nikos Clerides for the issuance of a prerogative writ of certiorari, seeking the annulment of the search warrant executed by the Police on his vehicles, office and home.
At the most recent hearing, the court issued directions that any objection by the Attorney General to the application be filed by 2 June 2026, and scheduled a new hearing for 4 June.
