Significant aspects of the Videogate scandal remain unresolved despite the publication on Sunday of the findings of an investigation led by independent criminal investigator Andreas Paschalides.
In a report submitted to the attorney-general last Friday, Paschalides concludes that the video material published under the account "Emily Thompson" constituted a form of hybrid attack aimed at damaging the Republic of Cyprus, fully embracing a position publicly advanced by President Nikos Christodoulides before the investigation had even begun.
The report, however, has already generated debate in legal circles, particularly over its treatment of financial arrangements involving some of the individuals featured in the recordings.
Questions over financial gains
One of the most discussed sections of the report states that three Cypriot participants and the purported investors signed a number of agreements, including confidentiality and consultancy contracts, under which two of the Cypriot participants obtained financial benefits.
That finding has raised obvious questions. If financial gain was obtained, critics ask why potential offences relating to trading in influence were not explored further and why the individuals concerned were not identified, given their public profiles.
According to information obtained by Politis, one of the two individuals referenced in the report did not appear in the edited eight-minute video released online, but was identified through the wider body of audiovisual material collected during the investigation, which totals approximately 26 hours.
Paschalides states that the evidence gathered so far does not establish violations of the Criminal Code by any of the Cypriot protagonists.
However, he acknowledges that both he and the police investigative team examined possible breaches of Cyprus' legislation implementing the Council of Europe Criminal Law Convention on Corruption, based on the actions, statements and conduct of those involved. Ultimately, they concluded that significant reservations remained.
Edited footage deemed of little evidential value
The report states that the footage released publicly on 8 January 2026 was not authentic and had been edited.
As a result, Paschalides argues that the material was obtained through unconstitutional means, would be inadmissible as evidence and possesses little, if any, evidential value.
The edited footage features three Cypriot figures, two of whom are well known for their involvement in political life and a third linked to the business sector.
The original footage, however, runs to around 26 hours and includes a wider cast of political and business figures, both current and former.
References to Black Cube
The report also contains references to the company that produced the recordings, widely believed to be Black Cube, though it is not named directly.
Paschalides describes it as a foreign-registered private intelligence company operating internationally and employing agents across numerous countries.
Investigators say they have identified both the company and the individuals involved in producing the recordings.
According to the report, the evidence suggests the objective was not to harm private interests but to damage the Republic of Cyprus itself.
The investigator points to several factors supporting that conclusion, including the timing of the video's release, which came one day after Cyprus assumed the Presidency of the Council of the European Union, and what he describes as the characteristics of a coordinated campaign linked to efforts launched in 2021 against EU member states.
Different investment scenarios were allegedly presented to different targets, leading investigators to question whether the stated motives of the operation's client were genuine.
The report concludes that the material justifies the assessment that the video was part of a hybrid operation directed against the Cypriot state.
"Boastful talk" and "empty claims"
Two unusual terms used by Paschalides have also attracted attention: "boastful talk" and "empty claims."
He concludes that many of the statements made by some of the Cypriot participants were little more than exaggerated attempts to impress potential investors and create a favourable impression of their influence and connections.
According to the report, these claims were intended to deliver personal financial benefits, some of which were already beginning to materialise.
When investigators asked those involved to explain their remarks, only one individual agreed to comment and reportedly confirmed that interpretation. Others declined to provide explanations or responses.
Investigation to continue
Despite the main findings, the probe is not over.
The Legal Service confirmed that Paschalides' report on the content of the recordings was submitted to the attorney-general on 17 July 2026 and will now be examined alongside the investigator's recommendations and reservations.
The report also recommends extending the investigation in order to identify the individual or organisation that commissioned the recordings, as well as the motives behind the operation.
The attorney-general has accepted the request and extended Paschalides' appointment until 31 December 2026, allowing the investigation to continue in cooperation with police authorities.
