The Nicosia Permanent Criminal Court reserved its decision on Friday on whether a number of documents withheld from the defence should remain excluded from the evidential material in the Central Prisons documents case.
The prosecution maintains that the documents fall within exceptions provided by legislation and therefore should not be disclosed to the defence.
The court scheduled the matter for 22 September 2026 at 9.30am, when it will deliver its interim ruling after hearing further clarifications from the prosecution and submissions from the defence on issues raised during the previous hearing.
Questions raised by the court
During proceedings last Tuesday, the court sought additional clarification on three specific issues:
- Documents for which there was uncertainty as to whether they had been disclosed to the defence;
- Lawyer-client communications contained within seized material; and
- Whether the defence must demonstrate how it has been prejudiced by the non-disclosure of the disputed documents.
Responding to the court's questions, prosecutor Anna Matthaiou said the requested clarifications related to documents numbered 204, 205 and 206.
She also referred to four digital discs containing lawyer-client communications that form part of the 421 items linked to the sixth and ninth counts of the indictment.
Matthaiou said there is currently no charge before the court relating to the interception of those communications, adding that she could not say whether the indictment might be amended later in the proceedings.
Defence challenges prosecution position
Lawyer Christos Triantafyllides, representing the first defendant, argued that once the prosecution seeks to rely on specific documents, those documents become relevant to the case and the defence must be allowed to make submissions regarding their admissibility.
He added that a different issue would arise only if the prosecution ultimately decided to withdraw the documents on the basis that they were irrelevant.
The second defendant, Athina Demetriou, who is representing herself, disputed claims by the prosecution that the defence had received a catalogue and summary of the disputed documents or that the documents contained essential identifying information such as dates, senders, recipients, classifications and subject matter.
She argued that neither a catalogue nor a summary had been provided and maintained that some documents lacked the identifying details cited by the prosecution.
Documents are part of the evidence, defence argues
Chloe Constantinou, representing the third defendant, argued that both the disputed documents and the indictment-related documents that form part of the pre-trial process constitute relevant evidential material and should therefore be disclosed.
She said the documents form part of the evidential case relating to her client and referred to relevant case law in support of her position.
Constantinou further argued that the defence is not required to reveal its trial strategy, but only to demonstrate the objective relevance of the documents to the evidence in the case.
With submissions completed, the court reserved its interim decision for 22 September, when it will determine whether the disputed documents that have not been disclosed to the defence will remain excluded from the evidential material.
Source: CNA
