Proceedings continued on Monday at the Nicosia Criminal Court in the case against a German real estate agent accused of advertising and exploiting Greek Cypriot land in the north, with the court hearing testimony from two prosecution witnesses.
At the outset of the hearing, defence lawyer Sotiris Argyrou told the court that the hard drive containing evidentiary material seized during a search of the defendant’s offices in Germany could not be accessed by the defence without the assistance of an expert. He said that following lengthy discussions with police on 17 January, facilitated by the prosecution, the defence was provided with a hard drive containing all electronic files recovered during the German investigations.
According to the defence, the hard drive contains more than five million documents in German. Argyrou also raised concerns over the defence’s inability to access CDs related to testimony by a witness, identified as M. Neophytou, which had been handed over as part of the case material.
'Unlawful process'
Responding, prosecution representative Anna Matthaiou said the CDs contained the defendant’s banking data obtained through a European Investigation Order and stressed that neither CD related to the evidence presented during Monday’s hearing. She added that the prosecution intended to introduce the German-language documents at a later stage and did not plan to use the entirety of the material, noting that an activity log had already been compiled.
Argyrou subsequently raised the issue of access to a translator in prison so that the defendant could examine the material. He also argued that the procedure followed in obtaining the evidence from Germany was unlawful and said he would seek a “trial within a trial” to challenge its admissibility.
The court then heard testimony from Konstantina Parpa, who in 2024 served in the Police Cybercrime Unit, where she was tasked with conducting online investigations and had received relevant training from INTERPOL and CEPOL. Parpa told the court she carried out online examinations related to the case and read from a response letter dated 5 July 2024 concerning a German real estate company’s website.
Open-source investigation
She said the website identified Eva Künzel as the company’s founder and chief executive officer and contained postings advertising tourist developments in the north. Appendices included references to residential units located in those areas. Parpa also presented a CD containing a folder in the defendant’s name with files gathered during her investigation.
Under cross-examination, Parpa confirmed that she relied on Google Translate for automatic translation of the original German website and did not use a certified translator. She said the advertisements were posted on the defendant’s website but acknowledged that she had not verified the website’s hosting provider or the authenticity of the images used. She added that she carried out the checks specifically requested in her service instructions.
The second witness, police constable Christos Hadjivassiliou, who served in the Police Cybercrime Administration Unit in 2024, testified that he had received both in-house and external training in conducting targeted searches of open-source online material. He said he was instructed by CID Headquarters to carry out online investigations relating to the defendant and another individual.
CID evidence
Reading from a report prepared in July 2024, he said the investigation identified social media accounts, a construction company website and promotional videos documenting the progress and details of tourist developments in the north. He added that links containing images and information on the developments were also found, as well as a German real estate company account advertising holiday property sales in the occupied areas.
According to the witness, Eva Künzel was listed as the owner and chief executive officer of the real estate company and had uploaded promotional videos advertising properties in the occupied areas. He later presented material from a CD containing evidence gathered during his investigations, including social media posts, photographs, videos and contact details related to the sale of properties.
Hadjivassiliou also testified that, following instructions from the prosecution, he prepared a second report in October 2024 concerning supplementary investigations into the defendant’s Instagram account.
Further evidence admitted
At that point, the defence raised an objection, arguing that the prosecution was attempting to introduce additional evidence after the case had been filed in order to address gaps in the evidence. Argyrou also claimed violations of constitutional principles and the separation of powers, stating that the supplementary investigation had been ordered one day before a ruling in a previous “trial within a trial”.
Matthaiou rejected the claims, arguing that the prosecution was entitled to instruct police to conduct further investigations when omissions were identified and that the instructions had been issued prior to the relevant ruling. She also cited case law supporting the position that investigative work may continue after a case has been filed.
In a unanimous ruling delivered by Criminal Court President Nikolas Georgiades, the court rejected the defence objection as unfounded. He said there was no case law prohibiting the Attorney General from requesting clarifications from police during trial proceedings and that the evidence indicated the instructions had been issued before the earlier ruling. The supplementary report was therefore admitted.
The court adjourned proceedings until Friday, 23 January, at 9am. The defendant will remain in custody until the next hearing.