The Limassol District Court has rejected a request by Limassol MP Nikos Sykas seeking to block his removal from the Democratic Rally (DISY) ballot, clearing the way for the party’s Supreme Council to proceed with ratifying the decision of its Political Bureau.
In a 33-page ruling delivered on Friday by the Administrative President of the Limassol District Court, the court declined to issue an interim prohibitory order, finding that no irreparable harm had been demonstrated at this stage. The judge also noted that granting such an order could effectively produce final consequences in the main civil action concerning Sykas' participation in the party’s electoral ticket.
Sykas had requested a court order preventing DISY’s Supreme Council from examining and ratifying the Political Bureau’s decision of 19 January 2026 to remove him from the Limassol ballot.
A separate civil action remains pending and will be heard in due course. In that lawsuit, Sykas challenges the decisions of DISY’s Executive and Political Bureau, alleging they were taken unlawfully and/or without proper authority. He further argues that the Supreme Council lacks competence to ratify the January 19 decision and that he is entitled to remain on the party’s candidate list for Limassol.
No interim order issued
With the interim request rejected, the path is now open for DISY’s Supreme Council to convene and decide whether to ratify the Political Bureau’s decision. The court’s reasoning leaves room for Sykas to challenge the internal procedures followed, should the Supreme Council ultimately confirm his removal.
The ruling emphasises that the nature of the requested order could have produced definitive consequences. For such relief to be granted, the applicant’s case would have needed to be clear and demonstrate an evident breach of the party statute and his rights.
“That is not the case here,” the court concluded.
The judge also stressed that the Supreme Council has yet to take a final decision and that Sykas has not formally been removed from the ballot. Should the Supreme Council ultimately confirm his removal, he retains the right to return to court to seek remedies.
Statute Interpretation at the core
In its reasoning, the court identified weaknesses in Sykas' argument. It noted that DISY’s statute does not explicitly provide a procedure for removing a candidate from the ballot. It also found shortcomings in the argument that the matter should have been referred to the party’s Ethics Committee.
The court further held that Sykas failed to demonstrate a clear violation of the statute or of the presumption of innocence.
Even if there is ambiguity in the party statute, the court stated, it is for the party itself to resolve such issues internally rather than for the judiciary to intervene at this stage.
The ruling also underlined that neither the Executive Bureau nor the Political Bureau has explicit statutory authority to remove a candidate outright. However, decisions of those bodies that are not expressly authorised by the statute must be ratified by the Supreme Council, which retains residual authority to interpret and apply the statute in matters not expressly provided for.
No substantive investigation
Addressing arguments about whether Sykas should have been heard before party bodies, the court observed that neither the Executive nor the Political Bureau appeared to have conducted a substantive investigation requiring his position to be formally examined. Nor did they function as a selection or removal committee in a final sense. Their decisions were preliminary in nature and subject to ratification by the Supreme Council.
In effect, the court has placed the next move firmly in the hands of DISY’s Supreme Council, while leaving open the possibility of further judicial review depending on its final decision.