Strong Objections to Surveillance Bill Over Method of Lifting Telephone Secrecy

Behind‑the‑scenes negotiations to secure the two‑thirds parliamentary majority required to amend the Constitution and allow phone‑tap authorisations for combating organised and serious crime have so far failed to bear fruit. Today’s scheduled vote will likely be moved to next Thursday.

Header Image

 

Intense consultations and political manoeuvring continue over the proposed constitutional amendment enabling conditional surveillance of telephone communications. Although the bill had been placed on the agenda for today’s plenary, following the Legal Affairs Committee’s 11 March decision, Politis understands that – barring any last‑minute change – it will be deferred to the 26 March session, the last before Parliament dissolves ahead of the May parliamentary elections.

The main point of disagreement – voiced primarily by AKEL and MPs from other parties – is the provision granting the Attorney‑General the power to authorise in writing the Cyprus Intelligence Service (KYP) to monitor telephone conversations solely on the basis that the matter concerns national security. Opponents warn of the risk of abuse without adequate justification and argue that such decisions should be taken by a committee rather than by a single official.

Despite intense efforts since the last committee meeting, including further clarifications from the Intelligence Service to address concerns, no consensus has been reached.

Amending the Constitution requires the support of at least two‑thirds of MPs – 38 votes. The current composition of Parliament is: DISY 17 seats, AKEL 14, DIKO 11, ELAM 3, DEPA 3, Greens 2, plus three independents and one solitary socialist MP.

Lawyers also favour committee oversight

The Pancyprian Bar Association agrees that decisions to lift telephone secrecy should be made by a committee. In a memorandum submitted to Parliament, the Association argued that allowing the Attorney‑General alone to authorise such surveillance – when deemed necessary for national security – without a prior court order, contradicts rulings of the Court of Justice of the European Union, violates the principle of lawyer‑client confidentiality, and undermines the constitutional independence of the Attorney‑General.

Justice Ministry signals willingness to revise disputed clause

According to Politis’ information, after a round of consultations with political parties, the Ministry of Justice has indicated it is open to amending the contested provision so that approval would be issued by a committee. The Minister of Justice has also requested suggestions on who should sit on that committee.

Expanded list of offences

For the Justice Ministry, the Police and the Intelligence Service, passage of the surveillance bill is a top priority, which they describe as a vital tool for tackling organised crime.

The draft law also broadens the grounds for lifting telecommunications secrecy to include additional categories of serious offences – attempted murder, trafficking of adults and minors, child pornography, sexual exploitation and abuse of children, terrorism, espionage, migrant smuggling, and facilitating illegal entry, passage or stay in the Republic. Cyber‑offences punishable by at least five years’ imprisonment are also included, along with money‑laundering and possession of narcotic and psychotropic substances with intent to supply.

Emergency committee meeting

In a separate development, the Legal Affairs Committee will convene an extraordinary meeting tomorrow at 9.30am for an article‑by‑article examination of two related bills: the Cyprus Intelligence Service Bill and the Protection of the Privacy of Private Communications Bill of 2026. Both legislative proposals are linked to the constitutional amendment on surveillance.

 

Comments Posting Policy

The owners of the website www.politis.com.cy reserve the right to remove reader comments that are defamatory and/or offensive, or comments that could be interpreted as inciting hate/racism or that violate any other legislation. The authors of these comments are personally responsible for their publication. If a reader/commenter whose comment is removed believes that they have evidence proving the accuracy of its content, they can send it to the website address for review. We encourage our readers to report/flag comments that they believe violate the above rules. Comments that contain URLs/links to any site are not published automatically.