The Independent Authority for the Investigation of Allegations and Complaints Against the Police (IAIACP) has launched a formal investigation into complaints of police misconduct during a peaceful pro‑Palestinian demonstration held outside the Ministry of Foreign Affairs on 2 October 2025.
Speaking to Politis, the President of the Authority, Andreas Paschalides, confirmed that three official complaints had been submitted, concerning unjustified use of pepper spray and excessive force by police officers.
“If additional evidence arises during the course of the investigation that justifies further scrutiny in other areas,” Paschalides stated, “criminal investigators have already been instructed to expand their scope accordingly.”
The investigation was greenlit in writing by the Attorney General on Thursday, 16 October, with two investigators officially appointed the next day. “The case file was handed to them on Friday [17 October],” he noted, adding that a two‑month window - one month less than the usual timeframe - has been allocated for the inquiry.
Delays
What is the average investigation time for a complaint against the police?
Good question, but difficult to answer. The response depends directly and decisively on the type of complaint, the nature of the case, and the time required by the case’s needs, which, it should be noted, constantly change, to locate witnesses and gather the necessary evidence.
How are serious delays in investigating cases, even those involving police violence, justified? What are the main causes?
Dear Ms. Iliadi, you hit the nail on the head. The crux of the answer to this question is one and the same: the absence of permanent investigators available to IAIACP. I mean investigators fully committed in spirit and body to the Committee. Any other choice to replace this arrangement is utopian.
19 years, 52 criminal cases
In all the years of IAIACP’s operation, what percentage of cases led to disciplinary or criminal consequences for police officers? How many ended up in court?
IAIACP has been operating since 2006, when it was established under Law 9(I)/2006. In total, criminal prosecution was initiated in 52 cases against the involved police officers, and an equal number (59) of disciplinary actions were taken. It should be noted that in each of these cases, whether criminal or disciplinary, the number of police officers prosecuted may be higher.
How is the public informed about IAIACP’s findings?
According to the provisions of Article 16/(3)(4) of Law 9(I)/2006, which governs the Authority’s operation, it is obliged to inform in writing only the complainant of the outcome of the investigation of their complaint, without any transmission or disclosure of the material, documents, or the report submitted to the Authority, or any part thereof. Consequently, and based on the current instructions of the Attorney General of the Republic, the Authority may provide the complainant with the names of the involved Police members, a copy of their statement given to the Authority’s investigator, and any medical certificates and/or reports concerning them. It is also noted that, regardless of the above, the complainant retains the right to summon the Authority’s investigator as a witness in any judicial proceeding to present the case file and any evidence that may be in the Authority’s possession before the Court.
Problems
What are the main obstacles you face today in your work?
Basically, the obstacles we face are many, most of which are practical in nature, but I am confident they will be resolved with the appointment of permanent investigators. This lack forces us often to resort to appointing criminal investigators, who, due to their profession, such as lawyers, or previous police service, have serious conflicts of interest in some cases to undertake the investigation.
The appointment of permanent criminal investigators will free the Authority’s hands, which will then focus entirely on fulfilling its purpose for which it was established. Imagine that even after 20 years, many police members, including senior ones, have not understood that IAIACP was not established to fight the Police nor is it an enemy of the Police, but quite the opposite. It was established to safeguard the prestige, independence, integrity, and all the qualities that should characterize police members, which is achieved only by removing rotten elements and expelling them from the Force. Police members who choose to exercise their powers violating citizens’ rights have no place in the Police, and that is the Authority’s purpose.
Do you think IAIACP should gain the authority for ex officio registration of criminal cases?
This is a difficult question to answer. Adopting such a proposal implies and necessitates a thorough restructuring and reorganization of the Authority’s composition and operation. I wish we could, and there are many things we would do.
Is it time to revise the legal framework governing IAIACP’s operation?
Indeed. The time has long since come.
No meeting with President
How do you interpret the fact that the President of the Republic has not received you to deliver your Reports for two and a half years?
We have never claimed that the President of the Republic has not received us. I am sure there is a serious reason why a meeting with the President has not yet been arranged. We will wait a little longer for a response from the presidential office. Otherwise, we will send the Reports by mail.
Independence
What kind of independence can we talk about when former police officers investigate complaints against police officers? Isn’t there a conflict of interest when former colleagues investigate each other?
According to Article 3 of the Law, investigators are appointed by the Authority from persons of known prestige and ethics, of the highest professional and moral level, with knowledge and experience in investigation matters, selected from a list prepared by the Attorney General of the Republic. No part of the Law excludes former Police members from such a list, provided they meet the other qualifications.
In any case, the conflict of interest phenomenon, which is the core of your question, is not only characteristic when former Police members are appointed investigators. It is equally or even more pronounced when criminal investigators who are lawyers of the free profession, are appointed, who in their daily work defend either citizens or Police officers in criminal courts. Tell me, how does the case of a lawyer, who in the evening acts as a criminal investigator for IAIACP and the next morning defends or prosecutes a police member in private criminal cases, differ? Also, according to Article 16, the Authority is not bound by the report containing conclusions, findings, and opinions of the member or investigator but studies the material and documents of the investigation and forms its own opinion.
Who trains the criminal investigators? From Police officers of the very force they are called to oversee?
Unfortunately, yes. It is the best option under the circumstances. We have neither the means nor the infrastructure for independent training. There is, however, plenty of willingness.
Therefore, how independent is the Independent Authority for the Investigation of Complaints and Claims against the Police?
The European Court of Human Rights, in decision 20198/05 Morteza Molla Zein Al v. Cyprus, rejected the complainant’s claim of violation of Article 3 of the Convention for ineffective and non-independent investigation and concluded that the investigation by IAIACP, which is not hierarchically or institutionally connected to the Police, was sufficiently thorough under the circumstances to meet Article 3’s requirements. These comments have not been overturned in cases following Morteza by the Court. On the contrary, I would add the positive remarks in the recent GRECO report on IAIACP.
'Screening'
For 2025, 270 complaints were filed, but only 70 are under investigation. What is the “screening” process, and who decides it?
The decision is taken by the Authority’s members in a session. During this session, each complaint is assessed; it is either dismissed as unfounded if it clearly falls outside the Authority’s powers or, due to its minor importance, referred to the Police Chief for administrative handling within the Force. If the Authority needs more details or the Police’s opinion before a final decision, the complaint is either returned to the complainant for further information or assigned for preliminary investigation where Police opinions are sought. Finally, if the complaint involves human rights violations or alleged verbal or physical violence by the police member involved, the Authority immediately proceeds with an investigation by appointing a criminal investigator.
Statute of limitations
What percentage of complaints expire due to delays?
The Authority tries to avoid such an outcome - expiration of offenses due to delays. Unfortunately, its practical inability often leads to fatal results. With the risk of sounding repetitive, I will bring up the issue of permanent investigators again. It is clear that a freelance lawyer will prioritize their office work, putting IAIACP’s cases second. This inevitably causes delays, often resulting in the expiration of offenses. This phenomenon, combined with the Authority’s effort to avoid appointing former Police members as investigators, makes avoiding expiration even harder.
Lawsuits against IAIACP
From your personal experience or that of your colleagues, have there been cases where you felt insecure during investigations of police arbitrariness?
I never felt insecure during my duties as a member and president of the Authority. From what I know, the same applies to other members. On the contrary, Police leaderships have surrounded us with trust and respect for our duties and position, ready to assist us. This, however, does not fill the legal gap concerning our safety from all aspects. All members have been subjects of civil lawsuits, i.e., we have been sued, and these lawsuits are pending trial, concerning how we perform our duties. It is time, I believe, to take measures to address this situation. After all, members of the Authority are just doing their job.
Where is the bill for IAIACP’s modernization?
I am pleased to inform you that it has “unstuck” from the Department, where it had been “stuck” for months, and its further progress has been resumed.
IAIACP’s recommendations for changes in the police
Based on its findings, the Independent Authority for the Investigation of Complaints and Claims against the Police has proposed the following institutional and training changes to the police force:
-
Amendment of anti-riot equipment regulations to include the identification marks of the police members using such equipment.
-
Compliance with Law 163(1)/2005 concerning the rights of detained persons.
-
Creation of a Protocol for the handling of missing persons.
-
Updating instructions relating to the detention centres of the Police and related issues such as smoking, detainees belonging to the LGBTQI+ community, etc.
-
Issuance of instructions regulating the powers of the coast guard.
-
Training on mental health legislation to Police members.
-
Instructions regarding the appointment of officers responsible for witness protection.
-
Instructions for timely execution of warrants.
-
Ensuring evidence preservation in police stations.