Lawmakers Seek Transparency on Social Support Agency Donations

Lawmakers seek transparency amid allegations of quid pro quo and vote-buying

Header Image

Significant interest surrounds today’s session of the House of Representatives’ Institutions Committee, as lawmakers await the submission of the named list of private donors to the Social Support Agency. The list is expected to be presented by the Auditor General of the Republic, Andreas Antoniades, who also serves as the Agency’s treasurer.

The request comes amid allegations that the Agency may have been used for political purposes, including vote-buying, suspicions that intensified following the publication of a critical report by the Audit Office.

Parliament seeks donor transparency

Lawmakers are seeking clarity on the identities of individuals and companies that have donated millions of euros to the Agency over recent years. The list of donors, which the presidential couple had kept undisclosed, is expected to shed light on whether donations were accompanied by any form of benefit or preferential treatment from the Presidential Palace.

Last week, First Lady Philippa Karsera resigned from her position as chair of the Agency’s management committee following revelations linked to the so-called videogate affair.

Asked yesterday by Politis whether he intended to submit the donor list to Parliament, Auditor General Andreas Antoniades replied verbatim:

“Any information will be submitted.”

What Parliament has formally requested

In a letter sent last Thursday, the chair of the Institutions Committee and DISY MP Dimitris Dimitriou formally requested that Antoniades submit the following information:

  • A named list of all natural and legal persons who made donations or contributions to the Social Support Agency between 1 January 2020 and 31 December 2025, broken down by year.

  • The number of donors who made anonymous contributions during the same period, also broken down by year.

What lawmakers want to examine

Members of the Institutions Committee are seeking full disclosure in order to examine whether:

  1. Any quid pro quo was involved

    Since 2024, political parties and MPs have alleged that the Agency was used by the Presidential Palace for vote-buying purposes. In the videogate footage, it is implied that major investors seeking to bypass bureaucratic procedures or secure presidential favour were expected to contribute specifically to the Agency’s fund, which was under the First Lady’s oversight, rather than to other charitable organisations.
  2. Conflicts of interest arise

    The Audit Office’s recent investigation revealed cases where individuals and companies made substantial donations to the Agency, in some instances up to €600,000, while simultaneously holding active contracts with the state or bidding for new public contracts.

In its report dated 4 November 2025, the Audit Office notes that

“the lack of transparency characterising the operation of the Fund creates conditions that may lead to public questioning.”

This risk is compounded, the report adds, by the fact that

“the spouse of the Agency’s chair is simultaneously the President of the Republic, who takes decisions that directly or indirectly affect businessmen and private companies making contributions.”

Findings raising suspicion

The Audit Office’s examination of donation records submitted by the Agency identified several cases requiring further investigation, including:

  • A natural person, identified only by name, who donated €600,000 in both 2023 and 2024, with no additional identifying details recorded.

  • A company negotiating a high-value, long-term contract with the state during 2023–2024, which donated €695,750 to the Agency (€395,750 in 2023 and €300,000 in 2024).

  • Shipping companies that made no donations between 2018 and 2022, but contributed significant sums in 2023 and 2024. One company donated €200,000 in each year, another €400,000 in 2023 and €500,000 in 2024, while a third contributed €50,000 in 2024. During the same period, the group owning the largest contributing shipping company participated in an EU co-funded project exceeding €10 million. It is also noted that in early 2024, the Council of Ministers issued a decree on tonnage tax, directly affecting the taxation of shipping companies.

  • A licensed credit servicing company donated €80,000 in total across 2023 and 2024.

  • Financial services companies under investigation or settlement discussions with regulatory authorities donated amounts ranging from €10,000 to €50,000 during the same period.

  • Individuals linked to the Cyprus Investment Programme (“golden passports”) donated between €10,000 and €70,000 per year. Another individual, a shareholder in several companies, donated approximately €170,000, including €100,000 in 2023, with the remainder paid in 2018–2019.

  • A natural person whose company received a licence to develop commercial property donated €200,000 in 2023 and €200,000 in 2024.

  • Three affiliated companies in the healthcare sector donated a total of €90,000 in 2023–2024 while awaiting a regulatory decision concerning group transactions.

Further scrutiny ahead

The Audit Office report on the Social Support Agency is also expected to be examined by the House Audit Committee, which is scheduled to meet tomorrow, Thursday.

The forthcoming disclosure of donor identities is therefore expected to play a key role in shaping parliamentary scrutiny and determining whether the Agency’s funding practices complied with principles of transparency and accountability.

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.