The Supreme Constitutional Court of Cyprus has upheld the decision of the Supreme Judicial Council of Cyprus not to confirm the appointment of Doria Varosiotou as a district judge, effectively ending her service on the judicial bench.
Decision reached by majority
By a majority of five votes to three, the Supreme Constitutional Court, sitting as an annulment appellate judicial council, rejected Varosiotou’s appeal against the Supreme Judicial Council’s decision not to ratify her appointment.
The ruling confirms that the judicial council acted within its powers when it decided not to grant Varosiotou permanent status following the completion of her two-year probationary period.
Background to the case
In June last year, the Supreme Judicial Council informed Varosiotou that she would not be confirmed in her post as a district judge and that her service in the judiciary would be terminated. The decision was taken after she completed the mandatory two-year probation period.
Varosiotou subsequently filed an appeal on 8 July 2025, challenging the legality of the judicial council’s decision.
Probationary status central to ruling
In its reasoning, the Constitutional Court noted that Varosiotou was fully aware that her appointment was on a probationary basis and that she had taken the prescribed judicial oath explicitly referring to the assumption of duties as a judge under probation.
According to the majority ruling, the concept of a probationary appointment cannot be disputed, nor can the authority of the Supreme Judicial Council to decide on non-confirmation. The court held that the legality of a probationary appointment directly affects the question of confirmation and that the council’s power to deny permanency is indisputable.
Reference to Thanasis Nicolaou inquest
The court’s decision also refers to errors attributed to Varosiotou during the coroner’s inquest she conducted into the death of National Guard conscript Thanasis Nicolaou.
These references stem from findings contained in a previous ruling of the Supreme Court, following an application by forensic pathologist Panikos Stavrianos seeking annulment of the inquest’s conclusions.
During the court proceedings, the majority decision was read out first, formally concluding the case and confirming the validity of the judicial council’s original decision.