After intense discussions and consultations, the bill proposing an amendment to the Constitution to allow the monitoring of telephone conversations for the prevention or investigation of serious offences is set to be brought before the plenary of the House of Representatives at its next session. Statements by MPs indicate that the vote may be extremely close, as a majority of 38 votes is required.
The much-debated bill will be placed before the plenary on Thursday, 2 April. It seeks to amend the Constitution to permit telephone surveillance in cases related to organised crime, terrorism and other serious criminal offences.
Final text prepared by the Legal Affairs Committee
During a closed-door meeting of the parliamentary Legal Affairs Committee held on Thursday, following extensive consultations, the final text of the bill was drafted.
Under the proposed framework, the Attorney General is removed from the approval procedure. In exceptionally specific cases, authorisation for surveillance would be granted by the head of the Cyprus Intelligence Service (CIS). That decision would subsequently be reviewed by a three-member committee responsible for overseeing the intelligence service.
These exceptional cases mainly concern matters related to the security of the Republic of Cyprus. In such circumstances, the head of the CIS may authorise surveillance and must refer the matter to the committee within 72 hours. In other cases, the order to lift the confidentiality of communications would be issued by a court.
Following the committee session, all those involved remained in the House of Representatives building, where the final drafting of the bill was completed.
Uncertainty over securing the required majority
Despite the completion of the legislative text, uncertainty remains as to whether the required two-thirds majority of 38 votes will be secured for the constitutional amendment.
Based on the current composition of parliament, the distribution of seats is as follows:
DISY 17, AKEL 14, DIKO 11, ELAM 3, DIPA 3, Greens 2, alongside three independent MPs and one independent socialist MP.
If DISY, DIKO, ELAM and DIPA vote in favour of the bill in its current form, they would still be four votes short of the required majority. If AKEL does not support the proposal, the outcome may depend on the position of the two Green Party MPs, the three independents – Irene Charalambidou, Alexandra Attalides and Andreas Themistocleous – and the independent socialist MP Costis Efstathiou.
Based on statements made by MPs so far, the result of the vote in the next plenary session is expected to be extremely close.
Offences covered by the proposal
The bill specifies the offences for which authorisation to lift the confidentiality of communications may be granted, either for investigative purposes or for prevention.
The proposed provisions expand the categories of serious offences that may justify such measures. These include terrorism, espionage, attempted murder, sexual exploitation and abuse of children, child pornography, human trafficking and migrant smuggling, as well as money laundering.
The list also includes offences committed via the internet for which a conviction carries a prison sentence of five years or more. Additionally, it covers offences related to money laundering and the possession of narcotic or psychotropic substances with intent to supply.
For the Ministry of Justice, the Police and the Cyprus Intelligence Service, the adoption of the legislation enabling telephone surveillance is considered a major priority, with authorities describing it as a powerful tool for combating organised crime.
AKEL raises concerns over judicial oversight
Speaking after the closed-door committee meeting, AKEL MP Andreas Pasiourtides said that significant reservations had been expressed, particularly regarding the absence of prior judicial approval for surveillance.
He stated that each new draft of the text appeared to be “worse than the previous one,” explaining that the absence of prior judicial scrutiny is problematic when fundamental rights are being restricted.
“For us, the issue was never about individuals but about institutional protection,” he said, stressing that the involvement of the courts is essential.
According to Pasiourtides, the key question is whether, in certain cases, the Cyprus Intelligence Service should be required to obtain a court order before beginning surveillance of citizens.
He noted that a majority appears to be forming in favour of allowing the intelligence service to proceed without prior judicial approval in specific cases, provided that the decision is submitted to the three-member oversight committee within 72 hours.
“In my view this is problematic. Are we placing greater trust in a three-member committee appointed by the Council of Ministers than in the courts?” he asked, adding that arguments related to speed or confidentiality do not justify bypassing judicial authorisation.