In a lengthy article nearing 4,000 words, published on his personal website and social media accounts, Drousiotis sets out a wide range of allegations spanning multiple issues, naming former and current officials as well as members of the judiciary. He links individuals to the Rosicrucian brotherhood, which he describes as operating as a nationwide organised economic crime network.
— MAKARIOS DROUSIOTIS (@makdrou) March 30, 2026
A central part of the article focuses on former judge Michalakis Christodoulou, whom he links to allegations of sexual abuse involving the daughter of a close associate. The woman, referred to under the pseudonym “Sandy”, is presented as a key source. According to Drousiotis, she became pregnant at the age of 16 and was an eyewitness and earwitness to corruption cases of significant scale, with his account based on what she told him during a meeting.
The article also includes references to an alleged relationship between Christodoulou and former president Nicos Anastasiades. In relation to the surveillance van case, Drousiotis refers to alleged communication between then MEP Demetris Papadakis and Christodoulou. He further claims that Anastasiades had a personal relationship with Tal Dilian, head of the company linked to the “black van”, and also implicates Christodoulou in surveillance activities.
Additional allegations concern the presence of surveillance devices within the Law Office and the existence of an informant, whom Drousiotis identifies as Morfakis Solomonides, claiming that while serving as driver to former attorney-general Costas Clerides he passed information to Christodoulou. He also refers to the Focus case and to discussions surrounding the appointments of George Savvides and Savvas Angelides to the Law Office of the Republic.
The publication further includes claims of financial transfers, including a payment to Sandy allegedly intended to secure her silence, as well as alleged transfers to former Supreme Court president Myron Nicolatos and to Christodoulou.
Drousiotis defends timing, evidence and publication
Speaking on Politis Radio, Makarios Drousiotis defended both the timing and substance of his publication, describing it as the result of a sustained investigation that began in 2023. As he put it, “it’s been three years that I’ve been looking into this issue”, stressing that he would not have proceeded to publication “unless I was certain that I could support it”.
He maintained that the material already made public represents only part of a broader evidentiary base, noting that “beyond the messages I have published, there is another level of documentation”, while describing the data in his possession as extensive and systematically verified. “I have a very large volume of data, which I processed, evaluated and verified with other sources,” he said, adding that what has been disclosed so far is “a small sample” compared to what remains. Drousiotis framed the publication as a matter of public interest, arguing that “we cannot, when we have such information, remain silent”, particularly when it concerns issues that touch on the functioning of institutions and fundamental rights.
He also addressed criticism over the timing of the disclosures ahead of elections, stating that “one of the reasons I published this now is because I believe that through this electoral process I may have more protection… to say even more”, suggesting that the political context may offer a degree of personal and legal safeguarding. At the same time, he confirmed prior engagement with authorities, saying “I went to the police some years ago… and I was even taken to court”, while reiterating that his role is not investigative enforcement but disclosure.
He further referred to personal risks linked to the case, stating that after it became known he held the material, “they sent me a message telling me I was in danger… to stop dealing with this”, a claim he used to underline both the sensitivity of the allegations and the rationale for bringing them into the public domain.
Direct clash with Papadakis over claims
The confrontation intensified following a response by Demetris Papadakis, who rejected the claims and described them as “fake and fabricated evidence”.
In a subsequent public statement, Drousiotis said Papadakis “must be suffering from memory loss”, adding that “he knows Christodoulou and he knows Sandy by her pseudonym”, and claiming that he had provided advice to Christodoulou in a legal dispute with Marinos Sizopoulos.
He added that, in response to calls for proof, “I am publishing, to begin with, the two messages referred to in my text”.
Καλημέρα.
— MAKARIOS DROUSIOTIS (@makdrou) March 31, 2026
Ο @DemPapadakis ισχυρίζεται πως δεν γνωρίζει καν τον Μιχάλη Χριστοδούλου και με κάλεσε δημόσια να ανακαλέσω.
Θα πρέπει να έχει απώλεια μνήμης.
Και τον Χριστοδούλου γνωρίζει και τη Σάντη με το ψευδώνυμό της, και συμβουλές για τη νομική αντιπαράθεση του με τον Σιζόπουλο… pic.twitter.com/xON7KAf8FS
Papadakis rejects allegations and challenges evidence
In a written statement, Demetris Papadakis categorically denied any connection, stating that he does not know Christodoulou, has never had any contact or communication with him and has never exchanged messages.
“I state categorically that I do not know this person, I have never had any friendly relationship or communication with him, I have never exchanged messages with him,” he said, adding that the claims “do not correspond to the truth, do not concern me and cannot implicate me”.
He called on Drousiotis to submit his material to authorities for forensic examination, stating that what has been published “constitutes fake and fabricated evidence”, and declared his readiness to provide access to his telecommunications data and mobile device.
Ανακοίνωση μου για τα δημοσιεύματα του Μακάριου Δρουσιώτη.
— Demetris Papadakis (@DemPapadakis) March 31, 2026
Τα όσα ο Μακάριος Δρουσιώτης αναφέρει στην ανάρτηση του προφανώς και δεν ανταποκρίνονται στην αλήθεια, δεν με αφορούν και ούτε μπορούν να με εμπλέξουν.https://t.co/ojnreRVqjl pic.twitter.com/8DaKOK9tXw
He further warned that he has already instructed his lawyers to proceed with legal action if the references are not withdrawn within 24 hours.
Nicolatos dismisses claims and signals legal response
Former Supreme Court president Myron Nicolatos rejected the allegations concerning him, stating that they are “a work of fiction” and “do not contain a trace of truth”.
He added that “I have never received any amount whatsoever” and said he is available for any investigation, including examination of his bank accounts, while confirming that legal options are being considered.
Tornaritis and Solomonides also move toward legal action
Nikos Tornaritis stated that he has instructed his lawyers to examine the publication and to take all necessary measures, while also calling on the competent authorities to investigate the claims.
Morfakis Solomonides rejected the allegations as fabricated, stating that they are “so outrageous that not even he himself believes them” and that the material presented as evidence “has already been clearly shown to be fabricated”.
He announced that he will proceed with legal action, including filing a defamation lawsuit and submitting a complaint to the Cybercrime Unit, while placing his personal data at the disposal of authorities.
Case moves toward legal and institutional scrutiny
The developments point toward a likely escalation into legal proceedings, with multiple individuals named in the allegations preparing to take action against Makarios Drousiotis. At the same time, Drousiotis maintains that his reporting is substantiated, stating that he would not have published the material otherwise, and indicating that further disclosures may follow. The case is now shifting toward potential judicial and institutional scrutiny, as pressure mounts on authorities to assess the allegations and determine whether formal investigations will be initiated.
Police Chief orders investigation into claims made
The Police have requested that researcher/journalist and Volt parliamentary candidate Makarios Drousiotis provide evidence for the purposes of investigating the claims made in the controversial article he published on Monday. Specifically, the Chief of Police Themistos Arnaoutis instructed a senior officer to contact Drousiotis. The senior police officer subsequently contacted Mr Drousiotis to request evidence. He, in turn, asked for time in order to consult his lawyer and revert.
Anyone in possession of any evidence should submit it to the competent authorities for investigation, Government Spokesman Konstantinos Letymbiotis said.
During a briefing of media representatives at the Presidential Palace, the Government Spokesman was responding to journalists’ questions regarding the post by author and journalist Makarios Drousiotis, in which public figures and institutions are implicated through serious allegations relating to criminal matters and corruption.
“As we have stated in previous cases, what we will repeat is that anyone who has any evidence, there are competent authorities to whom they must submit it, so that all information concerning anyone can be investigated,” he said.