Cyprus’s Supreme Court has granted lawyer Nicos Clerides leave to apply for a certiorari order to quash a search warrant executed at his home, office and vehicles on Holy Saturday, 11 April, as the broader “Sandy” corruption investigation nears its conclusion pending findings from Europol and the FBI.
Judge Elena Efraim granted leave on almost all grounds put forward by Clerides’s legal team — comprising Christos Clerides, Alexandros Clerides and Konstantinos Clerides — but declined two of the remedies sought.
The judge refused to issue an interim order prohibiting police from retaining and processing evidence seized from Clerides’s premises, ruling that if the search warrant is ultimately quashed, the seized evidence would automatically be returned and rendered inadmissible.
The application for certiorari will be filed within five days and served on the Attorney General, who will decide whether to contest it. The substantive hearing is scheduled for 20 May.
Grounds for granting leave
The Supreme Court cited four grounds in granting leave:
There was no reasonable cause to believe that the items sought by police were connected to the premises searched — Clerides’s home, office and vehicles. The description of the items sought in the warrant was general and vague. There was no evidence that Nikos Clerides was involved in the creation of the allegedly fabricated messages.
The warrant was issued in breach of Article 17 of the Constitution — covering legal professional privilege, privacy and personal data — and insufficient safeguards were imposed to protect attorney-client confidentiality and personal data.
On the last point, the court was clear that lawyers are not exempt from search warrants in the context of criminal investigations, but stressed the need for adequate safeguards.
“It is the task of the court examining a request for a search warrant at a law office to balance the interest in investigating criminal offences against the need to protect privacy, personal data and professional privilege, to ensure that the search is necessary and proportionate,” Judge Efraim said.
The court also noted that the lower court’s warrant did not record that it had satisfied itself that there was reasonable cause to believe the items sought were located at the premises in question.
Crucially, the Supreme Court found no evidence attributing involvement in the alleged offences to Clerides, noting that he was not shown to have known — or to have been informed at any point — that the material was false, that it had been fabricated by “Sandy,” or that the account set out in the 14-page document did not correspond to the truth.
Nor did it appear that Clerides had claimed “Sandy” had fled to Germany via a journalist in England whom he had introduced to her, with knowledge that this was untrue.
Clerides responds
Speaking after the ruling, Clerides said the Supreme Court’s decision was fully reasoned and reiterated that there had been no reasonable cause to connect the items sought by police to his premises. “There was no evidence whatsoever that I was involved in the creation of the allegedly fabricated messages,” he said.
He alleged that “completely false information” had been fed to the media about his case, with the purpose of avoiding proper investigation of the matter. He described the search warrant against him as an attempt to go on a fishing expedition for evidence, and called the actions of both the police and the court that approved the warrant “unacceptable.”
Clerides said the search of his home in the early hours of Holy Saturday had caused him significant distress and had serious professional and personal consequences. Asked whether he would take legal action against the state if the warrant is quashed, he said it was a matter he would decide with his lawyers at a later stage.
Where the Sandy investigation stands
The investigative work of the team set up to examine the allegations made by Makarios Drousiotis is substantially complete, Phileleftheros understands.
The file is awaiting Europol and FBI findings on the messages and profile of the person known as “Sandy” before being submitted to the Law Office of the Republic for review and instructions.
Investigators are expected to brief the Chief of Police, who will in turn brief the competent minister. Police will include specific recommendations in their report on the outcome and findings of the investigation.
Legal sources said “Sandy’s” own admission that she fabricated and sent the messages is, in itself, potentially subject to criminal liability.
Read more:
