A Cyprus court has found a 46-year-old Iranian man guilty on four counts of forgery, fraud and illegal residence, in a case stretching back to a parcel of forged documents intercepted at Larnaca airport in 2012, after which he could not be located for eight years.
The man arrived in Cyprus in 2006 using a forged passport from Turkey and applied for political asylum, which was rejected. He remained in the country illegally from 2011.
In December 2012, a parcel sent through a courier company arrived at Larnaca airport containing a forged Italian identity card and a forged Danish passport, both bearing his photograph but different personal details, addressed to a recipient with the man’s own details.
Police escorted an attempt to deliver the parcel to the address listed, but the named recipient was not there. The door was opened by a third Iranian national, who said he was the defendant’s roommate and that the man was away.
He was eventually located in 2020, when he was arrested and questioned. According to the case details, the investigation lasted around four years, as the man was wanted and could not be located.
Defence: asylum claim, not a forgery scheme
The man’s position was that he came to Cyprus in June 2006 because his life was in danger in his home country, and that this was why he applied for asylum in Cyprus. He denied ever ordering forged documents or having any need to, saying he knew that using such documents could put his life at risk. He said that rather than take that risk, he chose to remain in Cyprus illegally instead.
He also said that, in terms of appearance, he could not convincingly pass as Danish or Italian. He denied living at the address listed on the parcel and said he did not know the person named as his roommate.
The man referred to the danger he says he would face if returned to Iran, saying he had only recently learned of his brother’s arrest and that an internet search showed his brother’s name listed as a political prisoner. He said that, in light of these recent developments, he had already submitted his file for his case to be reopened.
Court finds testimony contradicted by evidence
The court found that the man’s explanation, that he had no reason to risk using forged documents, was not unreasonable in itself. However, it said his testimony was contradicted by the objective evidence in the case and by other testimony, including that the parcel listed his details as the recipient and a phone number which he himself accepted was his. On this basis, the court found him guilty.
