Filenews 19 December 2025 - by Angelos Nikolaou
The Independent Anti-Corruption Authority attributes huge responsibilities to a bombshell conclusion for the Trimiklini scandal, in relation to the diversion of the Kouris River and the transfer of water to illegal fish farm facilities,
Among other things, the Anti-Corruption Authority requests the criminal prosecution of the former Minister of Agriculture, Nikos Kougialis, the former director of the Department of Environment, Kostas Hatzipanagiotis and the former director of the Department of Fisheries, Loizos Loizides.
The Authority also recommends disciplinary proceedings against seven officials from the Department of Agriculture, the Limassol District Administration and the Department of Fisheries.
The Independent Anti-Corruption Authority issued the following:
Result of the ex officio investigation on the issue of the diversion of the water of the Kouris River.
Regarding the above issue, the Independent Anti-Corruption Authority makes the following Announcement:
LIFTING OF THE PROHIBITION ON DISCLOSURE OF INFORMATION IN RELATION TO THIS INVESTIGATION
1. By virtue of the legislation governing the establishment and operation of the Authority ("L.19(I)/2022"), there is a prohibition on the disclosure of information received in the context of its mission, without the prior approval of the Commissioner for Transparency.
2. In the present case, the Commissioner for Transparency approved, on the basis of Article 18 (1) of Law 19(I)/2022, the lifting of the ban and the Authority, at its Meeting, decided to issue this Announcement.
3. The reason for the above lifting lies in the fact that, in the present case, extensive publicity has already been given and details of the case have been published.
EVENTS THAT PRECEDED THE INVESTIGATION
4. At the beginning of Autumn 2023, the Authority became aware of information about allegedly illegal fish farming, illegal interventions in State land and the Kouris River and the illegal operation of a catering business and visitor accommodation in the Communities of Syliko and Trimiklini.
5. The information, mainly, came from publications in the printed and electronic press, as well as from posts on Social Media.
6. Because these publications also suggested the possible responsibility of officials for the above acts, the Authority decided to investigate the whole matter ex officio.
7. In the first stage, there was communication with the journalists who had covered the issue.
8. On October 18, 2023, at its own request, the Authority attended the Meeting of the Parliamentary Committee on the Environment, which discussed the issue in question.
9. On October 25, 2023, a team of the Authority conducted an on-site visit to the area of Trimiklini – Saitta.
10. In addition, the Authority contacted the Audit Office, which was also conducting its own Investigation and which on December 7, 2023, issued the Special Report no. DFMR/01/2023.
11. Following the above developments, the Authority decided to conduct an ex officio Investigation in order to ascertain whether, over time, there were illegalities and/or omissions that raise suspicions of acts of corruption on the part of state officials and/or officials.
THE CONDUCT OF THE RESEARCH
12. In order to conduct the Investigation, the Authority appointed only one Inspection Officer, the former President of the District Court, Mr. Nikos Giapanas.
13. Terms of Reference: The Terms of Reference given to the above Inspector were the following:
(A) The Survey will be conducted for the period from the year 2004 until today.
(B) The entities that will be investigated for possible acts of corruption are the following 12:
(i) Ministry of Agriculture, Rural Development and Environment
(ii) Department of Agriculture
(iii) Veterinary Services
(iv) Water Development Department
(v) Department of Fisheries and Marine Research
(vi) Ministry of Home Affairs
(vii) Limassol District Administration
(viii) Department of Town Planning and Housing
(ix) Department of Lands and Surveys
(x) Deputy Ministry of Tourism
(xi) Cyprus Agricultural Payments Organization
(xii) Department of Environment
(C) The natural persons who will be investigated for possible acts of corruption are the heads of the above entities, as well as their officials and employees for the period referred to in paragraph (A) above. Similarly, persons in the private sector legally and/or physically who are directly involved with any of the above persons for the same period.
(D) The actions for which all the above entities and persons will be audited are the following:
(a) Diversion of water from the Kouris River.
(b) Transfer of the water in question to illegal fish farm facilities in the Community of Trimiklini.
(c) Construction and operation of illegal fish farming facilities, a recreation center and visitor accommodation areas in the Community of Trimiklini as well as the fact that part of the development intervenes illegally on state land.
(d) Appropriation of state land for private interests by the managers of the Trimiklini fish farm.
(e) Licensing procedure for another fish farm, of own interests in the Community of Syliko.
14. During the Investigation, a total of 55 Hearings were held, during which a total of 64 Witnesses, current and former Heads, Officers, as well as Officers of the above Chambers testified. In addition, 120 Items were submitted.
FINDINGS – CONCLUSIONS
15. The Inspector, after hearing all the testimony brought before him and evaluating it for each section, prepared a Report consisting of 275 pages, in which he makes Findings and Conclusions on the testimony submitted. To that end, the legal aspect of the issues raised is also analysed. This Report was approved at a relevant Meeting of the Authority.
Admissible Facts
16. Some facts emerge as admissible and the basics are recorded below:
(a) The Owner of 2 pieces of land, one in Trimiklini and the other in Sylikou, both in the Limassol District, wished to create a fish farm mainly for the breeding of sturgeon from which caviar is produced with the final result of producing quantities of caviar.
(b) On 25/06/2009, he received a Building Permit from the Limassol District Administration, which concerned fencing and a water tank in the plot of Sylikou.
(c) On 13/10/2011, a License for the Establishment and Operation of a Fish Farm was issued for the same water tank, for the production of 5 tons of freshwater fish per year. The License was issued by the Department of Fisheries and Marine Research (DFMR).
(d) However, the Permit issued by DFMR inadvertently mentioned "Trimiklini, Paphos" as a space!!
(e) As the Inspection Officer characteristically mentions, what followed confirmed the saying "one evil, a thousand things follow"!
(f) Over time, government officials in all the services involved have been confused.
(g) On 13/10/2011 and 07/02/2013, DFMR granted Licenses for the Establishment and Operation of the Fish Farm. In both permits, "Trimiklini, Paphos" was still mentioned as a space.
(h) On 10/02/2013, the inauguration of the Fish Farm was held by the then Minister of Agriculture, Natural Resources and Environment.
17. The Findings – Conclusions of the Inspection Officer regarding the existence of criminal and disciplinary offenses as well as other general findings and recommendations are recorded below. Possible criminal responsibilities are attributed to 3 persons and disciplinary responsibilities to 7 other persons. It is noted that two persons are charged with possible disciplinary responsibilities in more than one case.
Possible Criminal Liability of Mr. Nikos Kougialis
18. Mr. Nikos Kougialis served as Minister of Agriculture, Natural Resources and Environment and then Minister of Agriculture, Rural Development and Environment from 01/03/2013 until 28/02/2018.
19. In his above capacity, he had never visited either the fish farm of Trimiklini or the one in Sylikou. But he knew about their operation because there was a request from the Owner to pump water from the Kouris River.
20. The Owner of the fish farms had submitted a request for the diversion of the Kouris River before the Trimiklini Dam, for the needs of his Fish Farm, which by Decision of the General Manager date. 08/08/2017, had been rejected.
21. Following this, the Owner, on 23/08/2017, registered a Hierarchical Appeal, against the above Decision, with extensive content.
22. On 13/09/2017, the Minister, without following the legal procedure, approved the Hierarchical Appeal by granting a Water Abstraction Permit from the Kouris River, at a point above the Trimiklini dam.
23. But his actions were not limited there. Without any relevant request, it also approved the supply of water from the Dam itself.
24. The Inspection Officer concludes as follows:
"The final conclusion that is drawn is that exercising the power granted to him by the above law, without research, contradictory and without studying the various letters and the issues raised, with a handwritten note and signature, on the same day, he approved two contradictory licenses. Obviously, a logical conclusion that can be drawn, and a relevant finding is drawn on this purpose, is that he approved the hierarchical appeal, without any control or investigation, exercising the power granted to him by law in a completely arbitrary and abusive way.
Also, it was likewise concluded that "It is obvious, in my opinion, that the purpose of the witness was to approve, without further ado, the hierarchical appeal, without any scrutiny and investigation, not even a study of the letters, approving with complete indifference, two different and conflicting licenses, which indicates that it was a predetermined decision, completely arbitrary and abusive. His arbitrariness is also derived from the fact that he was talking or confusing things, as well as his handwritten notes, as to the request, whether it concerned the intake of water from the Trimiklini dam, or upstream of the Kouris River, before the Trimiklini dam." Mr. Kougialis, taking advantage of the position of Minister he held, abusively and completely arbitrarily and without any control and investigation, approved the said hierarchical appeal."
25. From the above actions of Mr. Kougialis, according to the Inspector, criminal liability may arise for the offense of Abuse of Power, pursuant to Article 105 of the Criminal Code, Cap. 154.
Possible Criminal Responsibilities of Mr. Loizou Loizides and Mr. Costas Hadjibou Panagiotou
26. Mr L. Loizides was the Director of the Department of Fisheries and Marine Research at the material time, but is now retired.
27. Mr. K. Hadjibou Panagiotou, at the material time, served as Director of the Department of Environment.
28. According to the Findings of the Report, Mr. Loizides is the person who had signed the 2 Licenses for the establishment and operation of a fish farm, dated. 13/10/2011 and 07/02/2013.
29. The License dated. 07/02/2013, a Letter was signed on behalf of the Department of Environment. The Letter in question was sent illegally and completely abusively. Mr. Loizides stated, during the Investigation, that if he did not give the License, the Fish Farm would continue to operate illegally! This statement is strongly promoted by the Inspection Officer as arbitrary and unjustified, and his actions were considered abusive.
30. In fact, the said License dated. 07/02/2013, was given by Mr. Loizides himself, in consultation with Mr. Hadjibou Panagiotou, because the inauguration of the Fish Farm would take place by the then Minister and the space had to be legal! Essentially, knowingly, deliberately and deliberately, they bypassed all legislation and regulations, relying on the position they held, as Directors of the respective Departments and, completely arbitrarily and abusively, they agreed with each other in order to grant the License for the establishment and operation of a Fish Farm, dated. 07/02/2013.
31. From the above actions of the above, according to the Inspector, criminal liability may arise for the offense of Abuse of Power, pursuant to Article 105 of the Penal Code, Cap. 154 but also of Conspiracy to commit a misdemeanor, pursuant to Article 372 of the same Code.
Possible Committal of Disciplinary Offenses by Officers of the Department of Agriculture
32. The possible commission of disciplinary offenses by officials of the Department of Agriculture was found in 3 parts:
33. Application for the Rural Development Program 2007-2013
A serious absence of substantive checks by three officers was found, as well as a violation of a term of the Contract Agreement by one of them, in the context of a program co-financed by European funds. The way the audits were carried out, as analyzed extensively in the relevant chapter of the Report, may constitute a disciplinary offense in violation of Article 73 and Article 3 of the First Table of Part I of the Public Service Law of 1990 (Law 1/1990).
34. Water Reservoir Subsidy
The testimony revealed that the on-the-spot check was carried out in a frivolous manner, as inspection forms were signed and forwarded for payment without substantial verification. At the same time, an official of the Department of Agriculture, while he was responsible for supervision, referred the matter exclusively to the on-site inspector. Such conduct may constitute disciplinary offences on the part of both the officer and the on-site inspector, under the same statutory provisions.
35. Ex-post checks on payment requests
From the testimony of two officials, it was found that the audits were limited to simple accounting verification of the amounts, without a substantial check of the supporting documents and without investigating whether the companies involved had the required licenses. As a result, an amount of €657,000 was paid to companies that, according to the testimony, did not appear to have the necessary licenses from the Contractor Registration and Control Board. This omission may constitute a disciplinary offense on the part of the two officers.
Possible Committal of Disciplinary Offenses by Officers of the Limassol District Administration
36. From the established facts, it appears that 2 officials of the Limassol District Administration failed, as of 9 November 2017, to take the legal measures provided for and imposed by law against illegal premises in the Trimiklini area, with the result that the case remained unjustifiably pending for a period of 6 years.
37. That omission and long inaction are due to the fact that those officials did not take all the necessary steps in good time, were excessively and unjustifiably late and acted with indifference in bringing the case before the competent court.
38. Therefore, the Inspector concludes that the above conduct may constitute disciplinary offenses under the provisions of the Public Service Law (Law 1/1990).
Possible Committal of Disciplinary Offenses by Officers of the Department of Fisheries and Marine Research (DFMR)
39. It appears from the evidence that an officer of the DFMR issued licenses for the establishment and operation of a fish farm without prior adequate, or any substantial, control of compliance with the terms of the relevant licenses, acting in an unorthodox, incorrect manner and in violation of the applicable legislation.
40. That conduct constitutes a serious deviation from the duties of the service and cannot be justified, since it is either due to ignorance of the procedures laid down or to a disregard for compliance with the law and official obligations.
41. The Inspector therefore concludes that there is evidence of a possible disciplinary offence, which justifies further disciplinary investigation and the adoption of the measures provided for by law.
Findings – Suggestions
42. During the preparation of the Report and on the basis of the findings of the investigation, the Inspector made general observations, the most important of which are listed below:
(a) Based on the Findings, the Directors of the Department of Environment and DFMR showed unjustified and abusive haste to issue the Fish Farm License in view of its inauguration which would take place in a few days by the then Minister, bypassing the legal procedures.
This action shows irresponsibility and a virtual instead of real legality.
It is desirable for Government Officials before accepting invitations to inaugurate, to be sure of the legality of the business and that all legal procedures have been followed. Otherwise, they will remain exposed.
(b) In addition, and following the possible disciplinary offense found in the Limassol District Administration, it is concluded that there was a systematic exploitation of time through the continuous exchange of letters and meetings, citing constructive talks, resulting in the repeated extension of deadlines and the continuous granting of new extensions, without any real intention to solve the problems.
Such phenomena, i.e. constant discussions and exchanges of letters just for show, without any result, must be avoided since the only thing they cause is ineffectual delay, formalism and bureaucracy.
(c) The incorrect observance of an agreed term by a Program co-financed by European Funds is ascertained. The development was carried out on the basis of a request for support for actions under the European Programme for Rural Development 2007-2013. According to the terms of the Program, "no employee performs any of these duties without his work being supervised by a second employee". The wording of the term is clear and unambiguous and, despite this, it was not observed.
(d) The Report refers to the intention of the competent Deputy Ministry to request an opinion from the Attorney General regarding a possible violation by the premises of the provisions of the Commercial Descriptions Law (L.5/1987) and the Consumer Protection Law (L.112(I)/2022).
(e) Finally, the Report refers to a possible illegal intervention on state land and points out that it may be necessary to examine the issue by the Ministry of Interior, in order to determine whether civil and/or criminal offenses arise and to take appropriate measures.
CONCLUSION
In view of all the above, by virtue of the relevant legislation, the case file is referred to the Attorney General for his own actions on the issues of possible criminal responsibilities and to the competent bodies for the issues of disciplinary responsibilities.
Due to the issuance of this Announcement, the Authority will not make any further statement on the case.
