Filenews 30 March2026
The presence and action of the Police last night was intense, throughout Cyprus, with organized patrols in key points of urban areas, with the aim of preventing serious criminal acts, ensuring public order and increasing the sense of security of the public.
As part of these operations, members of the Police identified and arrested a total of four persons for various offenses including carrying knives and illegal stay on the territory of the Republic of Cyprus.
During the night, 524 vehicles were stopped for inspection and 675 persons in them were checked. At the same time, 27 inspections of premises were carried out, with the aim of dealing with phenomena of delinquency.
During traffic checks carried out, 309 complaints were made for various traffic violations, of which 134 concern driving at excessive speed and 12 concern driving under the influence of alcohol. A total of 107 alcohol tests were carried out. Also, as part of the police examinations, 32 vehicles were detained.
Coordinated policing operations, for the prevention and suppression of crime, continue daily, with an increased/enhanced police presence, targeted controls and immediate operational action, with the aim of increasing the sense of security of citizens/protecting citizens and ensuring public order.
* * * * * *
The Police arrested a 22-year-old woman and a 56-year-old man as part of an investigation into a case of stabbing and injury, committed in Limassol.
Around 5.30 p.m. on 27/03/2026, information was received about an injured person in Limassol. Members of the Police went to the area, where from examinations carried out, it was found that while a 68-year-old man was in his parked car, he got into a verbal confrontation with a female driver of another vehicle.
During the confrontation, the passenger of the woman in question got out of the vehicle and allegedly attacked with a knife and hit the 68-year-old. The 68-year-old was transported by ambulance to a hospital in Limassol, where it was found that he suffered an abdominal wall contusion and after receiving first aid, he was discharged.
On 28/03/2026, the driver, aged 22, was arrested with a court arrest warrant and after being charged in writing, she was released yesterday, to be summoned before a Court.
The 56-year-old passenger was arrested yesterday on a court warrant and taken into custody to facilitate investigations, while today he is expected to appear before a Court.
The TAE Limassol continues the examinations.
* * * * * *
A suspicious car was found in the morning at the First Primary School of Engomi, near the Russian embassy.
According to the Police, the first information spoke of reports that there may have been an explosive device placed in the car.
After police examinations, nothing to inspire concern was found and the alarm ended.
According to the Police, the protocol was applied and the area was cordoned off.
* * * * * *
The trial for premeditated murder of 26-year-old Alexandros Antoniou, on the night of November 19, 2025 in Konia, begins today at the Paphos Criminal Court, with a 58-year-old Greek Cypriot accused, who has been in custody since the day of his arrest, the day after the murder.
The indictment was filed at Paphos District Court on December 5, 2025 by the prosecution. The district court referred the 58-year-old defendant to the Criminal Court on charges of premeditated murder. Bringing the 58-year-old to court at the time, the Police cited shocking details. The 58-year-old's admission to his involvement in the murder of Alexandros Antoniou, his position on an unplanned action, his reference to the "bad time", as well as the regret he allegedly expressed when interrogated about the tragic outcome of the episode were mentioned. It was also reported to the Paphos District Court that from the closed circuit that the kiosk has installed outside, it can be seen at 6.16 in the afternoon of the fateful day that the victim parked his vehicle outside the kiosk, on its main façade and remained in the driver's seat talking on his mobile phone. Four minutes later, a man on foot appears approaching the vehicle, forcibly opening the driver's door, and grabbing the victim by his right shoulder. The victim tried to resist and the man appears to hit him on the neck, with an object he was holding in his hand.
Then in the visual material, the perpetrator of the attack can be seen going to the back of the kiosk and washing his hands in an outdoor sink. At the same time, the victim got out of the vehicle injured, entered the entrance of the kiosk and collapsed on the ground. The material shows the perpetrator of the attack, after washing his hands, entering the kiosk through the back door, seeing the bloodied victim and leaving the scene on foot.
The Police spokesman also announced to the court that the kiosk employee at the time in question, recognized the 58-year-old suspect when she was called to the Police as the person who seems to be carrying out these events. In addition, the Police stated that they have a second written testimony from a person who was at the scene that they saw the alleged perpetrator tell the victim that he warned him not to bother his daughter and the 26-year-old replied that he did not bother her.
This witness also testified that he heard the alleged perpetrator urging the young man to go to the hospital quickly because, according to the 58-year-old's expression, he was losing a lot of blood.
The third testimony is that of the person with whom the victim was talking at that time on the mobile phone. This witness testified that during their conversation, he heard a male voice threatening the 26-year-old that if he hurt his daughter again he would kill him.
* * * * * *
A fire broke out on Sunday afternoon in a two-wheeled vehicle that was in an open area near the church of the Holy Church of the Holy Cross of Polemidia, in Polemidia.
The fire broke out at 17:47, with the Monovolikos Fire Station responding immediately, bringing it under control at 18:06. From the fire and heat, the two-wheeled vehicle suffered extensive damage.
According to the first estimates, the fire was maliciously caused by unknown persons.
* * * * * *
The Court of Appeal, in its decision dated March 26, 2026, unanimously rejected an appeal by the Attorney General of the Republic, upholding the first-instance decision of the Limassol District Court, which rejected a request for the execution of a European Arrest Warrant (EAW) against the respondent, who is wanted by the German authorities for serious tax evasion offenses.
The case concerns an EAW issued on August 25, 2025, with the respondent accused of, as a company director, allegedly committing tax evasion of €1,796,689.12 and participating in a fraud ring that cost the German state €12,736,196.74, offenses punishable by a maximum sentence of 15 years in prison. The respondent was arrested on 25 September 2025 and appeared before the Limassol District Court. In its judgment of 29 October 2025, the Court ordered the execution of the EAW and its surrender to the German authorities.
It is noted that the wanted person had appealed the decision ordering his surrender, with the Court of Appeal ordering a retrial. Following the new rejection decision, the appeal was lodged by the Attorney General of the Republic, as the Central Authority of the executing State.
A key point in the decision of the Court of Appeal regarding the appeal of the Attorney General was the issue of the legal representation of the requested person in Germany. The Court of Appeal adopted the essence of the first-instance finding that there was serious and prolonged uncertainty regarding the appointment and operation of a lawyer in the issuing state. As recorded in the decision, "despite repeated and timely actions by the Central Authority of the executing State, it was not possible to ensure within a reasonable time the existence of clear, active and acceptable legal representation in the issuing State. This lack deprived the practical possibility of collecting and transmitting information or advice to the lawyer in the executing State in a timely manner for the presentation and substantiation of the relevant claims at the enforcement hearing, just as the role of Article 10 § 4 of Directive 2013/48/EU requires."
The Court placed particular emphasis on the temporal dimension of the case, noting that "105 days elapsed from the arrest (25.09.2025) until the information that the appointed lawyer remained formally appointed, but requested the appointment of another (8.1.2026)", a period that "goes beyond the framework of a temporary delay and substantially affects the practical value of the right of Article 10 of Directive 2013/48/EU within the EAW procedure.". In addition, he underlined that the developments took place while the respondent was in custody, which "intensifies the duty of custody".
Particular importance was attached to the operation of the "double representation" mechanism provided for by European law. The Court of Appeal noted that the impossibility of effectively appointing a lawyer in Germany "deprived the practical possibility of collecting and transmitting information in a timely manner" and rendered this mechanism "practically inactive".
According to the decision of the Court of Appeal, the situation created "is not linked to an isolated incident or a temporary delay", but to "a structural inability of the mechanism in the issuing state to produce an operational result, within the institutional time of the ECA". The Court held that this impossibility 'goes beyond the level of a remediable procedural defect' and constitutes a fundamental breach of fundamental rights.
As can be seen from the decision of the Court of Appeal, the finding of the Court of First Instance that there was a "real and individualized risk" of the respondent "being handed over to the issuing State without having ensured in advance the existence of an active and functional defense" was decisive. In those circumstances, the refusal to execute the EAW was considered to be a 'necessary and proportionate measure'.
Rejecting the first ground of appeal, alleging that the Court of First Instance misinterpreted the provisions of Directive 2013/48/EU to extend to the right of effective access to a lawyer in the Member State issuing the EAW, the Court of Appeal stressed that the obligation of the authorities is not limited to a formal appointment of a lawyer, but requires a substantial possibility of exercising the rights of defence. As pointed out in the decision, the reference of the European Directive to "effective exercise of rights" is "incompatible with the position of the appellant that the obligation of the issuing Member State concerns only the simple appointment of a lawyer, i.e. formal compliance with the requirements of the Directive".
In relation to the second ground of appeal, the Advocate General's side argued that even if it is accepted that there is a right of effective/effective access to a lawyer in the issuing State, this should not automatically lead to a refusal to execute the EAW. The Court of Appeal also rejected this ground of appeal.
In the end, the Court of Appeal upheld the first-instance ruling that the execution of the warrant would violate the fundamental rights of the requested person, as enshrined in the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights and the European Convention on Human Rights, maintaining the rejection of the request for his surrender to the German authorities.
