Officials and other actors are being investigated for corruption offenses, especially for the offense of influence trading, in connection with the infamous video of the Presidential Office that prevailed under the name "videogate".
This emerges - now clearly - from yesterday's official position of the independent criminal investigator of the case, Andreas Paschalidis. The latter, under the weight of pressure from the criticism levelled at him, wanted to clarify the announcement he had issued last Monday in relation to the result of the criminal investigation.
After first talking about an attempt to distort what he had announced at the beginning of the week, yesterday he clearly spoke of "violation of the Council of Europe Convention on the Criminalization of Corruption (Ratification) Law by political and non-exposed persons". In other words, persons involved in the case are being investigated for corruption offences.
This, of course, is nothing new for many. Those who carefully studied the text of Paschalidis' announcement last Monday, as well as the relevant official position of the Attorney General after receiving the conclusion, indicated that although there is no mention of offenses that fall under the criminal code, there was a reference to possible offenses on the basis of the controversial European convention that was incorporated into national legislation.
The bottom line, however, is that after yesterday's new statement by Paschalidis, it is clear that people we saw, but also some we did not see, in the infamous 26-hour visual material taken and edited by the Israeli interest company Black Cube, are being investigated for the crime of influence trading. This is also indicated by the information of "F" from reliable sources. After all, this offense (Article 12) is one of the most important of the Sanctioning Law.
We remind you that in the video that was shown lighting fires in the Presidential Palace and resulted in the resignation of the director of the President's office, Charalambos Charalambous, the former Minister of Commerce, Giorgos Lakkotrypis and the CEO of the CyField construction group, Giorgos Chrysochoos, were involved, in addition to the latter.
In the material that was never shown publicly, other people were also presented. These are indicative publications of "Politis", which concern the former Minister of Foreign Affairs and Trade of Cyprus, Giorgos Lillikas. According to the reports in the newspaper in question, Mr. Lillikas is said to be presented in the unedited material that Black Cube forwarded to Mr. Paschalidis for the purposes of the criminal investigation. The former government official, however, did not want to comment to "Politis" when asked.
Influence trading is an offense that was incorporated into the national legislation of Cyprus by a ratifying Law and in simple translation it concerns the promise of a person to exercise his influence in order to achieve a goal.
The constituent elements of the offense, of course, raise a legal debate. The only time it concerned a Cypriot Court was in the naturalization case, for which Dimitris Syllouris and Christakis Giovannis were accused.
The Permanent Criminal Court of Nicosia acquitted the two officials by majority, while from the decisions of the two members of the Criminal Court who agreed to the acquittal of the accused and the Judge who disagreed, it appears that the interpretation of the offense is not clear.
The article in question
Article 12 of the ratifying Law of the European Convention gives the following definition of the offence of influence trading: "(...)when committed intentionally, of the promise, supply or offer, directly or indirectly, of any unlawful advantage to any person who alleges or asserts that he may exert undue influence over the decision-making of any person referred to in Article 2. 4 to 6. and 9 to 11 in return for it either the irregular advantage is for the benefit of the or for the benefit of any other, as well as the request, receipt, or acceptance of the offer or promise of such an advantage, in exchange for such influence, whether the influence is exercised or not, or whether the alleged influence leads to the intended result or not."
Paschalidis
From yesterday's announcement by Mr. Paschalidis, the strong dissatisfaction he expresses for an "attempt to distort" his conclusion, "with the aim of serving political expediencies", as well as an "insult to his dignity", stands out, noting that he had no intention of taking a public position.
He clarifies that his role was exclusively that of the Criminal Investigator, with specific terms of reference, and not an Investigative Committee, claiming that some "either out of ignorance, or out of confusion, or deliberately" refuse to recognize it.
Referring to the non-publication of the finding, he notes that he would have no objection to it being made public, since all the investigations had been completed, explaining that such a thing today could violate the presumption of innocence, in case criminal charges are brought.
He also rejects criticism that he did not address the political or moral dimensions of the case, noting that this was not included in his terms of office as Criminal Investigator.
