Nicosia, Cyprus. The prison documents trial involving former central prisons director Anna Aristotelous was adjourned to February 9 after the defence requested more time during a hearing on Friday. Defendants said they could not prepare because authorities had not provided documents they had requested.
Defence cites lack of access to requested material
Eight defendants, including Aristotelous, former deputy director Athena Demetriou, five prison employees and a policeman, told the court they had been unable to prepare for the hearing because requested documents had not been supplied.
According to local media, only three lawyers had received witness material before the trial, and the documents were provided on a USB rather than in printed form.
Aristotelous’ lawyer challenges scope and handling of documents
Aristotelous’ lawyer, Christos Triantafyllides, said the documents, which he described as “allegedly confidential”, included interviews, newspaper reports, decisions by criminal courts, information leaflets for migrants, a plane ticket and basketball regulations.
“It is understandable that for an accused person to be able to answer, they must know why they are being accused. It is not difficult to realise this,” he said.
He said he could not advise his client until the documents were made available, and that she was therefore unable to respond to the charges raised at Friday’s hearing.
Demetriou’s lawyer signals preliminary objection
Sotiris Argyrou, representing Demetriou, said he would proceed with a preliminary objection, stating the case could not be tried and that his client also declined to respond to the allegations brought against her.
He said the trial was directly linked to complaints made by the central prison administration in 2022 concerning events involving his client, the prison directorate and a police officer in relation to gathering material aimed at harming her.
Argyrou said the matter involved “retaliation due to a specific complaint” and “should not even be before the criminal court.”
“Our position will be, if connected, that the prison administration did what it did under a specific directive, the state will have an obligation to protect them and not to prosecute them,” he said, referring to the EU directive for the protection of whistleblowers and the constitution of the Republic.
What do you think the court should do to ensure defendants have timely access to case materials before hearings?