People’s courts were set up, in violation of the presumption of innocence and despite the Anti-Corruption Authority’s warnings, said the former President of the Republic, Nikos Anastasiades, at a press conference he held at noon on Tuesday in Nicosia, which lasted over an hour and a half, regarding the findings on the book “State-Mafia.”

The former President of the Republic, accompanied by attorney Achilleas Emilianides, spoke of escalating toxicity, character assassination, and the smearing of reputations, while “none of the lay judges were willing to acknowledge that the slanderous allegations against me contained in the book‘State Mafia’.”

“In violation of the presumption of innocence, which is constitutionally guaranteed, some have set up people’s courts and convicted the guilty parties who, based on a balance of probabilities, were deemed by the Authority to be potentially involved in possible offenses,” he said, noting that some had been doing this for years and did not need the report’s findings.

“What has been documented since the report’s release is the intensity of the toxicity, the smearing of names, the character assassination, and the heroization of the creator of the fiction surrounding Santi. None of the lay judges were willing to acknowledge that the slanderous allegations against me contained in the book ‘State Mafia’,” said Mr. Anastasiades.

Mr. Anastasiades demanded the immediate appointment of an independent criminal investigator and prosecutor “with a strong personality and recognized standing,” who would complete their work as soon as possible within a reasonable timeframe.

He also stated that he does not accuse the Audit Office officials or the members of the Anti-Corruption Authority of bad faith, but “I hold them accountable for lacking the necessary strong will to resist populism, the prevailing atmosphere created by lay judges, the character assassins, and malicious internet users.”

Furthermore, when asked to engage in self-criticism regarding his own potential role in the discrediting of institutions, he said that the role played in the weakening of institutions by “by internet users, TikTokers, self-appointed judges, or those who invent fabrications such as the one about ‘Santi.’”

In analyzing the charges brought against him, the former President emphasized on several occasions that the Inspection Officials did not present the allegations to him and did not hear his own positions on the cases.

READ ALSO: Highlights of Anastasiades’ press conference: Immunity, the “elephant,” and jet travel

The “Ribolovlev” Law

Regarding the allegation of an agreement with Russian oligarch Ribolovlev to amend legislation for his benefit, Mr. Anastasiades said that the allegation “collapsed after the House of Representatives passed it almost unanimously, with only two votes against, following the support of the entire state apparatus—the Government, the Central Bank, the Cyprus Bankers’ Association, the Cyprus Bar Association, the Cyprus Chamber of Commerce and Industry, the Cyprus Chamber of Commerce and Industry (KEVE), STEP, the then Attorney General, and all those who were asked to express their views on the relevant bill.”

Regarding the arrest of Ribolovleva, he noted that nowhere in M. Drousiotis’s book or the Authority’s Report is there any mention of any direct or indirect action by the former President toward any authority or body that would suggest his knowledge of or involvement in the arrest.

As for the finding by the Inspectors, based on the balance of probabilities, that there was an agreement between the former President and Ribolovlev, to cover the cost of the former President’s private flight from Brussels to Athens on March 21, 2014, Mr. Anastasiades stated that the Anti-Corruption Authority’s finding that the former President may have committed the offense of “trading in influence” by accepting an undue advantage “is refuted and collapses, since the alleged undue advantage is not linked to the arrest of Ribolovleva but to a false claim regarding the implementation of a new plan that was ‘agreed upon’ at a later date.”

When asked by journalists to comment on the Authority’s finding that he had not provided evidence to support his claims regarding payment for the trip in question, Mr. Anastasiadis said that “When someone is accused, it is the accuser who must provide evidence. This is the first time I’ve heard that when someone calls you an elephant, you have to prove that you’re not an elephant.”

Furthermore, when asked about his relationship with Ribolovlev, he said it was an “acquaintance. He wasn’t my client. He was a major businessman. He invested €500 million in the Bank of Cyprus, which vanished following the Eurogroup’s decision,” he said, adding that Mr. Ribolovlev “does not speak English, did not reside in Cyprus, was not my client, and I had no special relationship with him—the kind attributed to me by the book’s author and rejected by the Authority.”

SEE ALSO: Anastasiades’ Full Press Conference: His Responses Regarding “Mafia State” and What He Demanded

The Focus Case

The former President noted that in the Focus case, the then Attorney General announced in 2016 that the evidence did not point to the commission of any criminal offenses, since, at the relevant time, undeclared funding of political parties did not constitute a criminal offense.

Furthermore, he noted that “the defamatory allegation” that he had embezzled a total of €550,000 intended for DISY was refuted as “false and baseless” by the Inspection Officials.

Nevertheless, the officials concluded that there is a possible case of the offense of abuse of authority, because Mr. Anastasiades met with and spoke by phone with the then-Attorney General, Kostas Clerides, expressing strong dissatisfaction with the course of the investigation and requesting that the interrogations be terminated.

“No such allegation was ever brought to my attention during my testimony before the Inspection Officials,” he said, while questioning what personal benefit he might have gained—a prerequisite for establishing the felony offense.

He also asked how it was possible for the former President to express strong dissatisfaction with the progress of the investigations, since no criminal offenses had been identified, and he questioned why the then-Attorney General had not reported his “alleged improper interventions.”

“It is truly unprecedented and also regrettable for the Inspection Officials to reach conclusions attributing a possible felony to the former President without giving him the right to be heard,” he noted.

READ ALSO: “He took on the TikTokers”: How Angelidis and Dimitriadis viewed Anastasiades’ responses

Allegations from Laiki

Regarding the Authority’s finding of a transaction amounting to €250,000 from Laiki Bank in 2011 for his own benefit—which was allegedly intended as financial support for his election campaign, which was misleadingly presented as a fee or commission, and the allegation that Nikos Anastasiades abused the influence he might have exerted over others as a “trafficker of influence,” Mr. Anastasiades reiterated that this allegation was not brought before him either, and he was not given the opportunity to be heard.

“The alleged offense to which the Authority concludes is that of passive influence peddling. This offense presupposes the existence of an undue advantage. What is the undue advantage in this case, especially considering that the alleged offense does not pertain to the period during which I served as President?” he asked, describing the finding as “completely unfounded, just as the charges against me are arbitrary.”

READ ALSO: “I Hope I Don’t Face a New Charge”: The Profile of a Criminal Investigator and Anastasiadis’s Sarcasm

Troika Laundromat and Pandora Papers

The former president also referred to reports published by the Organized Crime Reporting Platform (OCCRP) in 2019 and the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists (ICIJ) in 2021, which linked the firm “Nikos Chr. Anastasiadis & Partners” to the laundering of millions of dollars belonging to Alexander Abramov through a network ofshell companies that operated from 2006 to 2013, as well as his own involvement in the naturalization processes of Alexander Abramov and Leonid Lebetev.

As he noted, although the reports in question stated that “there is no evidence whatsoever that the law firm and/or its associates violated any law or committed any offense,” the opposition exploited the report, creating a stir and leveling serious accusations against the former President. In light of this, he said, he requested that MOKAS investigate the report to determine whether any offenses had been committed.

According to the Anti-Corruption Authority, the then-President’s call for an investigation “raises serious concerns about arbitrary institutional interference, improper use of political executive influence, and abuse of power,” which could lead to potential criminal liability for committing the misdemeanor of Abuse of Authority or attempting to commit said criminal offense.

“I consider it, at the very least, unacceptable for a call to investigate such allegations to be regarded as a possible commission or attempt to commit the crime of abuse of power,” he said, adding that he considers it “completely absurd and unlawful to regard a President’s request to investigate media reports attributing acts of corruption to him as an abuse of power.”

Regarding the naturalizations of Abramov and his wife, as well as Lebetev, he notes that the relevant decisions to amend the legislation were made by the Cabinet of Dimitris Christofias.

“Is it possible to claim that a member of Parliament and President of the opposition party requested a meeting with a minister and, by exerting his influence, instructed him to proceed with the illegalnaturalization of investors?” he asked, noting, “Since when, and in what country, has executive power been exercised by the opposition rather than by the legally elected government?”

READ ALSO: “They Did Not Resist Populism”: Anastasiades Launches Fierce Attack on Committee Over “Mafia State” Findings

Property in Dromolaxia

Referring to the findings of the inspectors on the matter, he noted that Susan Dikraz, a Turkish citizen, was claiming ownership of a property in Dromolaxia that was registered in the Land Registry as Turkish Cypriot property, as well as the right to lease it to a private company.

A meeting on the matter was attended by the then Minister of the Interior, Socrates Hasikos, the then Minister of Transportation, Tasos Mitsopoulos, the former Deputy Attorney General, Rikkos Erotokritou, a representative of the Land Registry, a representative of the company that wanted to lease the property from Ms. Dikraz, and Member of Parliament Georgios Varnavas.

“The Inspection Officers found that, at the meeting in question, no evidence was presented that the former President promised or did anything improper to advance the private company’s request,” the President stated.

Responding to the Inspectors’ finding that Mr. Anastasiades gave instructions for Ms. Dickraz’s illegal passage through the occupied territories, without having the authority to do so, he noted that, once again, he was not called to testify on this specific matter. As he said, the allegation “is completely arbitrary and based on the narrative of an author who, based on the investigators’ findings, should be deemed unreliable.”

READ ALSO: Alma’s scathing attack on Anastasiades and DISY: The former “President of Scandals” tried once again to convince everyone that he is above reproach

Drousiotis Deemed “Unreliable”

“After 2.5 years of investigations, at a cost of €1.5 million, with 150 individuals interviewed, and evidence submitted by 41 legal and government departments, the total number of which amounts to 793, the author’s defamatory allegations—which are not included in this Statement—have not been proven even to the minimum degree required in investigative proceedings. “Consequently, they constitute unsubstantiated or defamatory allegations,” he stated.

Mr. Anastasiadis therefore questioned why the Authority had not taken legal action against Mr. Drousiotis, since, according to its law, a person who intentionally provides the Authority with false or misleading information, data, or evidence—knowing that such information is false or inaccurate, or having reasonable grounds to believe that it is inaccurate—is guilty of anan offense and is subject to imprisonment for a term not exceeding three years or a fine not exceeding €50,000, or both.

“I believe the time has come—if we want the rule of law or to protect the rule of law—to take measures against those who undermine it with fabrications, such as those documented in *The Mafia State* or others related—following investigations by the author himself—to the Santi case. “What do we ultimately want? The Rule of Law or the State of the Internet?” he said.

The former President was asked by journalists whether, beyond the legal aspect, he felt the need to say “mea culpa” and take some responsibility for the prevailing image in Cyprus today, marked by the discrediting of institutions and perceptions of corruption and collusion.

As he said, we must analyze the role played in the weakening of a state’s institutions by “internet users, TikTokers, lay judges, or those who invent fabrications such as the ‘Santi’ story,” though this does not mean, he added, that this perception is not also due to mistakes made by the political leadership. “Many times, when I was President and later on, I said that I, too, had made mistakes.”

Responding also to the question of whether immunity is an issue, Mr. Anastasiades said, “I do not believe there is an issue of immunity, but even if there were, I would certainly waive it.”

When asked if he believes his posthumous reputation has been tarnished, he said, “Of course, the murder and the smear campaign are troubling,” adding that this is why he has never refused any investigation and deserves the swiftest possible decision on the appointment of a criminal investigator and prosecutor.

Furthermore, in response to a separate question, he stated that he is prepared to undergo a tax audit.

READ ALSO: “Morally and politically, he is already discredited”: Volt’s 61 words on Anastasiades

*Source: CNA