During Monday’s hearing before the PermanentCriminal Court of Nicosia, as part of the trial in the case of the Holy Monastery of Avvakoum. The Court reserved its decision on the motion until July 20.

Today’s proceedings began with the testimony of Police Officer A.H., who stated that, following instructions, she received on July 13 from one of the investigators in the case, the evidence that was to be submitted to the Court and placed it in her custody.

Subsequently, a large number of pieces of evidence were submitted, and during the presentation of some of them, the defense raised an objection regarding their admissibility.

The defense attorney for the first defendant, Kostis Efstathiou, argued that the witness could testify only to the fact that she received the evidence and kept it in her custody, but not to what preceded that until it came into her possession.

“Under no circumstances has the legality of the possession of the evidence been proven to date. Even if our position is not accepted, the unbroken chain of custody up to their handover to the police has not been proven,” she stated.

As he argued, it has not been proven who located the items, who received them, where they were stored, which individuals had access to them, and what their route was until they were handed over to the police. According to the defense, this information is crucial to determining whether there was any tampering with or alteration of the evidence.

Mr. Efstathiou further argued that admitting the evidence at this stage would deprive the defense of the right to cross-examine the individuals involved in its acquisition and safekeeping, citing a violation of the principle of a fair trial, as enshrined in the European Convention on Human Rights and relevant case law.

At the same time, the defense reiterated its position that some of the evidence in question was obtained through the unlawful entry into and removal of items from the Avvakoum Monastery, arguing that this raises the issue of the application of Article 35 of the Constitution, which requires state authorities to act in accordance with the law.

These positions were also adopted by the defense attorney for the second defendant, Eustathios Efstathiou, clarifying that the objection concerns exclusively the legality of the acquisition, handover, and safekeeping of the specific evidence.

As he noted, when artifacts originate from the Monastery or from private, private and religious sites, it cannot be taken for granted that any third party had the legal authority to remove them and hand them over to the police.

He argued that, in such cases, it must be proven who located the items, where they were found, who received them, under what authority they were transported, and how their integrity was ensured until they came into the possession of the police. He invoked, among other things, Article 110 of the Constitution regarding the autonomy of the Church of Cyprus, as well as constitutional provisions concerning the protection of privacy, the home, and religious freedom.

The representative of the Prosecution, Vasilis Bissas, argued that the defense’s claims are general and essentially repeat issues on which the Court has already ruled in its interim decision of July 1.

He noted that, pursuant to Article 35 of the Evidence Law, a witness may submit evidence in her possession that she acknowledges, while issues such as the unbroken chain of custody, the manner in which they were obtained, and their reliability will be assessed during the trial on the merits of the case.

“The defense is not deprived of any right to cross-examination simply because today’s witness is appearing before the Court solely for the purpose of submitting the evidence,” he stated, adding that the individuals involved in receiving the evidence are included on the prosecution’s witness list and will be called to testify before the Court.

Furthermore, referring to the defense’s arguments concerning Article 110 of the Constitution and the protection of rights pertaining to the Monastery and third parties, Mr. Bissas argued that the defendants cannot claim a violation of constitutional rights belonging to third parties.

The Nicosia Permanent Criminal Court set July 20 as the date for issuing its decision on the objection and for the continuation of the proceedings. At the same time, it scheduled a new hearing for July 22.

It should be noted that monks Nektarios and Porphyrios face, among other charges, allegations of conspiracy to defraud, forgery and use of forged documents, theft from a representative, illegal possession of property valued at over 63,000 euros, money laundering, obstruction of justice, and filing a false tax return.

Both deny any involvement and have not admitted to any of the charges they face.

Source: CNA