The Audit Office identified eight cases in which benefits were paid to individuals for whom such payments do not appear to be justified, as part of an audit of allowances for prisoners of war from the 1974 Turkish invasion, noting at the same time that the number of ineligible recipients may be higher.
According to the Audit Office’s Special Report published on Thursday, in 2025, a total of 852 individuals received at least one of the relevant benefits. The audit examined whether the status of prisoner of war was confirmed by sufficient and verifiable evidence, by cross-referencing data from the Social Security Services (YKA) and the Welfare Benefits Administration Service (YDEP) against the Ministry of Defense’s Prisoner of War Registry and the records of the Cyprus Red Cross.
ΣΧΕΤΙΚΑ ΑΡΘΡΑ
In the report’s preface, Auditor General Andreas Papakonstantinou notes that “recognizing the contributions and hardships endured by those who were prisoners of war during the Turkish invasion of 1974 is a self-evident obligation of the State,” adding that, precisely because of the honorary nature of these benefits, it must be ensured that they are paid to the actual beneficiaries, based on reliable and verifiable data.
As he notes, the sample audit identified eight cases, out of 852 benefit recipients, for which, based on the available data, the payments do not appear to be justified. “The number of ineligible recipients receiving benefits may be higher,” it notes, clarifying that the audit was not exhaustive but was limited to a specific sample.
View the report in its entirety:
According to the report, out of the 832 cases of beneficiaries receiving benefits as conscripted prisoners of war through the YKA that were examined as part of the audit, 15 individuals were identified who were not listed in either the Ministry of Defense’s Prisoner of War Registry or the Cyprus Red Cross’s records.
At the same time, a further review of the Military Registration Records revealed that six of these individuals had in fact been prisoners of war and, therefore, should be included in the Ministry of Defense’s Prisoner of War Registry. It was determined that three other individuals had been taken hostage prior to their enlistment in the National Guard and are therefore entitled to the relevant benefit, though not as conscripted prisoners of war.
For the remaining six cases, no evidence was found in the available data to support the claim that the individuals had been prisoners of war. Consequently, the payment of benefits under this status is not substantiated.
In addition, during the review of 77 cases from the Military Registration Records of the Nicosia, Kyrenia, and Morphou Offices, the Audit Office identified two erroneous entries concerning individuals who were receiving benefits as conscripted prisoners of war, without this being substantiated by the relevant records.
In the first case, an individual who was arrested by the occupying forces in April 1975 while in a state of desertion appears to have been erroneously included in the Register of Prisoners of War. The Audit Office notes that, although the payment of the monthly honorary allowance may be justified due to additional service, the semiannual lump-sum honorary allowance—which applies to prisoners of war during the Turkish invasion—is not justified.
In the second case, information pertaining to another individual—including references to captivity—was inadvertently entered into the Military Service Registry. Although the erroneous entries were canceled in 1983, they were taken into account when compiling the Ministry of National Defense’s Register of Prisoners of War. The Audit Office notes that, with regard to this specific individual, the appropriateness of the monthly honorary allowance payment is also being questioned.
At the same time, the Audit Service finds that the Military Registration Records, on which the compilation of the Register of Prisoners of War was based, contain entries with limited or no supporting documentation. It also notes that in 39 of the 77 cases examined, basic information was missing, such as the unit in which the individual served during the war or the start and end dates of captivity.
Subsequent entries were also identified, even decades after the events of 1974, which, according to the relevant authorities, were based on supporting documents that have since been destroyed. As a result, it is not currently possible to verify their validity.
At the same time, it was found that the National Guard does not issue a specific certificate of prisoner-of-war status, but rather a Type “A” Military Status Certificate, without retaining a copy of the issued certificate. According to the report, this prevents subsequent verification of the certification.
Weaknesses were also noted at the Military Recruitment Offices, as the copy of the Prisoner of War Registry they maintain is not updated, and during the on-site audit, no evidence was found to substantiate that the prescribed verification procedures were applied in the 15 cases specifically examined.
The Auditor General acknowledges that the cyberattack, the loss of records, and inadequate initial documentation created objective difficulties. However, he notes that the relevant issues “do not justify perpetuating these weaknesses, especially when they turn a non-prisoner of war into a benefit recipient.”
He adds that “current procedures remain fragmented and, to a significant extent, manual,” increasing the risk of errors and omissions, without ruling out the possibility that some errors were intentional.
In contrast, for the 65 cases of prisoners who received a care allowance through the YDEP in 2025, the audit confirmed the beneficiaries’ eligibility through certificates from the Cyprus Red Cross, and no issues were identified in the procedures followed.
Recommendations for a re-verification of beneficiaries
The Audit Office recommends a comprehensive cross-check of benefit recipients against an updated Register of Prisoners of War and available official documentation, as well as a case-by-case review of cases that cannot be confirmed.
It also requests that the Ministry of Defense re-examine the entries in the Registry and establish a procedure for immediately updating it in the event of subsequent corrections to the Military Registration Records.
At the same time, it recommends that the Regional Military Commissions obtain an up-to-date copy of the Prisoner of War Registry, investigate cases where doubts have arisen, and revise the procedures and application forms so that the beneficiary’s eligibility is adequately documented.
Source: KYPE
