Anastasiades rejects influence-trading at Mafia State press conference

Politics corruptionNicos AnastasiadesTop News Anastasiades rejects influence-trading at Mafia State press conference Anastasiades Rejects Influence Trading At Mafia State Press Conference Relevant News European leaders offer warm farewell to Britain’s Starmer 23 June 2026 Anastasiades rejects influence-trading at Mafia State press conference 23 June 2026 Law Office forwards Mafia State reports to police and Cabinet 23 June 2026 Ernestos Mousas 23 June 2026 FacebookXWhatsAppEmailPrintViber Former President Nicos Anastasiades opened his press conference on Tuesday by accusing unnamed parties of publicly crucifying him and engaging in character assassination in the wake of the Anti-Corruption Authority’s findings, one week after the report’s publication. Speaking at the journalists’ club Estia in Nicosia, Anastasiades said some people had set up “kangaroo courts” and reached their own verdicts without needing the report to do so. He said what had followed the report’s publication was an intensification of toxicity, the tarnishing of reputations, character assassination, and the heroisation of the person he described as the inventor of the Sandy affair. Anastasiades stressed that the standard of proof in investigative proceedings is the balance of probabilities, not proof beyond reasonable doubt, and that the inspectors and the Authority had the presumption of innocence in mind, with guilt a matter for a court to determine. He said no one had stated that the defamatory claims in the book Mafia State had been rejected as false. The SMS allegation Anastasiades moved on to address directly the inspectors’ finding on an SMS message, saying the linking of events in the report had led to incorrect conclusions. He said a message attributed in the report to “No. 1” — a designation he said was arbitrarily implied to refer to him — read: “I hope the President of the Republic will not intervene.” He said the inspectors had wrongly connected that message to a separate SMS from a person named Hatzikyriacos relating to a trip, and had reached what he called an entirely unfounded conclusion that he may have committed the offence of trading in influence. The report found, on the balance of probabilities, that an agreement existed between Anastasiades and Rybolovlev to cover the costs of a Brussels-to-Athens flight, and that the agreement was facilitated by Andreas Hatzikyriacos, according to Anastasiades’s account of the findings. The Rybolovleva arrest allegation Turning to the allegation concerning the arrest of Rybolovlev’s wife, Anastasiades said the claim had collapsed given that the relevant decision had been approved by parliament with only two votes against. He said the narrative in the report referred to his alleged knowledge of and involvement in the arrest of Rybolovlev’s wife, but that at no point did the report cite any action by him towards any authority or body that would indicate such involvement. He added that the Authority itself had stated that nothing could be proven without supporting evidence. The press conference follows the Anti-Corruption Authority inspectors’ recommendation that Anastasiades face scrutiny on seven counts: three of trading in influence, one felony count of abuse of power, and three counts of abuse of power as a misdemeanour or attempted criminal offence. The oligarch and the private jet flights Anastasiades turned to the chapter of the book titled “The oligarch demands explanations,” in which Drousiotis writes that an emergency meeting with Rybolovlev was arranged on March 6, 2014, to take place at a European People’s Party congress Anastasiades was attending. Anastasiades said Drousiotis claimed on page 52 of the book that among the financial benefits he allegedly secured from a new arrangement with the oligarch was an agreement for Rybolovlev to pay for private jet travel, with a one-way flight cited as an initial example. The trading in influence finding collapses Anastasiades said the conclusion on trading in influence could not stand, arguing that the arrest of Rybolovlev’s wife had taken place on February 24, 2014, and that the alleged illicit advantage was therefore not connected to that arrest. He said the finding was based on what he called false claims by Drousiotis regarding the formulation of a new plan developed at a later date. The Focus case Anastasiades addressed the Focus case, saying the book’s narrative was that Focus had been used as a vehicle through which a person named Vgenopoulos funded political parties in Cyprus. Following the negative publicity and reactions in 2014 after the contributions were made public, the then Attorney General ordered investigations to determine whether criminal offences had been committed and by whom. Former Attorney General Kostas Clerides subsequently announced that the evidence did not point to the commission of any offences. The €550,000 allegation Anastasiades addressed what he called a defamatory claim that he had misappropriated 550,000 euros intended for DISY to cover voter transport and campaign needs ahead of the 2009 elections. He said the inspectors had rejected those claims but nonetheless concluded that a potential offence of abuse of power may have arisen. He said the finding was based on an allegation that he had met the then Attorney General and expressed strong dissatisfaction with the progress of an investigation, asking for it to be terminated on the grounds that no criminal offences had been identified. The report also found, he said, that the intervention may have constituted presidential interference capable of influencing the course of the investigation, the administration of justice, and the public interest. Anastasiades said this allegation had never been put to him during his appearance before the inspectors, meaning he had no opportunity to refute it or challenge what he called the Authority’s erroneous conclusions. He also pointed to what he described as a contradiction within the report itself, noting that page 41 of the findings referenced evidence of possible personal or political benefit that could reveal his involvement in funding for DISY, while other findings by the Authority concluded that he had not gained so much as a cent and had not committed any offence. He asked what benefit he could have had and why he would have sought the termination of a criminal investigation on that basis. No motive to intervene, says Anastasiades Anastasiades turned to the allegation that a potential abuse of power finding rested on evidence that he had intervened with former Attorney General Kostas Clerides, expressing dissatisfaction with the progress of an investigation. He said the reasons why he had no motive to intervene had already been set out. He said responsibility for investigations rested exclusively with the Attorney General, and questioned how he could have expressed dissatisfaction in that context. He also asked why Clerides, with whom he said he did not have the best of relations, had not reported the alleged interventions at the time. Anastasiades said it was regrettable that the inspectors had reached findings of a potential felony against him without giving him the right to be heard. This article will be updated as the press conference continues. Read more : Mafia State corruption reports lands on Attorney General’s desk Subscribe to our Newsletter Latest News European leaders offer warm farewell to Britain’s Starmer Law Office forwards Mafia State reports to police and Cabinet Limassol psychologist jailed six years for abusing minor patient Indonesia announces 26.34 trillion rupiah stimulus package to boost economic growth On this day: Britain votes to leave EU in historic referendum in 2016 Cyprus road deaths rise 9.8% in 2025 despite long-term progress, EU report finds Pension reform bill delayed to September for further consultations Follow en.philenews on Google News and be the first to know all the news about Cyprus and the world.