Anti-corruption authority poised to probe ‘spy van’ case

The anti-corruption authority will soon commence its probe into the ‘spy van’ affair, it told MPs on Monday. Officials with the authority were answering questions about their work, during a review of the body’s budget for 2027. Asked by Akel MP Andreas Pashiourtidis about the status of the ‘spy van’ investigation, a representative of the authority said “it’s coming.” The rep declined to go into specifics about their preliminary findings so far, or how long they anticipate the full investigation would take. Up until August, the authority had conducted a pre-screening of the ‘spy van’ case, following a complaint it had received about it. The authority first carries out a preliminary review of a complaint and then, if it decides a case has merit to it, proceeds with a full investigation – for which it hires investigators on a contract basis. In September, a difference of opinion emerged between the authority and the attorney-general over the terms of reference of the authority’s probe. During a meeting between the two, the authority’s head explained to attorney-general George Savvides that they were looking at aspects of the case which the police had not covered. As such, the authority said, it would pursue its own line of investigation. By law, there should be no overlap between what the police and the anti-corruption authority investigate. The authority’s position is that they’re looking at different aspects of the ‘spy van’ case. According to media reports, one of the aspects that the authority is examining – and which the police/AG did not – concerns an alleged conflict of interest by deputy attorney-general Savvas Angelides. The allegations of conflict of interest concerned corporate ownership connecting companies linked to Angelides’ brother and Israeli businessman Avraam Shahak Avni. Speaking to the Cyprus Mail later in the day, anti-corruption authority member Nikos Zambakides would neither confirm nor deny that their coming probe related to Angelides. “It’s possible,” Zambakides said. Their probe might also look at other public officials, he added. On how long they expected their investigation to take, Zambakides said it was too early to tell. The ‘spy van’ affair centred on Tal Dilian, an ex-Israeli intelligence officer who was also former chief executive officer of WiSpear, the company operating the van. In November 2021, the attorney-general dropped all charges against three individuals that had been arrested in connection with the alleged ‘spy van’. At the time, Savvides stayed the prosecution against the three suspects – two men aged 30 and 35 and a woman aged 41. Among the three was Dilian. The three were facing some 90 charges related to violating privacy laws, processing private data, falsely obtaining documents, breaking the radio communication law, and conspiracy to commit a felony. Police began investigating the case in November 2019, after the ‘spy van’ was showcased in a Forbes report – where Dillian was essentially advertising his services, which included covert surveillance and eavesdropping. WiSpear itself got slapped with a €76,000 fine. The anti-corruption authority has no criminal investigatory powers as such. It may, however, summon witnesses, and anyone disregarding a summons commits a criminal offence. As it stands, the authority carries out an investigation, but its findings have no legal weight. It forwards its findings to the attorney-general, who then decides if the findings merit launching a criminal/police probe. But under legislation currently being drafted by the justice ministry, the anti-corruption authority would be able to deputise officers of the law to conduct a criminal investigation – just like the police does. Nevertheless, the authority would still have to hand over its findings to the attorney-general who would decide whether to prosecute – meaning to file the case with the courts. Only the attorney-general may prosecute. According to Zambakides, this change would not require amending the constitution. “Today, we have agencies other than the AG which have the authority to carry out criminal investigations – for example the Tax Department,” he explained. According to a memo sent to parliament ahead of the budget discussion, to date the authority has received 943 complaints. Of these, 673 were pre-screened, 19 led to a decision to open a full investigation, and 11 of those investigations were completed, with reports issued. Under the law governing its operation, the authority examines complaints about specific acts of corruption. These include bribery of a public servant, the giving or taking of bribes by a public official, unlawful acquisition of property benefit and abuse of power. In the private sector, the authority may intervene in two situations: where persons from the public or wider public sector are involved in acts of corruption, or where persons from the private sector are involved in the corruption of public officials and public servants. Complaints directed solely against private individuals fall outside its remit.