Witness says welfare services had grounds to seek removal order for Stylianos

A former liaison officer told the Nicosia district court on Friday that, based on her professional experience, there were sufficient indications for the Social Welfare Services to apply for a court order removing 14-year-old Stylianos Constantinou from his family environment before his death. The witness, identified as S.K., was testifying in the ongoing trial examining the circumstances surrounding the teenager’s death after he took his own life in September 2019. During cross-examination by defence lawyer Victor Akamas, who represents the third defendant, S.K. said she had revisited the case files following her previous testimony to ensure she would not “do an injustice to anyone” through her evidence. She stressed, however, that she did not know exactly what actions were or were not taken by the specific social welfare officer who is facing charges in the case, saying that was a matter for the court to determine after considering all the evidence. Related Articles • Stylianos witness faces tough cross-examination Nevertheless, she maintained that, based on her experience handling particularly difficult family cases, the welfare services routinely sought removal orders even where there were only indications of abuse or neglect. “In my personal opinion, there were enough elements that the services ought to have examined and which should have led to an application before the court for a removal order,” she said. She added that she had worked with welfare offices in other districts where similar procedures had been followed in comparable cases. When the defence suggested her opinion reflected her views as a mother, teacher and citizen rather than as a professional, S.K. rejected the claim, insisting her position was based solely on her professional experience and the practices followed by the Social Welfare Services at the time. She reiterated that she could not say whether the officials involved in this particular case had fulfilled all of their obligations, stressing that her testimony was limited to her own professional experience rather than the specific handling of the case. Asked about multidisciplinary team meetings, S.K. said the objectives set during those meetings were collective decisions rather than the personal views of individual participants. She also told the court there was no separate objective dealing specifically with domestic violence, explaining that assessing such issues fell within the responsibility of the Social Welfare Services. According to the witness, the welfare officer responsible for the case was informed about discussions held during the multidisciplinary meetings, mainly through telephone conversations. She said she kept personal notes in her diaries and was certain the officer had been informed, although she could not recall who had passed on the information or exactly when. Addressing the absence of official minutes from later multidisciplinary meetings, S.K. explained that there was no requirement at the time to keep formal records. She said the ministry’s B1 form, completed after the first multidisciplinary meeting, was an official recommendation form rather than minutes of the meeting, while the notes she kept herself were “personal.” S.K. also explained why she had not made a definitive finding of domestic violence in her report. She said it was not her role to determine whether domestic violence had occurred, but rather to identify information and incidents that could indicate neglect or domestic abuse. She added that she did not possess sufficient evidence to reach a definitive conclusion. During cross-examination, the defence also questioned her about her contact with Stylianos. S.K. rejected the suggestion that she had never met the children, saying she visited them at school and observed them there alongside colleagues. However, she acknowledged that, after so many years, she could no longer identify Stylianos with certainty from a photograph, although she remembered some of his general physical characteristics. Following the completion of S.K.’s cross-examination, the court adjourned proceedings until September 7, when a new prosecution witness is expected to testify. The case concerns the investigation into the circumstances surrounding the death of 14-year-old Stylianos Constantinou. The court is examining potential criminal responsibility both within the family and among state officials, including whether reports of possible abuse or neglect were properly assessed and acted upon by the Social Welfare Services.