A series of references to former President Nicos Anastasiades are included in the report concerning Makarios Drousiotis’ book Mafia State.
Key witnesses, such as the author of the book Mr Makarios Drousiotis and former President Mr Nicos Anastasiades, gave testimony for many hours over more than one day.
Verbatim references to Nicos Anastasiades recorded in the report under the category “Findings”:
71.12 Former President Mr Anastasiades had a close relationship with the late founder and partner of the law firm Andreas Neocleous & Co LLC, who was the legal adviser of the Russian oligarch in Cyprus.
71.13 Based on the testimony presented before them, the Inspection Officers concluded, on the basis of the evidentiary standard applied by the Authority, that there are sufficient indications demonstrating the following possible acts of corruption:
(c) Former President Mr Nicos Anastasiades, as a person alleged to have acted as a Passive Trader / influence peddler, namely as a person who received or accepted an undue advantage in order to exercise or propose to exercise improper influence in the decision-making process of public officials.
72.1 Mr Drousiotis claims that the purchase of property in Limassol by Mrs Andri Anastasiades, wife of the then President of the Republic, from the Archbishopric of Cyprus, formed part of a broader framework of relations between the then President and the Archbishopric. According to the allegation, in April 2014 a newspaper published a contract concerning Mrs Anastasiades’ purchase of property from the Archbishopric. The property was located in Limassol and, according to Mr Drousiotis, the purchase price was low considering the area and size of the property.
Mr Drousiotis links this purchase to the relationship between the then President and the late Archbishop Chrysostomos II. He claims that the Archbishop frequently submitted financial requests to the then President and that the latter generally satisfied them.
In this context, Mr Drousiotis also refers to an earlier Council of Ministers decision approving the granting of highly valuable state land in Ayia Napa to the Archbishopric. The grant was made as compensation for Church land in Engomi that had been expropriated by the State.
According to Mr Drousiotis, the transfer of state land to the Archbishopric was illegal or irregular because, as he claims, the Archbishopric was not entitled to receive state land as compensation, but only financial compensation.
He presents this earlier decision in favour of the Archbishopric and the subsequent property purchase by Mrs Anastasiades as two events that were not unrelated.
Focus
Mr Drousiotis claims that Focus Maritime was used as a vehicle through which Mr Vgenopoulos financed political parties and individuals in positions of power or influence in Cyprus.
He specifically claims that the first leaks concerning Focus involved former Central Bank Governor Mr Christodoulos Christodoulou, who was allegedly reported to have received €1,000,000 through Focus, but that, according to his allegation, the real purpose of the leaks was to send a message to Mr Nicos Anastasiades, who, according to Mr Drousiotis, had also been bribed by Mr Vgenopoulos through the same company.
Mr Drousiotis argues that the explanation that the €450,000 was used for airline tickets for DISY voters was not sufficiently proven because, according to him, the police report relied on statements supporting Mr Anastasiades’ version without including necessary supporting evidence such as invoices for the tickets or proof of bank transfers.
The Inspection Officers, based on the testimony and documents they examined, did not identify evidence substantiating the allegation that the amount of €450,000 ended up in the personal accounts of former President Mr Nicos Anastasiades.
According to the findings, the amount of €100,000 was transferred from Focus Maritime to Rizokarpasso Shipping Ltd and subsequently, following instructions which, according to testimony, were given by former President Mr Nicos Anastasiades, transferred to a Cypriot businessman for onward delivery to DISY.
The businessman reportedly stated that he acted on behalf of DISY and allocated the amount to the party for electoral purposes.
In relation to former President Mr Nicos Anastasiades, the Inspection Officers concluded that there is a possible commission of the offence of abuse of power.
This finding is based, among other things, on testimony that while the Focus Maritime investigation was ongoing, Mr Anastasiades met and communicated by telephone with then Attorney General Mr Costas Clerides, expressing strong dissatisfaction regarding the progress of the investigation and requesting that interrogations be terminated on the grounds that no criminal offences had been identified.
Bribes from banks
An allegation is made regarding tax evasion by former President of the Republic of Cyprus Mr Anastasiades and the law firm Nicos Chr. Anastasiades & Partners through undeclared income from commissions received from Cypriot banks for referring clients to them.
According to the allegation, these amounts were channelled abroad without being declared and without being taxed in Cyprus.
The law firm Nicos Chr. Anastasiades & Partners was among the largest intermediaries for the Bank of Cyprus and received substantial amounts in commissions.
Furthermore, there was testimony that Laiki Bank also paid commissions to introducers, including the said law firm, although complete banking records from Laiki Bank confirming the level of such payments were not identified.
Evidence from the Bank of Cyprus also showed that certain payments connected with commissions to the law firm were not paid directly to the firm but to offshore companies in the British Virgin Islands, including Masterton International Corp. and Truro Investments Ltd, which banking records linked to the law firm and/or its foreign associates.
74.7 While former President Mr Anastasiades and his partners in the law firm Nicos Chr. Anastasiades & Partners, Mr Stathis Lemos and Mr Phanos Philippou, claimed that Mr Anastasiades held the status of a “silent partner”, the private Partnership Agreement dated 9 September 2001, as well as records from the Registrar of Companies, indicate that he “bears the general responsibility for supervising the partnership’s activities” and that this role remained until his resignation as general partner on 26 February 2013.
Former President Mr Anastasiades had personal and decisive involvement in the law firm’s negotiations with Cypriot banks regarding the level of commissions to be paid to the firm as an introducer.
Mr Nicos Anastasiades, while holding the office of Member of Parliament and simultaneously the position of President of the Democratic Rally (DISY), abused the influence he may have exercised over others in decision-making and, acting as an influence peddler, sought the misleading classification of a transaction with Laiki Bank in order to conceal its true nature and beneficiary.
Specifically, by exploiting the banks’ practice of paying commissions for clients referred by intermediaries, he received sums from Laiki Bank to support his 2013 presidential election campaign under the pretext of such commissions, which were misleadingly categorised in the bank’s accounting books as “introducer fees”, namely fees for clients referred to the bank.
By receiving these amounts, which constituted an irregular advantage, Mr Nicos Anastasiades is implicated in passive influence trading.
Passports and jets
An allegation is made regarding money laundering by former President Mr Anastasiades and the law firm Nicos Chr. Anastasiades & Partners through offshore shell companies and concealment of beneficial owners, as well as misleading statements regarding his lack of active involvement in the law firm after 1997.
On 14 August 2019, the Organised Crime and Corruption Reporting Project (OCCRP) published an article titled “Bank Records Link Cyprus President to the Troika Laundromat.”
The article included allegations that the law firm Nicos Chr. Anastasiades & Partners facilitated money laundering by moving millions of dollars among shell companies and acted as an intermediary with banks for high-risk clients.
The public position of Mr Anastasiades, who at the relevant time held the office of President of the Republic and requested an investigation by MOKAS regarding the issues raised in the OCCRP publication in order to prove his non-involvement, demonstrates incitement and use of the state Financial Intelligence Unit for the protection of his public image and that of the private company bearing his name, in which his two daughters were shareholders.
This may have led to an erroneous public exoneration from responsibility, undermining public trust in the impartial application of obligations by the competent authorities.
Former President Mr Anastasiades’ attempt, through institutional pressure, to direct MOKAS — a functionally independent and autonomous unit — to investigate the private company bearing his name and in which his two daughters were shareholders, with the aim of securing public exoneration and protection from independent scrutiny, may establish possible criminal liability for abuse of power or attempted abuse of power.
The arbitrary nature of this action is strengthened by the timeline, since MOKAS claimed that it acted on its own initiative following media reports and had already received an official referral from an audit firm concerning the relevant transactions eight days earlier, yet took no action until former President Mr Anastasiades publicly requested an investigation.
Pandora papers
In October 2021, the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists (ICIJ) revealed the Pandora Papers and the activities of the law firm Nicos Chr. Anastasiades & Partners once again came under international media scrutiny.
Mr Leonid Lebedev and Mr Alexander Abramov, Russian oligarchs with substantial wealth, sought to obtain Cypriot citizenship within a particularly short period through the law firm Nicos Chr. Anastasiades & Partners.
Based on the evidence, continuous personal involvement by Mr Nicos Anastasiades before his election as President of the Republic in matters concerning the interests of the law firm’s clients emerges, raising serious concerns about exceeding institutional authority and inappropriate use of political influence.
The Inspection Officers concluded, on the basis of the testimony before them and the evidentiary standard applied by the Authority, that there are sufficient indications demonstrating the following possible acts of corruption:
A. Former President of the Republic of Cyprus Mr Nicos Anastasiades:
(1) Abuse of Power as outlined in paragraph 58 above, or alternatively attempted Abuse of Power as outlined in paragraph 67 above.
(2) Trading in Influence as outlined in paragraph 63 above.
The Dromolaxia property
The allegations concern alleged improper interventions by Mr Nicos Anastasiades who, as President of the Republic, attempted to promote the interests of a private company seeking to exploit a property in Dromolaxia.
In this effort he intervened with various bodies and also enlisted political figures.
The interests of the private company were represented and promoted by then MP Mr Giorgos Varnava, who allegedly also engaged in improper interventions.
Despite the fact that the former President’s interventions appear to have been well-intentioned during a period of economic crisis and were not made for personal gain, such actions did not fall within the duties of the President of the Republic.
Also read: Irregularities reported in state land allocation to Archiepiscopate
For more videos and updates, check out our YouTube channel
