The Supreme Court has dismissed an appeal in an espionage case, ruling that police had not unlawfully accessed private communications before obtaining a court warrant.
The decision, dated September 29, 2026, concerns a warrant issued in June 2025 that authorised access to, inspection of and extraction of recorded private communications from electronic devices seized during a search of the appellant’s home.
Investigation involved military installations
The case arose from an investigation that led to the appellant’s arrest in 2025.
According to the case record, he had been observed near the British Bases at Episkopi-Akrotiri, as well as near Paphos Airport and Andreas Papandreou Air Base. He was reportedly carrying a large camera and three smartphones, taking photographs, making phone calls and taking handwritten notes.
He was arrested under a court warrant over several alleged offences, including offences under the Combating Terrorism and Protection of Victims Law of 2019 and espionage.
During a search of the apartment where he lived, police seized two mobile phones, three SIM cards, a laptop, a camera and the camera’s memory card.
Appeal focused on private communications
The main issue before the Supreme Court was whether police had already accessed private communications from the devices before obtaining the relevant warrant.
The court heard that forensic extraction had been carried out on the devices, with copies created and stored in electronic folders before the material was analysed.
The appellant argued that these actions already amounted to access to private communications and that the subsequent warrant effectively sought to legitimise that earlier access.
The Supreme Court rejected that argument.
It found that the creation of forensic copies and the analysis carried out beforehand did not involve access to recorded private communications. Under Cyprus law, access to recorded private communications from devices held by police is subject to a specific court-warrant procedure.
Court distinguishes photographs from communications
The Supreme Court also considered the large number of photographs and videos of military installations found on the devices.
It noted that examining a mobile phone as a camera does not necessarily involve accessing communications.
“Mobile phones are multifunctional devices. They are also cameras,” the court said, according to the decision. “To the extent that a mobile phone is examined as a camera, no issue of communication arises.”
The court said the situation would have been different if the photographs or videos had been sent to another person. It found that this was not the case here.
The Supreme Court therefore concluded that the forensic examination described in the affidavit did not concern recorded private communications.
Appeal dismissed
The court also rejected the argument that the proportionality of the access warrant had not been examined.
It noted that the first-instance court had considered the issue and concluded that the principle of proportionality had not been breached.
As a result, the Supreme Court dismissed the appeal, finding that the earlier examination of the seized devices did not amount to access to private communications.
Also read: October 1 parade to feature foreign troops and aircraft
For more videos and updates, check out our YouTube channel
