**NICOSIA, CYPRUS** – A highly anticipated criminal trial, centred on allegations of corruption and fraud surrounding the controversial "golden passport" scheme, has been postponed by the Nicosia Criminal Court, pushing proceedings back by over two years. The case, which implicates former transport minister Marios Demetriades alongside seven other individuals and two companies, was originally slated to commence on Friday. However, the presiding judge announced the adjournment, citing the court's congested docket as the primary impediment to hearing the case as scheduled. The trial is now rescheduled for March 9, 2026.
The defendants face a formidable array of charges, including bribery, extortion, conspiracy to defraud, and money laundering, all stemming from accusations that Cypriot citizenship was illicitly granted to foreign nationals in exchange for substantial investments. The "citizenship-by-investment" programme, which offered a pathway to EU passports for wealthy investors, came under intense scrutiny and was eventually revoked following revelations of irregularities and potential security risks. This trial represents a significant legal undertaking, aiming to establish accountability for alleged malfeasance during the scheme's operation.
The postponement, while a setback for those anticipating swift justice, has opened a window for intensified dialogue between the prosecution and defence. Defence lawyers, Petros Stavrou and Elias Stefanou, have conveyed a strong inclination towards expediting the judicial process. They have proactively proposed reaching an agreement on the admissibility of key facts, a move that could substantially streamline the presentation of evidence and potentially shorten the trial's duration. Furthermore, the defence has formally requested clarification from the prosecution regarding the specific format of documents – be it printed or electronic – that will be submitted as evidence. They also sought a definitive stance from the prosecution on the charge of conspiracy to defraud prior to the trial's commencement.
In response, the prosecution representative, Charis Karaolidou, acknowledged the goodwill for a potential agreement on admissible facts. This accord, however, is contingent upon the consensus of all parties involved, with the possibility of submitting a unified text to the court. Regarding the disclosure of evidence, the prosecution indicated that providing an exhaustive list of all exhibits in advance might not be feasible, as certain documents could be inadvertently omitted. This stance underscores the complexities inherent in prosecuting such a multifaceted case, where the sheer volume and nature of evidence necessitate a carefully managed disclosure process.
The implications of this extended adjournment are multifaceted. Beyond the undeniable delay in bringing the case to trial, it provides an extended period for both the prosecution and defence to meticulously prepare their arguments, refine their strategies, and potentially explore avenues for a more efficient resolution. The willingness expressed by the defence to collaborate on streamlining the proceedings suggests a recognition of the potential benefits of a focused and fact-driven trial. As the legal machinery grinds forward, the ultimate outcome of this case will undoubtedly cast a long shadow over the legacy of the "golden passport" scheme and its perceived impact on Cyprus's international reputation. The extended timeline, while frustrating, may ultimately serve to ensure a more thorough and just examination of the serious allegations at hand.