THE legislature this week agreed on a watered-down version of a bill drafted by the Attorney-general’s office governing the extradition of Cypriots to EU and third countries.
Under the amendments to Article 11 of the Constitution, Cypriot citizens would be extradited to third countries for offences committed only after the new law is published and to EU countries for offences committed after the island’s accession to the bloc.
EU laws stipulate mutual judicial assistance among member-states, and Cyprus is obliged to incorporate these into domestic legislation since the EU acquis supersedes local laws. Any member-state not complying is liable to huge fines.
Any amendment to the Cyprus Constitution requires a two-thirds majority in parliament. But reluctant deputies – despite realising Cyprus’ obligations inside the EU – have been trying to work around this.
The AKEL party, which currently has the largest representation in parliament, is reportedly mulling over the changes and has not yet finalised its stance.
Parliament has proposed that the new law not be retroactive, which means that any Cypriots wanted on arrest warrants abroad issued before May 1 2004, when Cyprus joined the EU, and who are taking refuge on the island would get off the hook.
The House Legal Affairs and European Affairs committees also drafted a clause preventing the extradition of Cypriots “if the Republic has reasons to believe that the extradition request is aimed at prosecuting or punishing an individual because of his race, religion, nationality or creed.”
Politicians have put forward a number of objections to giving new extradition laws sweeping powers. Some, such as AKEL, are wary of relinquishing domestic powers to the EU. Others are worried that Cypriot citizens might end up being extradited to countries with a questionable human rights record.
To assuage these concerns, Attorney-general Petros Clerides has said that amending the Constitution would not automatically make extradition mandatory in all cases. According to Clerides, the amendment would merely make it possible to extradite someone, but from then on there are certain failsafes in place protecting Cypriot citizens.
“Of course we shall not extradite anyone to a country where the crime he is accused of is punishable by the death penalty, or where human rights are not fully respected,” Clerides said.
On a technical note, the Attorney-general has also warned Parliament that the half-measures proposed cannot be incorporated into the Constitution per se. Clerides said the practice in all countries was that changes to the Constitution are generalised – if a country then wants to introduce additional clauses, this must be done later with regard to the relevant domestic legislation.
Clerides could not be reached for comment yesterday.
Some observers speculate that hidden agendas are behind the dogged opposition of deputies – particularly from the DIKO and DISY parties – to making extradition retroactive. They say that certain interests are shielding some Cypriot businessmen wanted abroad for high-profile financial crimes committed before 1 May 2004.
The issue of extraditing Cypriots wanted on European arrest warrants (EAW) resurfaced late last year when the Supreme Court upheld a decision by a Limassol district court not to extradite 41-year-old Constandinos Constandinou, wanted by British authorities in connection with a £10 million sterling VAT scam wanted on tax fraud charges in the UK.
The top court in the land found that the initial decision was correct, since the Cypriot Constitution prevailed over the EU acquis.
Constandinou was the second Cypriot citizen to hit the headlines for being wanted by foreign law enforcement. The other is Lycourgos Kyprianou, CEO of bankrupt Nasdaq-listed AremisSoft; he is considered a fugitive by the US authorities and is wanted there on charges of securities fraud and money laundering. The case has been described as one of the biggest stock market frauds of all time, with some 6,000 investors allegedly stripped of over $500 million.
