Court condemns diplomat’s ‘reprehensible actions’
CYPRUS’ former Ambassador to Sweden, Costas Papadimas, was yesterday jailed for seven months for sexually harassing and indecently assaulting two of his secretaries in Stockholm between 2002 and 2005.
Papadimas, 51, had protested his innocence throughout the marathon trial at Nicosia’s Criminal Court, claiming that one of the secretaries was his mistress and that she had engineered the accusations against him after he had wanted to end their affair.
Yesterday, Papadimas and his tearful wife Mary hugged and kissed after he was sentenced by Judges Antonis Liatsos, Stalo Hadjiyiannis and Charalambos Poyiatzis.
It is the first time a Cypriot diplomat has been found guilty of such a crime.
Defence lawyer Efstathios Efstathiou’s pleas for mitigation – in which he called on the judges to suspend whatever sentence they chose to impose on the diplomat – fell on deaf ears, and as Papadimas and his relatives looked on in horror as Judge Liatsos began sentencing him for each of the 23 charges against him.
Efsthathiou had called on the court to show leniency, stating his client had suffered both mentally and physically, particularly after he had been found guilty on December 20.
On Friday, Papadimas had a minor heart episode and was submitted to a private clinic for 48 hours.
“The repercussions of the court’s decision have had a dire effect on my client’s position, both on a professional level and in society,” said Efstathiou “His family, his wife and his two daughters have endured a strenuous time throughout the entire proceedings, not to mention the fact that my client has debts and that losing his job will have severe consequences should he be jailed.”
But reading the court’s decision on sentencing about two hours after the mitigation plea was made by the defence, Judge Liatsos said: “The whole behaviour of the accused and his actions have been totally reprehensible. His reprehensible activities and unacceptable actions have not only tarnished the good image of his homeland in the country he was serving – dismantling the foundation of support for operations entrusted to him by the state – but also played a role in his position of authority…”
The judge continued: “His continuous illegal activities were not a result of an isolated and one-off behaviour. They spanned over a depth of time, with many incidents taking place. They inflicted fear, stress and insecurity on the plaintiffs.”
The judges were not convinced by Efstathiou’s plea that his client had shown remorse.
“Mr Efstathiou expressed his client’s remorse to the court. With all due respect, the facts are different. The defendant did not show remorse for his illegal behaviour, but his sadness in accordance with his line of defence. In other words, that he, wrongfully in his opinion, entered into an affair with Alexandra [Zioga].
“The defence also makes reference to the health problems of the defendant. According to the medical documents in our possession… they do not constitute a major problem but instead indicate that the defendant may need medical observation.”
In fact, Judge Liatsos said the punishment should, in the court’s opinion, have been harsher.
“It is our belief that the maximum sentence of six months [for sexual harassment] that can be imposed does not reflect the severity of the crime … It must be stated that in Britain, the offence of sexual harassment in the workplace can carry a prison sentence of up to five years.”
Papadimas was sentenced to one month, two months and six months for most of the charges, with the judges sentencing Papadimas to seven months on two charges of indecent assault.
A distraught Papadimas told reporters after the trial, “What can I say?”
Papadimas and his defence team have launched an appeal against the decision at the Supreme Court.
