Trial of monks Abbacum: Adjournment of ruling on evidentiary objection

The Nicosia Assize Court postponed to 20 July its ruling on an objection filed by the defence lawyers of two monks. A new hearing was scheduled for 22 July.

Trial of monks Abbacum: Adjournment of ruling on evidentiary objection

Trial of monks Abbacum: Adjournment of ruling on evidentiary objection

The Permanent Assize Court of Nicosia postponed to 20 July the delivery of its ruling regarding the objection filed by the defence lawyers of the two monks being prosecuted in connection with the case of the Holy Monastery of Abbacum. A new hearing was scheduled for 22 July.

During yesterday's proceedings, the legal representatives of the accused challenged certain pieces of evidence that had been submitted. Specifically, they raised questions concerning the lawfulness of the acquisition of the items and whether continuous possession of them had been maintained from the moment they were found until their delivery to the prosecuting authorities.

The defence argued that it was not clear who initially discovered the evidence, where it was stored, who took receipt of it, by what document the transfer was authorised, and in what manner it was ensured that the items had not been altered. They further contended that if the court accepted the said items, they would be deprived of the opportunity to examine those involved in the collection and safekeeping of them.

From the opposite side, the representative of the prosecution argued that the objections are general in nature and reiterate matters that have already been decided by a prior ruling of the court in early July. He added that the persons who participated in the collection and delivery of the evidence are included on the prosecution's witness list and will be called to testify under oath.

The two accused, monks Nektarios and Porphyrios, face serious charges including conspiracy to commit fraud, forgery, theft, unlawful possession of property valued at more than €63,000, money laundering from proceeds of unlawful acts, and interference with judicial proceedings. Both deny any involvement.

Source: Politis

Source: Politis

Read this article in the original language