The anti-corruption authority has examined seven complaints against district court judges but found the evidence provided was insufficient to demonstrate corruption, media reports said on Tuesday.

According to Politis, the complaints were filed by members of the public, one of whom decided to remain anonymous.

The complaints alleged conflict of interest, bias in favour of a litigant, and miscarriage of justice.

Regarding the seventh complaint, it alleged that the judge had a conflict of interest and had displayed biased behaviour in a case involving a bank and a credit-acquiring company.

All seven complaints were examined but eventually rejected as the authority did not establish evidence pointing to corruption. The complainants have been informed of the outcome.

The daily said that in none of these complaints had anyone raised the matter of a conflict of interest or bias during the actual trials. These matters must be resolved during the legal proceedings, it stressed.

Litigants have the right to request that a judge recuse himself if they suspect the judge is corrupt. If they do so, and the judge does not recuse himself or herself, and there is some indication of corruption or conflict of interest, then the anti-corruption authority will investigate once a complaint is filed.

But if no such matter is raised during a trial, that makes it all the more difficult for the anti-corruption authority to investigate later.

Politis also said the authority investigated a number of complaints made against a senior civil servant at the interior ministry. The civil servant was named in the complaints, but the complaints themselves were made anonymously. Because they were anonymous, that made it harder for the authority to get in touch with the complainants and ask follow-up questions.

After reviewing these complaints, the body decided there was insufficient evidence to proceed.

One of the complaints claimed that civil servant tried to get a club deleted from the clubs’ register, so that it would lose the right to use the building in which it was housed.

Another alleged that the same civil servant was ‘covering’ for the owner of a kiosk that operated illegally – it lacked the required permits. The kiosk owner was said to be a member of the local community council.

The anti-corruption authority does not have criminal investigatory powers. It may summon witnesses, but their testimony may not be used as evidence in a court of law. The findings are forwarded to the attorney-general’s office which then decides whether to instruct police to carry out a criminal probe.

The members of the anti-corruption authority are appointed by the president. The body was established in 2022 under the presidency of Nicos Anastasiades.