The government moved on Wednesday to expediate a package of legislation that would significantly expand the state’s power to intercept telecommunications, with MPs examining the proposals in the parliamentary legal affairs committee.

The legislative package centres on a constitutional amendment and accompanying bills designed to broaden the legal framework governing telephone monitoring.

Authorities argue the reforms are necessary to combat organised crime, corruption and national security threats, while critics warn that expanding surveillance powers risks undermining fundamental rights and weakening judicial oversight.

Justice Minister Costas Fitiris told the committee the measures form part of a wider institutional response to what he described as a serious and evolving landscape of criminal activity.

The proposed changes would amend article 17 of the constitution, which guarantees the secrecy of correspondence and communications, setting out the circumstances under which authorities may lawfully interfere with that right.

Fitiris said the aim was to equip the state with modern investigative apparatus while remaining within the rule of law.

“Our line of defence depends to a large extent on these bills,” he informed the committee.

“The objective is to strengthen the regulatory framework so that the republic has the necessary tools to protect its security and sovereignty and to effectively tackle serious and organised crime.”

Under the proposals, the list of offences for which the police may seek authorisation to intercept communications would expand substantially.

The additional categories include murder and attempted murder, human trafficking involving adults and minors, offences related to child pornography and the sexual exploitation or abuse of children, terrorism, espionage, cybercrime and organised online offences punishable by at least five years in prison.

Other offences cited include illegal immigration networks, money laundering, drug trafficking and participation in criminal organisations.

During the committee discussion, further suggestions were raised to include crimes such as the financing of terrorism and the establishment of criminal syndicates.

Attorney-general George Savvides stressed the urgency of the legislative reform, describing surveillance as a critical investigative tool against both organised crime and threats to the state.

Addressing MPs, he said the authorities require stronger powers to confront criminal networks operating with large financial resources.

“I want to emphasise in the strongest terms the danger to our country’s security,” Savvides said.

“It is necessary to give state services the means to do their job and to combat organised crime.”

He characterised the surveillance capability as “a superweapon” for the state, arguing that criminal networks and underworld organisations increasingly rely on sophisticated communication methods that require modern investigative responses.

Savvides also outlined safeguards included in the proposed legislation.

Any individual found to have conducted unlawful surveillance would face penalties of up to ten years’ imprisonment, while a three-member supervisory committee would oversee compliance with procedures governing interceptions.

Telecommunications providers would also be required to maintain a traceable record of every interception request and execution, ensuring transparency and accountability within the system.

The proposed framework establishes two distinct authorisation routes depending on the nature of the case.

For investigations into criminal offences, police authorities would still need to obtain a court warrant before any interception of communications.

However, in matters involving national security, surveillance could be authorised through written approval by the attorney general rather than by a judge.

Savvides sought to draw a clear distinction between those two processes, arguing that the attorney general’s approval would apply exclusively to matters of state security rather than ordinary criminal investigations.

“For criminal cases that lead to prosecution, there must be a court order,” he said.

“What we are discussing here concerns asymmetric threats and the security of the state.”

Police chief Themistos Arnaoutis supported the proposed changes, describing surveillance as essential in confronting corruption.

According to Arnaoutis, intercepting communications could provide evidence that is often decisive in securing convictions in complex criminal cases.

Without such tools, investigators face significant challenges in dismantling criminal networks that operate through encrypted messaging and mobile communications.

Security officials also emphasised the broader geopolitical dimension of the debate.

Head of the intelligence service (Kyp) Tasos Tzionis told the committee that Cyprus faces a range of threats including terrorism, and activities linked to foreign states.

“We are also facing threats from external actors and state-controlled operations. That is why we want these tools.”

He added that speed and confidentiality were indispensable elements of intelligence work, suggesting that requiring judicial approval in every instance could hinder urgent responses to security threats.

Despite those arguments, opposition parliamentarians expressed unease about expanding surveillance powers without maintaining full judicial oversight.

Akel MP Andreas Pasiourtidis questioned the necessity of granting broader interception authority, pointing out that a previous surveillance mechanism approved in 2020 had never been used.

His intervention reflected wider concerns within the opposition that bypassing the courts in certain circumstances could weaken constitutional protections for privacy.

The constitution guarantees the confidentiality of communications, and any interference with that right has traditionally required judicial authorisation.

The debate also touched on practical considerations surrounding the implementation of surveillance measures.

Representatives of telecommunications providers argued that the legal framework could function effectively only if operational responsibilities were clearly defined and the financial burden of maintaining interception systems was borne by the state.

Cyprus’ main telecommunications companies, including Cyta, have already installed technical infrastructure required for lawful interceptions following earlier consultations with authorities.

Committee chairman Nicos Tornaritis defended the legislative initiative, arguing that Cyprus had been slow to adopt measures already in place across other European countries.

He also addressed concerns surrounding political immunity and surveillance, questioning whether individuals acting against the interests of the republic should remain beyond scrutiny because of their status.

The committee scheduled an additional closed session for this Friday to examine two accompanying bills that will regulate the operational details of the surveillance system.

Lawmakers are expected to continue reviewing the legislative package article by article before it proceeds to a plenary vote.

Passing the constitutional amendment will require a broad parliamentary majority, as changes to the constitution demand at least 38 votes in parliament.