Lawyer Nikos Clerides refuted accusations that he failed to report allegations of paedophilia as “legally unfounded” and risk undermining the legal profession, insisting the information was provided under strict confidentiality and did not trigger any reporting obligation.
In a detailed public statement issued on Friday, Clerides said the claims relate to information he received from his now former client referred to as ‘Sandy’.
He rejected suggestions the case involved a minor at the point of disclosure, describing such assertions as “a distortion of reality”, as when approached by yhe individual he maintains that she was “in her forties”.
He outlined that the information provided to him “concerned events from decades ago”, “was not associated with any present danger to a minor” and “was given under strict attorney client confidentiality”.
He added that it had been communicated with “an explicit and categorical prohibition on disclosure”.
Clerides argued that invoking legislation intended to force an individual to report cases of such severity in this context constitutes a misinterpretation of its purpose.
He said the legislation, aligned with EU directives, is designed for “the prevention and immediate response to sexual abuse and exploitation of minors”, particularly where there is an ongoing or potential risk.
According to his position, “all relevant provisions of the law presuppose the existence of a child in need of protection at the present time”.
He maintained that the law does not impose an obligation to report “exclusively historical incidents reported by adults without indication of active danger”, adding that it “does not turn the lawyer into a retroactive complaint mechanism” and does not override “fundamental principles of the rule of law”.
On the issue of legal privilege, Clerides said confidentiality is not discretionary but binding, stating “attorney client confidentiality is not an option but an obligation”.
He warned that breaching it would constitute “a serious disciplinary and legal offence”, while any expectation to do so “ignores the Lawyers Code of Ethics” and conflicts with established case law of the European Court of Human Rights.
He further stressed that in the specific circumstances “there was no minor at risk”, “no indication of ongoing criminal activity” and “no consent from the client”, concluding that “there is no legal obligation to report”.
He described opposing interpretations as “arbitrary legal construction without basis in law”.
Clerides also warned of implications for the justice system if such expectations were accepted, stating that requiring lawyers to report all information regardless of context would lead to “a complete breakdown of confidentiality”.
He said that under such conditions “no citizen would be able to speak freely to their lawyer” and legal advice would be fundamentally undermined.
“The requirement to violate legal privilege, in a case where the information was provided by an adult, concerned past events and there was no immediate danger to a minor, has no legal basis and is contrary to the fundamental principles of law,” he said.
The statement comes amid ongoing scrutiny surrounding allegations linked to the ‘Sandy’ case and claims of paedophila, rape and corruption involving former supreme court judge Michalakis Christodoulou.
Clerides has previously distanced himself from his former client and raised concerns about the handling of the investigation, stating he fears for his personal safety and questioning the conduct of authorities.
He has also maintained that material connected to the case was initially withheld due to its sensitive nature and concerns for the safety of those involved.
In earlier remarks, he said he had encouraged the complainant to proceed with formal reporting at the time but that she declined, citing “fear for her own life”.
Click here to change your cookie preferences