The retrial of Giorgos Zavrantonas Christodoulou got into the substance of the case on Monday with his lawyers lodging several objections to the evidence submitted by prosecutors.

In the trial before the Nicosia criminal court, he faces charges of possessing 15kilograms of cocaine with intent to sell. He has pleaded not guilty.

Christodoulou had originally been sentenced in December 2022 to 22 years in prison, but that conviction was recently overturned by the appeals court, which ordered the case to be retried from scratch.

In court on Monday, the prosecution called to the stand an officer with the drug squad who had been in charge of the evidence in the case.

Officer Militsa Papa described the events of January 16, 2019, when police arrested two men for possession of 15kg of cocaine.

The two men arrested at a residence in Lakatamia were Aristos Kyprianou and Yiannis Andreou.

Andreou had initially been sentenced to 16 years in prison for the same case. Having served four, he was subsequently granted a presidential pardon. He has now become a witness in this case.

Officer Papa said that on arriving at the scene, she was informed about the arrests. Andreou was inside the house at the time, while Kyprianou was inside a vehicle.

A packet containing cocaine was found in the garden of the same house, after Andreou pointed out the exact location, telling officers the drugs were his.

Police also found an army-style bag in the driver’s seat of Kyprianou’s car. Inside the bag were 14 packages containing a white substance.

The prosecution then presented as evidence the seized packages.

At this point, Christos Poutziouris, lead attorney for the defendant, objected that the evidentiary items are being held by the prosecution “illegally”.

He claimed that, during the previous trial, the court had ordered that the evidence be destroyed after the drugs were examined by the state lab.

Despite this, the evidence was not destroyed, nor had authorities in the interim filed a request to retain the evidence.

This adversely affects his client’s right to a fair trial, and constitutes contempt of court, the lawyer said.

Responding, the prosecution said the court should first hear the reasons why the police kept the evidence.

The matter was resolved by the court itself, with the judge citing a previous file – dated June 25, 2020 – which stated that the evidence in question could be retained.

Next, the prosecution presented other evidence related to the case – documents issued by the state lab, as well as a USB device with telecommunications data.

Again, the defence objected about the USB, saying they were unaware of its contents and questioning whether the authorities obtained the data lawfully.

The trial continues on Tuesday.