Newsroom
The Supreme Constitutional Judicial Council has rejected the appeal of Doria Varosiotou, who challenged the decision not to confirm her as a provincial judge. Speaking after the ruling, lawyer Achilleas Demetriades said they plan to take the case to the European Court of Human Rights.
The council voted 5–3 against Varosiotou, with the majority decision read aloud by council member Tasia Psara.
“The road to justice does not stop in Nicosia,” Demetriades said. “It continues to Strasbourg, where the European Court will look at whether this decision violated human rights.”
Why the Council Rejected the Appeal
The council’s majority said a judicial appointment can be probationary and that provisional appointments are allowed under the Constitution.
Judges, they noted, are expected to show legal skill, integrity, and proper behavior, especially in a role that comes under heavy public scrutiny. The Supreme Judicial Council has the constitutional responsibility to decide if a judge on probation meets the standards for permanent confirmation.
In Varosiotou’s case, the council reviewed six-month evaluations from the President of the Limassol District Court, which are part of the probationary process, to determine if she was fit to be confirmed.
Probation Was Clear From the Start
The council emphasized that Varosiotou knew her appointment was temporary. She accepted it without hesitation, took the required oath, and even sent a letter on July 4, 2024, saying she would perform her duties under the probationary terms.
Because she never questioned the provisional nature of her role at the time, the council said she cannot now claim she was supposed to have a permanent position. They also noted that she benefited from the appointment and that her later claims contradicted her initial acceptance.
Concerns About Performance
The council found that Varosiotou had mishandled judicial proceedings in ways that were not allowed under the law and could undermine the proper delivery of justice. They identified serious legal errors and behavior not consistent with the standards expected of a provincial judge.
Overall, the council concluded that her conduct and performance did not meet the required standards and could harm the credibility of the judiciary.
The review was thorough, taking into account multiple evaluations and focusing on whether the process had been followed correctly. The council stressed that they were not second-guessing the substance of earlier evaluations but checking that the rules had been applied properly.
Notable Case Mentioned
The council also referenced Varosiotou’s handling of a case involving the pre-trial questioning of Thanasis Nikolaou, noting significant procedural mistakes.
Even though her appeal was dismissed, Varosiotou may still consider bringing her case to the European Court of Human Rights.
