Newsroom
For five years, Cyprus believed someone had been held responsible for the devastating Arakapas fire.
Now, after a man spent three years in prison, the Court of Appeal has ruled that the evidence against him was not strong enough to prove he started it.
The court unanimously overturned the conviction Tuesday, clearing the man of the charges linking him to the July 3, 2021, fire that tore through villages in the Limassol and Larnaca districts.
Four Egyptian farmworkers lost their lives after their vehicle was surrounded by flames as they tried to escape. Homes, farms and small businesses were destroyed, while roughly 55 square kilometers of land were burned across several communities.
The fire remains one of the most painful disasters in Cyprus’ recent history. For those who lived through it, the memories are still vivid: orange skies, families fleeing their homes, animals trapped in fields and entire villages watching years of work disappear in a matter of hours.
The man had been sentenced to eight years in prison in 2023 after the Limassol Criminal Court found him guilty of deliberately starting the fire near his orchard.
But there was no witness who saw him light it and no direct evidence showing that he did.
Instead, the original conviction was based on a series of circumstances.
He had been working in his orchard shortly before the fire was spotted. He had access to the wider area where it began, and two lighters were later found in his vehicle.
The lower court also considered his movements after leaving the orchard. He stopped at a kiosk in Arakapas, where he mentioned that reeds were burning, and later travelled to nearby Eptagonia for coffee while the fire was spreading.
Taken together, the Criminal Court believed those details pointed to him.
The Court of Appeal disagreed.
Why was he acquitted?
In simple terms, the appeal judges found that the original case made too many leaps from “possibly” to “definitely.”
Investigators believed the fire was probably started deliberately with an open flame, such as a lighter. But the appeal court noted that this was never established as a fact. It remained one possible explanation for how the fire began.
The original court then connected that possibility to the two lighters found in the man’s car. The appeal judges said this was not enough. Carrying a lighter may show that someone had the means to start a fire, but it does not prove that they actually did.
The judges also found that the fire could be reached by another route, not only through the man’s orchard.
Although evidence showed that he had walked near the area where the fire started, it was unclear when he had done so. He had been at the orchard for several hours, from around 10 a.m. until 1:20 p.m. The original judgment did not establish that he approached the area shortly before the flames appeared.
His decision to leave the village and go for coffee was also treated as suspicious. But according to the appeal ruling, the lower court had not properly examined what he knew about the size of the fire at that point or his claim that he later returned. It also did not fully consider that he said he called 112 about the fire at 1:53 p.m.
To the average person, his behavior may have seemed strange. But strange behavior is not automatically proof of a crime.
The appeal court found that the evidence established three things: He was in the area, he had lighters, and his actions afterward raised questions. What it did not establish was that he was the person who set the fire.
In a criminal case, suspicion, even strong suspicion, is not enough. The prosecution must prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt, and an accused person does not have to prove that he is innocent.
The appeal judges concluded that this legal threshold had not been met and unanimously acquitted him of the charges connected to the deadly blaze. He had already served three years of his eight-year sentence.
The ruling brings freedom for the man but no real closure for the families and communities scarred by the fire.
Four people are still dead. Villages still carry the damage. And Cyprus is once again left with the question many believed had already been answered: Who started the Arakapas fire?
