Newsroom
The Supreme Court of Cyprus has dismissed an application filed by a detained Russian citizen seeking to block his extradition to the Russian Federation, where he is wanted to stand trial on large-scale tax evasion charges. The Court also rejected his request for immediate release from custody.
In its ruling, the Supreme Court found that the evidence presented did not demonstrate a real or substantial risk that the applicant would suffer human rights violations, or be subjected to degrading or humiliating treatment, if returned to Russia. The judges concluded that the general conditions cited by the applicant were insufficient to justify preventing extradition.
The case follows an earlier decision by the Larnaca District Court, which on 31 October 2025 approved Russia’s extradition request. That court ordered the applicant’s detention pending transfer, after determining that the alleged offenses, corporate tax evasion on a particularly large scale under Russian criminal law, met the legal requirements for extradition.
In response, the detainee applied for a prerogative writ of Habeas Corpus ad Subjiciendum, arguing that both his continued detention and the approval of extradition were unlawful. He claimed that prison conditions in Russia involve systematic abuse, particularly of newly admitted inmates, including torture and degrading treatment.
The applicant further alleged that his prosecution was not being pursued in good faith and suggested that his personal background placed him at heightened risk. He pointed to his Ukrainian ancestry on his father’s side, while acknowledging that he was born in Moscow, holds a Russian passport, and is a Russian citizen.
The Supreme Court, however, was unconvinced. It noted that documented human rights abuses in Russia tend to affect individuals such as political activists, opposition figures, outspoken journalists, or others openly critical of the authorities. The applicant, the Court observed, does not belong to any of these categories and faces charges under ordinary criminal law rather than politically motivated accusations.
The Court also found no persuasive evidence indicating that conditions in Russian detention facilities are such that a newly arrived prisoner would, by default, face serious mistreatment from prison authorities or fellow inmates. Likewise, the applicant’s family background was not considered sufficient to place him among groups known to be targeted for abuse.
Addressing claims of bad faith prosecution, the Court stated that no objective material had been submitted to support such allegations. It added that the applicant’s account could not be verified and might have been tailored to avoid extradition.
Finally, the Supreme Court rejected the argument that extradition would likely result in an unfair trial, describing that claim as unsupported and lacking evidentiary foundation.
As a result, the extradition order remains in force, and the applicant will continue to be held in custody pending transfer to Russian authorities.
