The prosecution in the military court case involving the five Greek Cypriots who were arrested in the north last month asked for a site inspection of the Strovilia crossing point, near Famagusta, as the trial over the charge that they entered the north illegally continued on Wednesday.

The five Greek Cypriots had entered the north in the same car on July 19, though the police and prosecutors have claimed that only four identity cards were handed over for inspection on the Turkish Cypriot side of the crossing point. The five Greek Cypriots deny this.

As such, one of the five Greek Cypriots stands accused of having entered the north illegally, while the other four stand accused of having aided and abetted that illegal entry.

On Wednesday, the prosecution stated that every person involved in the case, including judges, lawyers, and defendants, should visit the crossing point and “conduct a site inspection to see whether the inside of the vehicle could be seen or not” by a police officer working at a crossing point booth.

This is because at last week’s hearing, it was stated by police officer Timucin Apaydin that it would have been impossible for the police on duty to discern how many people were in the Greek Cypriots’ car because of the car’s tinted windows.

Initially, the defence had asked for time to consider the request, but following a brief adjournment, objected.

“These things should have been done immediately after the incident by the police assigned to investigate the matter. Now, you want to complete whatever points you left out of your investigation under the pretext of further discovery,” the defence stated, according to newspaper Ozgur Gazete’s editor-in-chief Pinar Barut, who was present in court.

Barut, a qualified lawyer, pointed out in a social media post after the conclusion of the day’s hearing that “an incomplete investigation is grounds for acquittal”, and that she considers the request for a site inspection on the grounds of “further discovery” is a “last resort” on the part of the prosecution.

In addition, she said, the defence had highlighted that various conditions on the ground may have changed since July 19, including the weather conditions, the light conditions, and that “maybe an awning was added since the fact, maybe a tree was planted, maybe an existing tree cast a shadow over the vehicle and has since been removed”.

“Forty days have passed since the incident. All the circumstances have changed. Therefore, anything you find 40 days later will not give us the facts of the day on which the incident occurred. We object to this, because you want to complete and incomplete investigation,” the defence stated, according to Barut.

The court then adjourned until Thursday, with hearings expected both regarding the case regarding the alleged illegal entry, and regarding charges of privacy violations, trespassing, and breaching the peace – offences which they allegedly committed while visiting the village of Gastria, near Trikomo.