Independent criminal investigator Andreas Paschalidis confirmed that he has indeed recommended criminal prosecutions against exposed individuals in the Videogate affair, rejecting claims that his findings cleared everyone involved and accusing critics of deliberately distorting his conclusions.

In a public statement on Thursday, Paschalidis said commentary surrounding his report had created the false impression that he had exonerated all those connected to the case, despite his recommendation to attorney-general George Savvides, that prosecutions be pursued under legislation implementing the Council of Europe Convention on the Criminalisation of Corruption.

“In light of my finding that criminal offences have been committed by a number of individuals and my recommendation for criminal prosecution of these individuals, the following questions reasonably arise. On the basis of what facts do some conclude that with my finding I acquit and absolve everyone and everything?” he said.

Paschalidis said he had chosen to respond publicly because he had witnessed an “attempt to distort” his findings “aimed at serving political expediencies”, as well as what he described as an attack on his personal integrity.

He stressed that he had acted solely in his capacity as a criminal investigator operating under specific terms of reference, rather than as the head of an investigative committee with a broader political or ethical mandate.

“My role was exclusively that of a criminal investigator,” he insisted, adding that critics “either out of ignorance, confusion, or deliberately” refused to recognise that distinction.

He also defended the decision not to publish the full report, saying he had no objection in principle because the investigation itself had been completed.

However, he warned that releasing the findings before any decision on prosecutions could undermine the presumption of innocence.

Paschalidis rejected criticism that he had failed to examine the political or moral aspects of the affair, arguing that such matters fell outside the scope of the mandate he had been tasked with.

He also explained why the report had been submitted on Monday, saying his appointment expired on that date and extending the investigation after it had already concluded would have been unjustified.

While the report found that no offences had been committed under the criminal code, Paschalidis said his assessment of the evidence and relevant case law led him to conclude that offences under the anti-corruption convention legislation had in fact been committed.

The statement follows criticism from opposition parties after the findings were submitted earlier this week.

Disy has called for the Legal Service to examine the findings and determine whether criminal offences arise, while maintaining that legal responsibility and political accountability should be treated separately.

Akel accused the government of attempting to escape accountability and called for the report to be published in full through the House institutions committee.

Paschalidis also rejected suggestions that his appointment as president of the watchdog tasked with investigating complaints against the police (Aadipa) was the result of an arrangement with President Nikos Christodoulides.

“My appointment to the position of Aadipa is in no way the product of a transaction with the President,” he insisted, adding that he did not personally know Christodoulides and that his appointment followed a recommendation by the attorney general, as required by law.

Concluding his statement, Paschalidis said he had carried out his duties “without fear or prejudice”, adding “If anyone questions it, let him speak now, otherwise let him hold his peace.”