-
.
- Ελληνικά
The Court of Appeal held that the decision of the first instance court to dismiss a civil action brought by a private individual against the power of the Attorney General of the Republic to intervene and discontinue criminal proceedings for reasons of public interest, without justification, was absolutely correct. The decision of the Court of Appeal, which was unanimous, was handed down on 12 January 2023.
The application asked the Court to recognise that, the decision of the Attorney General of the Republic to register a stay on 2 private, criminal prosecutions in June 2016 was, inter alia, invalid, in that the then Attorney General did not provide a justification as to why the stay of those prosecutions was in the public interest.
The Court of Appeal, holding that the decision of the trial court to dismiss the action was correct and characterizing the case law as crystallized as to the fact that the power of the Attorney General of the Republic to intervene and discontinue criminal proceedings when, in its judgment, it is in the public interest, is not subject to judicial review, states that:
"[THE ORIGINAL COURT] ...analysed the power of the Attorney General of the Republic to intervene and discontinue criminal proceedings, explaining the obvious, based on the case law crystallised on this point, that the Attorney General has an unreviewable power to initiate, conduct, prosecute, continue or discontinue any proceedings if, in his judgment, it is in the public interest to do so. Any public interest is to be judged by the Attorney General himself, whose judgment is not subject to judicial review. For the purposes of Article 113 of the Constitution, the Attorney-General himself is the judge of the public interest, with any such decision of his being deemed to be taken for the purpose of serving the public interest, without his having to give any explanation to that effect."
The Court of Appeal also held that no reason to differentiate the jurisprudence could be identified, nor would it be correct to do so.
All of the plaintiff's claims were rejected by the Court of Appeal, which awarded costs in favour of the Republic.
On behalf of the Attorney General of the Republic, the case was handled by Ms Marianna Tsagari, Attorney of the Republic I.
Contents of this article including associated images are belongs PIO
Views & opinions expressed are those of the author and/or PIO
Source
