The Supreme Court rejected the application of four monks in the case of the Abvakum monastery for the issuance of a privileged Prohibition type warrant, with which they requested the prohibition of the adjudication of their cases by the Synodal Court of the Church of Cyprus. The request of Archimandrite Nektarios Georgios, Archimandrite Porphyrios Ttoulos, Hieromonk Abvakum Christofis and Monk Timotheus Florentzos arose after they were summoned by the Holy Synod for canonical and criminal misdemeanors.
The applicants requested the permission of the Court for the registration by summons of an application for the issuance of a Privileged Warrant, type Prohibition, with which it is prohibited to "start and/or continue the procedure before the Six-member Synodal Court, which is scheduled on 30.8.2024. XNUMX at the premises of the Holy Archdiocese of Cyprus in Nicosia."
They also requested a Prohibition Decree prohibiting the Metropolitan of Tamasos and Orinis from taking any other and/or further measures on the complaint of Archimandrite Hieromonk Fr. Varnavas Chrysanthous against him until the application is considered.
The monks argued that the proceedings before the Synodal Court were invalid, as previous decisions of Metropolitan Tamasos, by which they had been sentenced, created a res judicata.
They also questioned the correctness and legality of the procedures followed for drawing up and serving relevant indictments on the three of them, as well as in general the initiation of the procedure before the Six-member Synodal Court. At the same time, they questioned not only the competence but also the existence of various organs and bodies provided for in the Charter of the Church of Cyprus and relevant Church Regulations, which they claim were involved in the above developments and procedures, not excluding the Commission of Inquiry and the same of the Six-Member Synod Court, before which the trial of the case is pending.
They also stated that given that all the members of the Holy Synod, on 08.03.2024, were positive on the question of referring the two above Archimandrites Nektarios and Porphyrios to a Synodal Court to be tried, they should be exempted from exercising the duties of a Judge or member of the Investigative Committee, in a way that does not create suspicions of biased behavior.
They also claimed that their right to a fair trial was violated as their request to be represented by a lawyer of their choice was denied. The Court held that the right to a fair trial was not violated and dismissed the application.
The Court held that the proceedings of the Synodal Court do not fall within the jurisdiction of review of the civil courts and emphasized that the Ecclesiastical Courts have autonomy, as guaranteed by the Constitution. In addition, no sufficient evidence was presented for a violation of the monks' rights or a wrong application of the Charter of the Church of Cyprus.
"The inescapable conclusion of all the above is that the Petition under discussion cannot have a successful outcome. Both in view of the fact that based on the current jurisprudence the Ecclesiastical Courts are not subject to the control of the Supreme Court through Privileged Decrees, and in view of the fact that in any case, the reasons for which the requested intervention of the Court was sought in this particular case, do not it has been demonstrated, to the extent even required in applications of this kind, that they occur", the decision states.
With this decision, the way is opened for the continuation of the trial of the monks before the Synodal Court.
Source: KYPE