Cyprus man locked Asian worker indoors, took her mobile and made her share his bed

A Greek Cypriot man who locked his Asian worker indoors, took her mobile and even made her share his bed has been sentenced to eight years in prison after he was found guilty of trafficking and labor exploitation. 

The defendant who was convicted of exploiting two Asian women hired for agricultural work has been sentenced to eight years in prison after an appeals court quashed rape charges but upheld convictions for trafficking and labour exploitation.

The Famagusta Criminal Court initially sentenced the man to 10 years after finding him guilty of forcing one worker to sleep in his bed, locking her in the house, confiscating her mobile phone and making both women work excessive hours, according to the Appeals Court ruling.

The defendant faced 11 charges under the Prevention and Combating of Trafficking and Exploitation of Persons and Protection of Victims Law, and the Aliens and Immigration Law. Seven charges related to an Indian woman and four to a Nepalese woman.

Prosecutors alleged the employer recruited, received and housed the Indian woman under an agricultural employment agreement with the aim of exploiting her labour through abuse of his position and exploitation of her vulnerable status. He was also charged with recruiting her to exploit his power as employer for sexual contact.

Two rape charges accused him of having intercourse with the Indian woman against her will on 2 January 2018 and 3 January 2018.

The employer faced similar charges regarding the Nepalese woman, including subjecting her to servitude by forcing her to sleep in the same bed with him, locking her in the house and taking her mobile phone. He also faced two indecent assault charges relating to the Nepalese woman.

The defendant appealed the initial conviction on multiple grounds, including claims of misdirection due to “inadequacy of his defence.”

The Appeals Court examined all grounds and ruled the rape charges were not proven. The court found the Criminal Court’s conclusion that the employer had intercourse with the complainant on the two specific dates was “precarious,” resulting in the cancellation of the rape conviction due to absence of a constituent element of the offence.

The Appeals Court rejected the defendant’s claims that the delay in reporting proved vindictiveness, noting the woman’s account of events during the initial period was consistent with testimony from other witnesses who became aware of her complaint.

The court reduced the sentence from 10 years to eight years, which it deemed fair and proportionate to the defendant’s criminal conduct.