In a late-night vote on 5 December, made public on 7 December, Cyprus’ House of Representatives passed amendments to the Refugee Act that let authorities cancel refugee or subsidiary-protection status when a beneficiary is deemed a security risk or has committed a "serious crime". The Deputy Minister of Migration or the head of the Asylum Service can now issue a revocation order after giving the individual ten days to respond.
Crimes ranging from terrorism and murder to repeat theft or illegal employment qualify, provided prosecutors show deliberate intent. Once status is withdrawn, the individual immediately loses work rights, welfare benefits and freedom of movement; deportation can follow once all appeals are exhausted. Government lawyers say the reform aligns national law with EU Directive 2011/95/EU and closes gaps flagged during recent Schengen pre-assessment visits.
![Parliament grants government power to revoke refugee status for serious crimes]()
Human-rights NGOs and opposition MPs opposed the bill, warning that executive revocation without prior court oversight risks politicising asylum and breaching the non-refoulement principle. Independent MP Alexandra Attalides argued that "no minister should decide people’s fate behind closed doors" and called for judicial approval mechanisms.
For employers, the tighter rules mean any staff members holding protection status must maintain a clean criminal record or face automatic loss of the right to work. Mobility teams should review compliance checks and consider additional background-screening steps for new hires who are asylum beneficiaries.
Crimes ranging from terrorism and murder to repeat theft or illegal employment qualify, provided prosecutors show deliberate intent. Once status is withdrawn, the individual immediately loses work rights, welfare benefits and freedom of movement; deportation can follow once all appeals are exhausted. Government lawyers say the reform aligns national law with EU Directive 2011/95/EU and closes gaps flagged during recent Schengen pre-assessment visits.
Human-rights NGOs and opposition MPs opposed the bill, warning that executive revocation without prior court oversight risks politicising asylum and breaching the non-refoulement principle. Independent MP Alexandra Attalides argued that "no minister should decide people’s fate behind closed doors" and called for judicial approval mechanisms.
For employers, the tighter rules mean any staff members holding protection status must maintain a clean criminal record or face automatic loss of the right to work. Mobility teams should review compliance checks and consider additional background-screening steps for new hires who are asylum beneficiaries.
