The Institutions Committee unanimously rejected the referral of the law, which had been voted on November 3 by Parliament and which provides for control of the taking up of work in the private sector by former state officials and judges and certain former employees of the public and wider public sector.
The deputies of all the parties participating in the Committee expressed their objections to the impeachment by the President and unanimously the body decided to ask the Plenary of the Parliament to vote against the impeachment of the law by the President of the Republic.< /p>
The Chairman of the Committee and DISY MP, Dimitris Dimitriou, stated that he was discouraged by the impeachment of the law and noted that the law neither interferes with the Separation of Powers, nor violates Article 158.3 of the Constitution, referring to the two main arguments of the impeachment.
The representative of the Legal Service who presented the impeachment before the members of the Committee, particularly developed the argument of the law's unconstitutionality, on the one hand due to a violation of the Principle of Separation of Powers, as well as due to a violation of Article 158.3 of the Constitution, which concerns the alteration of employment conditions judges of the Supreme Court, as well as the Attorney General (AG) and Assistant AG.
As Ms. Symeonidou explained, “the working conditions of judges after their employment should not be adversely altered after their appointment”. He went on to say that “the legislation is coming to a stage where the judges, Attorney General and Assistant Attorney General, are in place to shape their terms of employment” and added that judges are subject to disfavor by submitting a request to the audit committee, with a detailed record of all of the cases they have handled during their tenure in the public sector. It was also mentioned in an earlier case of a judge's decision to withhold a proportional pension, which was deemed unconstitutional, based on the specific article of the Constitution.
Special emphasis was placed by the representative of the Legal Service on the violation of the Principle of Separation of Powers, arguing that “there will be an intervention in a matter which is considered purely judicial”. He referred to the intention of the Supreme Court since 2016 to issue directives on the questions of where the judges are concerned, in order not to predetermine the way of control by “factors external to the judiciary, i.e. auditors”, in order to avoid the erosion of the Principle of Discrimination of Powers, as explained by Mrs. Symeonidou.
Finally, he mentioned that issues are also raised on a practical level due to the law passed by the Parliament, as “the institutions of the General Secretary and the Assistant General Secretary operate through the representation of the Legal Service officers, who deal with thousands of issues, so in reality they will be difficult for officials to submit detailed information in relation to transactions they had in the course of their duties, which may concern a future employer”.
In his statement during the meeting, the President of the Committee and Member of Parliament of DISY, Dimitris Dimitriou, noted that equality, equality and transparency should take precedence. “I don't understand the disfavor, since after their retirement the officials are citizens of the Republic of Cyprus, with a guaranteed pension as an asset and with guaranteed rights, including that at work,” he noted, adding that no one was prohibited from working, but a committee approval was sought for the cases of high-ranking officials, for the first two years after their retirement “to protect transparency and prevent entanglements.”
Referring to the 2016 decision to regulate the audit where did you come from, he emphasized that until today the judiciary has not taken care of the regulation of this issue with its exclusive competence. “If the judges had regulated the control of where they were from, they would have gained in their conscience and credibility” and he concluded that “what is happening today is a collapse of the credibility of the institutions”.
Regarding the CEO and Assistant CEO, he pointed out that all major state contracts fall under their jurisdiction and raised the question of who protects the state, but also the employee himself, if such a former high-ranking official is found working in a company that handles such large contracts.
Finally, he said there could be a complete ban on employment for the first two years after retirement, given the wide range of cases handled through Legal Service officers.
p>
The Member of Parliament of AKEL, Andreas Pasiourtidis, during his presentation to the Committee, noted that already in 2012, the Law on Lawyers forbids for one year after leaving office, a lawyer to appear in court practicing work and wondered why this is not an issue for the Separation of Powers, but the law referred to is an issue.
He also raised the issue of the DA and Assistant DA having the power to suspend criminal prosecutions, without being controlled by anyone and wondered what would happen if, after a suspension of prosecution, such an official chose to work for a person whose prosecution was suspended, since no one will be able to check it.
“I think they should have been more flexible, both judges and prosecutors, because the law does not prohibit them from working, but asks them to present their request to the committee and as long as there is no conflict of interest to be allowed,” he noted and added that “we cannot plead transparency and accountability, but it stops where the judiciary begins”.
The Member of Parliament of DIKO, Zacharias Koulias, in his intervention emphasized that from the moment the judges retire, they are now retired and ordinary citizens and “do not inherit” their terms of employment. “The Constitution is not an inherited right, nor does the Separation of Powers follow them to the end of their lives,” he said, concluding that there is a counter-argument to each of the impeachment arguments presented by the Legal Service.
“It must to remain in the same position and let the Supreme Court decide whether our position or the position of the Legal Service is correct”, noted the MP of the Greek National Association for the Protection of the Environment, Marinos Mousioutas.
The MP of the Environmentalists Movement – Citizens' Cooperation, Alexandra Attalidou, in her statements after the meeting, said that “equality and equality must concern all citizens, especially when they no longer practice a profession for which they claim an exemption from any law”, and added that on the day after retirement, judges, prosecutors, parliamentarians and ministers should be treated equally by the law.
He also said that “for the purposes of transparency and avoiding conflict of interest, the judges themselves, the General Secretary and the B EO, not to ask for this exception, which I hope will be voted against by the Plenary of the Parliament”. Finally, he called on the President of the Republic not to refer the law to the Supreme Court.
