We all remember, in May 2017, the unprecedented feud that broke out between the former Minister of Interior Socrates Hasikos and the Auditor General Odysseas Michailidis, regarding the family residence of Mr. Michailidis in Kokkinotrimithia and the certificate of approximately 20 years. after its construction, due to various violations, as it was then said, regarding conditions in the specific building permit.
By Alexia Kafetzis
The term in the Building Permit of the family residence of Odysseas Michailidis who was not satisfied with the cost to the public
As it was mentioned at the time, in the building permit of the family residence of Odysseas Michaelides, a condition was imposed for the owners to pay the construction costs of the sidewalk and part of the road in front of the house. It was also reported that the general inspector's house is located opposite the 2nd Primary School of Kokkinotrimithia and for this reason, the community council was obliged for reasons of public security to complete the project, but without paying the cost of the building permit for the Mr. Michaelides's house was to be paid on the basis of the relevant condition imposed on the building permit.
Mr. Michailidis then put forward the argument, with his written answer, that:
” In the issued urban planning permit, there was a condition for the concession of a section and for the construction of a sidewalk and asphalt paving of the road in front of the plot, in front of the house, while it was also provided for the concession of its green space in the southeastern part of the plot. The green area was planted with trees by us and the trees received proper care for many years.
On October 6, 2000, an Expropriation Notice was published in the Official Gazette of the Republic for the widening and alignment of the road in front of the house, through which an area of 208 m2 was expropriated, in which the sidewalk would be constructed and the road would be widened . mentioned above. For the expropriation of these 208 m2 the offered compensation was only CYP6 (€ 10), while there was already an access road in front of the plot and therefore there was no question of goodwill of the plot due to the creation of an access road. It is obvious that this symbolic amount (for land of 208 m2, significantly higher value – on 1.1.2013 would have a value of around € 15,000 applying the same ratio as above) was given since the plot would gain added value by widening and aligning road construction and sidewalk construction.
The work of widening and aligning the road that would be done by the Community Council was delayed for many years, I realize in anticipation of the implementation of the sewerage system that would destroy the road. Eventually the project was promoted around 2010-2011 (I do not have exact details) and also included
construction of all sidewalks along the road, in front of all houses.
During the same period, the construction of sidewalks was promoted in many parts of the Community. I contacted the Mayor of Kokkinotrimithia this morning and he confirmed what I knew, that is, that the Community then decided to bear the cost of the sidewalks and not to share it with the affected residents (as is usually the case in cities).
Therefore, I do not understand why only my wife should be burdened with this construction “.
The term in the urban planning permission of a citizen that Odysseas Michailidis insists on
be satisfied with costs to the citizen
Well, these are what Mr. Michailidis says about his own family home and the burden of his family with the cost of construction of sidewalks, etc., which are in fact a condition for granting a permit for his residence, but his views are diametrically opposed. Mr. Michailidis when an identical term and in fact also in Kokkinotrimithia exists in another urban planning permit!
As “24” was informed by sources of the Department of Urban Planning, from where it also secured relevant correspondence, letters signed by the Auditor General himself, Odysseas Michailidis, in the immediately preceding year of the disclosure of the condition in the permit for his own family residence, had diametrically opposed view for a condition in an urban planning approval which provided for the payment of the cost of construction of sidewalks as well, by the owners of plots.
He insisted on this case, and also raises the question of why he dealt with such a small issue, and especially of his neighborhood, personally himself, contrary to what he later said about his own case, the citizens to pay to a Special Fund of the Community Council the cost of building the sidewalks to meet the condition in the relevant permit given to them, despite the fact that the Community Council would build the road itself and all other sidewalks along its entire length.
Major issue of constitutional and moral order for the Auditor General and the comments of those in charge
Although he considered this to be completely unfair to his wife and did not realize it, despite the fact that there was a specific condition in the permit given for his family home, for an identical case of another citizen, also a resident of Kokkinotrimithia, he considered the condition imposed on the relevant permit. binding and did not wonder, since the Community Council would build the rest of the sidewalks along this road, and did not worry as for his wife “Therefore I do not understand why only this citizen” should be “burdened with this construction” – obviously because it was not about his wife at a cost to his family!
The issue will not stay here
The issue is extremely serious, and in fact touches on serious, fundamental principles of the Constitution of the Republic of Cyprus itself, but also of the Authorities and moral officials of the state and above all the Auditor General of the Republic who so easily judges and criticizes everyone else many times with leaks, completely unjustly, as the President of the Republic himself has repeatedly pointed out to him, and in his public statements, drawing his attention.
Therefore, “24” will return to the issue if the need arises, in case there is no equal treatment of the citizens of the Republic, such as the treatment received by the Auditor General of the Republic, with the public essentially bearing the cost to meet condition that existed in his own license, but not to bear the cost for the construction of sidewalks, etc. in terms that exist in the licenses of all other citizens, in identical cases.
On the other hand, the Auditor General of the Republic presents himself as allegedly fighting against corruption, entanglement and the defense of the public interest on the basis of principles; obviously only when it concerns others with whom he opposes ?!
See the documents here:
KokkinotrimithiaPezodromia1
