“The executive branch neither had nor will have any authority.” This was the response given by Government Spokesperson Konstantinos Letympiotis, when asked by the Alpha News program to comment on AKEL’s criticism regarding the renaming of Kemal Atatürk Street, to “Street of Memory and Hope,” located in the Muttallou neighborhood in the Paphos district.
As he explained, the Municipality of Paphos informed the government of its decision to rename the street in question, after the decision was made at a City Council meeting “something of which AKEL was aware” and in accordance with the powers of the respective local government authorities. He further argued that if the executive branch were to send proposals and recommendations to local government authorities, then AKEL would respond by following the practice of “double standards.”
At the same time, the Government Spokesperson described it as “regrettable” that the government is being criticized for the fact that this decision may affect the process of implementing Confidence-Building Measures, since the Greek Cypriot side has virtually accepted all of the UN Secretary-General’s proposals on the matter and has also submitted its own. When asked why the government had not responded to a related letter from AKEL, Mr. Letympiotis questioned whether it was necessary to respond to an issue on which a decision had already been made.
ΣΧΕΤΙΚΑ ΑΡΘΡΑ
“If we had made the decision, it certainly would not have been renamed Presidential Palace Street. If it were subject to the discretion or majority vote of the City Council, and we were to consider their position, then that is where we would need to discuss where the jurisdictions begin and where they end. If you like, we’ll have to see in the future whether the executive branch should be held accountable by local authorities; that is AKEL’s position, as I understand it, on other issues as well.”
Specifically regarding the MOEs, Mr. Letympiotis took a firm stance against those who claim there is a lack of political will on the Greek Cypriot side, stating that “Our own actions and deeds at the negotiating table—whether under the auspices of the UN or with the Turkish Cypriot leader—are well-documented and concrete.”
“It does no one any credit to leave even the slightest impression that there is no sincere political will on our part.”
What AKEL Says
AKEL Paphos expresses its disagreement and refers to a “political choice that cannot be separated from the current context of the Cyprus issue.” At a time when the UN Secretary-General is making efforts to resume negotiations and build trust between the two communities, some are choosing to raise an issue that fuels confrontation rather than reconciliation.”
As the party emphasizes, this is not the message Cyprus needs today. The government cannot hide.
“The Municipality of Paphos officially requested the position of the government and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. No response was received. The government chose to hide. At the same time, the President of the Republic is promoting new confidence-building measures, including a proposal to list the names of towns and villages in the occupied areas in Greek.”
“The government cannot speak internationally about confidence-building while domestically choosing to remain silent when issues arise that affect the climate between the two communities,” adds AKEL Paphos, noting that “the contradiction is obvious.”
“At the same time, DISY declares that it supports rapprochement and the solution of a bi-zonal, bi-communal federation. In Paphos, however, it was its municipal council group that introduced the motion to rename Mouttalo and voted in favor of it, along with ELAM, the mayor, and other municipal councilors.”
“Political positions are judged by actions, not just by declarations,” the party adds, while arguing that DISY must explain how this specific decision serves the reconciliation and the creation of a climate of trust that it claims to seek.
“We do not dispute society’s right to honor the memory of the past and discuss its history. However, we do question political choices that, at this particular juncture, could deepen mistrust and provide ammunition to those who oppose reunification. For us, the answer to occupation and division is not more division. It is the solution. We will not settle for a Cyprus of two separate realities.”
While emphasizing that he wants negotiations to resume, a substantive rapprochement between the two communities, and a solution based on a bi-zonal, bi-communal federation with political equality that will reunite our homeland and our people.
“This must be the path for Paphos. This is the path for Cyprus,” he concludes.
