Government Spokesperson Konstantinos Letympiotis, to the strong criticism voiced by AKEL and the ALMA movement regarding the renewal of the term of AADIPA President Andreas Paschalidis.

Read more: New Criticism from AKEL: Christodoulides Has Become Accustomed to Disregarding Any Trace of Justice and Equality

The opposition’s criticism centers on the fact that Mr. Paschalidis is simultaneously serving as an independent criminal investigator in the “VideoGate,” which involves the Presidential circle, with both parties citing institutional abuse and an objective conflict of interest due to the timing of the decision.

Read more: Push for Paschalidis’s reappointment: Christodoulides, a worthy disciple of Anastasiades’s political culture

For his part, Mr. Letympiotis categorically rejects these allegations, emphasizing that the renewal of Mr. Paschalidis’s term at the Authority does not affect the independence of the investigation nor does it constitute any kind of “deal.” In fact, he accuses AKEL and ALMA of attempting to prejudge and undermine the expected findings, noting that they are choosing to invest in sweeping and unsubstantiated pre-election propaganda that undermines the institutions themselves.

The full statement by Konstantinos Letympiotis

“This is not the first time—and, unfortunately, probably not the last—that AKEL has attempted to preempt and challenge a finding and undermine the credibility of an independent investigator. The preemptive undermining of an institutional process is a dangerous political maneuver and serves only political expediency.

Andreas Paschalidis was already President of AADIPA when he was selected as an independent criminal investigator—and, moreover, not by the Council of Ministers. The attempt, therefore, to present the renewal of his term today as some sort of “deal” lacks credibility and is clearly belated and unfounded.

The two roles are institutionally distinct, and the renewal of his term at AADIPA neither creates a conflict of interest nor affects the independence of the investigation.

We await the completion of any findings with the utmost respect. We do not know the outcome; we will not prejudge it, nor will we challenge it in advance. This is the responsible institutional stance. AKEL, on the other hand, reaffirms its own dismal pattern of institutional disregard.

Unfortunately, ALMA has also chosen to follow the same path. Their complete alignment—not on an ideological basis but in their hostility, their stubbornness, and their disregard for procedures, institutions, and individuals—is revealing. Their accusatory rhetoric, designed merely to make a splash, now makes it abundantly clear whom they are targeting and what political agendas they are serving.

Their consistent commitment to the nullification and disparagement of institutions and findings is disheartening. They have evidently chosen to invest in sweeping and unsubstantiated pre-election propaganda, reminiscent of political fairy tales from bygone eras.

We, in contrast to many well-known instances in the past involving AKEL, declare and demonstrate our full respect for procedures, findings, institutions, and the independence of the branches of government.”