73 of the 94 positions in semi-governmental organizations were filled by individuals included in the Advisory Council’s recommendations, as reported on Wednesday during the session of the Parliamentary Committee on Institutions, during the discussion of the Council’s institutional role and operation. Regarding the appointment of 21 individuals not included in the Council’s recommendations, MPs from DISY, AKEL, the Alma movement, and Direct Democracy criticized the government, emphasizing that there should be a full justification for these specific choices.

The approach taken by the DIKO MPs was different; they described the creation of the Advisory Council as positive, noting that it is of an advisory nature. They also noted that 80% of the appointments were made based on its recommendations.

The session was also attended by the Deputy Minister to the President, Irini Piki, who emphasized that the Advisory Council’s role is advisory and that its recommendations are not binding. She noted, however, that the overwhelming majority of the appointments concerned individuals included in the Council’s recommendations, noting that the decisions and the rationale behind the selections have been made public.

At the same time, he said that technical assistance would be provided by the International Monetary Fund to improve the governance of public-law entities, adding that IMF representatives had a meeting scheduled for Wednesday with the Advisory Council.

At the start of the discussion, the Chair of the Institutions Committee, DISY MP Dimitris Dimitriou, stated that “the issue arose following the latest appointments to parastatal and other organizations.”

Mr. Dimitriou raised a series of questions, noting the lack of justifications for the appointment of individuals who were not included in the Advisory Council’s recommendations. He also asked how many heads of quasi-governmental organizations are not included in the Advisory Council’s proposals and whether the purpose for which the Council was established is being undermined.

The President of DIKO, Nicholas Papadopoulos, welcomed President Christodoulides’ initiative to establish the Advisory Council, noting that the council was set up as an advisory body. He added that 80% of the appointments were made based on the Advisory Council’s recommendations.

Mr. Papadopoulos also stated that quasi-governmental organizations are “arms of the executive branch and are responsible for implementing government policy.”

Odysseas Michaelides, President of the Alma movement, asked exactly how the 21 individuals were appointed to the quasi-governmental organizations, since they were not included in the Advisory Council’s recommendations.

Subsequently, DISY MP Michalis Fellas, addressed a question to the Chairman of the Advisory Council, Giorgos Arestis, regarding the criteria the Council applies in evaluating candidates.

“The question is whether the rules established by the Council of Ministers itself have been followed,” noted AKEL MP Konstantinos Konstantinou.

DIKO MP Panikos Leonidou stated that “a way must be found to justify the exclusion from the selection of the Advisory Committee’s proposals,” while Alma Movement MP Irini Charalambidou said that “it is likely that the 21 individuals were appointed from party lists.”

“A few years ago, we wouldn’t even have been able to have this discussion. In 2023, we established the Advisory Committee as a consultative body that assists in the selection of the Boards of Directors, which constitute the executive arm of the government,” said Deputy Minister to the President, Irini Piki.  

She added that “in 2023, we established the Advisory Committee, and since then, a series of improvements have been made. We have enabled the Advisory Committee to invite candidates for the chairmanship to interviews.” This effort to modernize the process is ongoing, she noted.

As Ms. Piki stated, 1,282 people expressed interest in the latest appointments across 12 organizations.

She noted that of the 94 positions, 74 were filled by individuals included in the Advisory Council’s recommendations.

“The Advisory Council evaluates and makes recommendations; the Cabinet makes the decisions. I agree that we need to address the issue of institutionalizing this process,” said Ms. Piki.

“The Advisory Council has an advisory role,” said its Chairman, George Arestis.  

“We make decisions in five-member committees, the composition of which varies each time,” he noted.

As he explained, “Our decisions are unanimous; we have never disagreed. When we make a decision, we take into account what the law says, as well as the honesty, prestige, and integrity of the individuals, and we consider their academic and other qualifications.”

“We also take into account the relevant laws governing each organization,” Mr. Arestis clarified.

At the same time, he noted that “there have been cases where we determined that the candidates were not suitable, so we did not propose more than three individuals for a position. For chairperson positions, there were instances where we nominated fewer than three candidates.”

Mr. Arestis emphasized that “our recommendations were rejected in only two cases involving chairpersons; in the other ten cases, they were accepted.”

AKEL MP Anastasia Hasikou then noted that the big question is why the government provided no justification for the 20% of the appointments that fell outside the Advisory Council’s recommendations.

Ms. Charalambidou echoed this sentiment, noting that the government “fell short of the standard it had set for itself.”

Next to speak was Advisory Council member Eleni Mouzala, who criticized DIKO MPs. “A long time ago, DIKO MPs were appearing on TV channels and disparaging the Advisory Council,” she said.

“When I see four people on RIK who didn’t apply, and one who did, isn’t that a problem?” asked Ms. Mouzala.  

The other members of the Advisory Council then took the floor, emphasizing the good work being done to evaluate the candidates—without receiving any compensation, as they noted.

At this point, Advisory Council member Yiannis Mourouzidis, suggested that the three individuals proposed by the Council for each position should also undergo a personal interview—not just for the chair positions. 

“The review conducted for conflicts of interest is defined by Article 3 of the law. The scope of the review and the duties of the Conflict of Interest Committee are expanded if an organization’s own bylaws create a conflict of interest,” said Menelaos Tsagaridis, Chairman of the Conflict of Interest Investigation Committee.

As he noted, they have identified conflicts of interest during the filling of the most recent positions.

“We have moved from a model of party nominations and party observers to an open process in which any citizen can express interest, regardless of party affiliation or connections,” Ms. Piki stated after the session concluded.

As she noted, “We received 1,282 expressions of interest, approximately 19% more than the previous time. Of the 94 positions, 73 were filled by individuals who were members of the Advisory Council.

She noted that “those who, when the Advisory Council was established, questioned its very usefulness are now citing the weight of its recommendations.”

Ms. Piki emphasized that any newly established institution can be improved even further and “for this reason, technical assistance from the International Monetary Fund is beginning this week, a request that had been made in 2025 with the support of the European Commission, generally aimed at improving the governance of public-law entities.”

“It is an advisory body that evaluates and makes recommendations. It does not make appointments as the Public Service Commission does, it does not conduct recruitment competitions, and it does not compile a merit list,” Ms. Piki clarified.

She noted that the executive branch, as provided for in the Constitution, the Council of Ministers, decides and assumes responsibility for the composition of the boards of directors of public-law entities.

“After all, these are organizations that serve as the executive arms of the government and play a decisive role in the implementation of government policy,” she said.

The overwhelming majority of appointments were recommended by the Advisory Council, with only a limited number of additional selections made. The specific needs of each organization, the job profiles, the overall composition of the Board of Directors, knowledge, experience, skills, and, where necessary, geographic distribution were all taken into account.

He clarified that “the relevant decisions and the rationale for the selections have been made public, because an effective Board of Directors must be evaluated as a whole.”

“The Advisory Council does not decide on appointments to the boards of semi-governmental organizations; it makes recommendations, offers proposals, and serves in an advisory capacity,” Mr. Arestis stated after the meeting concluded.

“Based on the Cabinet’s decision, we were aware that the Cabinet had the discretion to deviate from our proposals,” he noted.

“I must tell you that today the Advisory Council will meet (Editor’s note: It was scheduled for 3:30 p.m.) with representatives of the International Monetary Fund to discuss enhancing the role of the Advisory Council,” he said.

In his own remarks, Mr. Dimitriou stated that “the Cabinet’s decision to select a significant number—nearly 20 percent—that falls outside the Advisory Council’s recommendations is a point of criticism, especially since these choices were not adequately justified, as required by the Cabinet’s decision.”

“It could very easily have, if it did not wish to nullify the role of the Advisory Council, urged these 21 individuals who were ultimately appointed outside the recommendations to simply submit an application to the Advisory Council,” he added.

“When the establishment of the Advisory Council was announced, it was emphatically stated that if the Cabinet did not select individuals from the Advisory Council’s recommendations for appointment, that decision would have to be fully justified. This did not happen for 22% of the appointments in parastatal organizations—that is, for 1 in 5. And today, unfortunately, regarding this commitment, we heard nothing but empty words,” Mr. Konstantinou said in his own remarks.  

“What is regrettable, however, is what was mentioned by the Chairman of the Advisory Committee—that, to put it bluntly, they have no complaints whatsoever because, in any case, the final decision rests with the Cabinet,” he noted.

He noted that “in response to our question as to whether the government had honored its commitment to provide a full justification for the unilateral appointments without taking the Advisory Committee’s recommendation into account—or whether such a recommendation had even been requested— the answer was no.”

“The decisions of the Council of Ministers are specific; they are stipulated by the Constitution itself, as the President himself just stated regarding the ]Advisory Council stated,” Mr. Leonidou noted in his remarks following the session.

“We maintain that the Advisory Council’s work is positive, but the constitutional political rights of the Council of Ministers must not be undermined in any way,” he noted.

“No one has a monopoly on absolute justice and objectivity. I believe that the Advisory Committee did its job within the limits of its authority, but we must not exclude the rest of society—those who have not submitted an application or whose applications have been rejected,” said Mr. Leonidou.

Ms. Charalambidou noted that 21 individuals have been appointed “without a reasoned decision.”

“I therefore believe that if the Advisory Council truly meant what they said—and their statements on transparency were not merely for public relations purposes—then they would have enshrined this in law,” he noted.  

“Once again, it has been proven that not only did they not mean what they said, but they are simply not keeping the promises they made before the election,” he concluded.  

“I have a very positive view of the Advisory Council and its members, who are doing a tremendous amount of work within this framework, which has proven to be somewhat problematic,” said Diana Konstantinidi, Member of Parliament for Direct Democracy.

She noted that “the system is flawed because many of the appointments are made through the back door. Therefore, one of the points raised was that, first and foremost, we need to establish the Advisory Council so that we can ensure transparency and accountability,” she added.

READ ALSO: There’s a problem… The textbooks should have been delivered on time to all classrooms | AlphaNews

Source: CNA