The publication of lawmakers’ asset disclosure statements has once again sparked debate over whether, with the tightening of the law, the data provide an accurate picture and whether the intended purpose of oversight. Weaknesses still exist, lawmakers point out, such as in cases involving the donation or inheritance of real estate.
“When it’s inherited, isn’t it property? Because then I can sell a piece of real estate, a field that was a gift, and acquire 200,000 euros in deposits that will be included. You’ll see it five years later—or two or three properties—you’ll see the total and wonder, since you’re not the one paying the tax, whether transparency is being ensured so that citizens are also informed.”
Nikos Kettiros – AKEL Member of Parliament
ΣΧΕΤΙΚΑ ΑΡΘΡΑ
“My parents tell me they want to give me my inheritance, to hand it over to me, and I tell them no. I don’t want it—not yet. But if my parents were to sell a property that isn’t in my name and give me some money, depositing it into my account, would it be clear where that money came from?”
Charalambos Pazaros – DISY Member of Parliament
READ ALSO: A Hurdled “Declaration of Assets”: The Rich and Poor Among Parliamentarians
The Chairman of the Institutions Committee, however, clarified that this is one of the strictest asset disclosure frameworks, stated that he would push for a change so that the Tax Commissioner conducts the audit first, and only then are the declarations made public.
All this comes at a time when the blunder by Parliament’s services is under investigation—the publication of the declarations and, by extension, sensitive personal data, without the required processing.
Watch the report by Nasia Ioannou:
