DISY, DIKO, DIPA, and VOLT are the bodyguards of the banks Interview with the General Secretary of AKEL Stefanos Stefanou
Sunday 1 December 2025, ‘KATHIMERINI’ newspaper
ON THE CYPRUS PROBLEM
Mr. Tsipras’ book and the special chapter he devotes to the Cyprus problem have reopened the debate on what happened at Crans-Montana. What is your conclusion?
SS: The general conclusion from what Alexis Tsipras writes (in his book) is that Nicos Anastasiades did not exhaust all avenues to ascertain Turkey’s intentions regarding guarantees and security issues and that he acted in such a way as to prevent the Greek Prime from meeting with the Turkish Prime Minister so as to move forward on the issue.
Mr. Anastasiades, however, argues that those who support the Turkish narrative are refuted.
SS: Anastasiades is trying hard to shake off the responsibility that the UN Secretary-General put on him for the failure at Crans-Montana and to shirk off the weight of the discussions and fermentations he made for a two-state solution.
They’ll tell you that you don’t see that Mr. Tsipras states that it was the Turkish intransigence that led to the failure.
SS: AKEL’s position—and this is also what Alexis Tsipras writes—is that no effort was made to check Turkey’s intentions until the very end.
However, I will repeat the question posed by AKEL, to which Mr. Anastasiades never responded to:
Since, as Mr. Anastasiades claims, he did everything right at Crans-Montana, why is Mr. Guterres attributing responsibility to him?
And why did Mr. Anastasiades not dare to even question the UN Secretary-General’s accusations?
He was entitled to do so in accordance with the procedures that are followed for the discussion of the Reports to be subsequently submitted, but he didn’t do so.
Do you see any prospects this time around for the Cyprus problem?
SS: Since the Secretary-General of the UN has stated his intention to take a new initiative, there is hope. Right now we are waiting for María Ángela Holguín, the Personal Envoy of the United Nations Secretary-General on Cyprus, to arrive to see how she will proceed. The Turkish Cypriot leader Mr. Erhürman is different from Mr. Tatar, as he believes in the solution of Bi-zonal, Bi-communal Federation with political equality.
Nevertheless, everyone’s intentions will become clear when the effort to break the deadlock assumes a concrete form and, even more so, at the negotiating table itself. Initiatives also need to be taken on our part to encourage the UN Secretary-General to move forward.
What else should the President of the Republic do?
SS: The President of the Republic is right to say that we must continue from where we left off at Crans-Montana, but he needs to be more specific.
He must clearly state that we will not open the convergences that have been recorded so far.
He should state that the negotiations will continue on the basis of the Guterres Framework and express his readiness to discuss outstanding issues.
We are not hearing this from the President. And this is precisely what the international community is waiting to hear.
Does AKEL agree with the preconditions set by Mr. Erhürman for a resumption of the talks?
SS: There are issues raised by Mr. Erhürman that the Greek Cypriot side must agree to, such as, for example, the position that we must not open the convergences registered.
However, there are also issues on which we cannot agree, such as, for example, the position that if the talks collapse due to the fault of the Greek Cypriot side, the Turkish Cypriots should not return to the status quo. If we reverse this, there is no answer. If the talks collapse due to the fault of the Turkish Cypriot side, what will the Greek Cypriots get?
For that reason, when discussing how we should proceed, it is important that the framework be mutually agreed upon.
When Mr. Erhürman says that convergences must be safeguarded, he mainly means political equality.
SS: Political equality is part of the negotiating acquis and its content has indeed been agreed, a fact also confirmed by the UN Secretary-General’s Report following the collapse of the Crans-Montana talks in September 2017. We must confirm this.
Why would President Christodoulides do such a thing when efforts are underway to enter into negotiations where all these issues will be put?
SS: From the moment we state that we must continue from the point where the negotiations were interrupted and that we will not open convergences, we must do so.
Of course, this presupposes that the Turkish Cypriot side will recognize that part of the negotiating acquis is the termination of the existing system of guarantees, the withdrawal of the troops within a short period of time, and the abolition of the so-called unilateral right of intervention, as the UN Secretary-General writes in his Report. This was the big deal at Crans-Montana. The Turkish Cypriots want political equality, and we want the issues related to security and guarantees.
QUESTION: Deputy Attorney General Savvas Angelides states in a written statement that he never submitted his resignation to the President of the Republic, notes that he received threats and points out that he did not express the view that there is corruption in the police force. Do you think that after the uproar that has been caused, he can remain in his position, or is the damage to his credibility irreparable?
SS: The credibility of the institution has indeed been dealt another blow, which is precisely why I think it has increased the pressure to ensure accountability and resignations. Issues of this nature, as highlighted in press reports, cannot remain unanswered for four whole days. The Deputy Attorney General Savvas Angelides tried to smooth things over, but he failed, and yes, he should resign. Mr. Angelides spoke, but the fundamental question remains: who is ultimately governing the country? The President is limiting himself to commenting on current affairs instead of governing.
However, there appears to be an institutional crisis between the Legal Service and the Anti-Corruption Authority.
SS: Yes, indeed, but on this issue too, the President of the Republic essentially declares the familiar Cypriot phrase “It’s not my responsibility,” throws up his hands and says it’s none of his business. Of course it concerns him; it is his duty as President of the Republic to find ways not to interfere in the duties and responsibilities of independent institutions, but to ensure that there are smooth relations between them and that they do their job.
Why is AKEL bringing back its proposal for the taxation of the so-called super profits of banks?
SS: The European Commission recently ruled on Lithuania, which taxed the super profits of the banks, that there is no risk to banking and fiscal stability. This was the main argument of those political parties who voted against AKEL’s bill proposal the first time around, who, of course, whenever issues concerning banks arise, are the guardians/bodyguards of the banks’ interests.
Which political parties play this role?
SS: Whenever we have to vote on something related to banks, such as foreclosures, excessive charges, or the implementation of the Central Bank’s code, DISY, DIKO, and DIPA always vote in favour of the banks. VOLT has also joined in on the issue of the taxation of super profits. These parties are the guardians of the banks’ interests at the expense of society. Now, I leave it to your readers to decide who is playing the role of Athos, Aramis, Porthos, and D’Artagnan…
And what will change this time?
SS: The parties that claim that the banking system or the economy is at risk from a possible taxation of super profits should respond to the European Commission, which says the opposite. We will therefore compel all those parties and forces who protect the banks’ super profits to at least discuss the issue again in Parliament. This time we will request the activation of Article 44 of the Parliament’s Rules of Procedure, which stipulates that MPs must declare any conflict of interest, if there is one. There are MPs who are shareholders in law firms that have major banks as their clients.
Why shouldn’t it be considered that you are doing this for pre-election reasons in order to expose people?
SS: Parliament’s Rules of Procedure have been invoked on other occasions. It does not prohibit anyone from voting; it simply requires that the conflict of interest be declared. And it does not mean that anyone who has a conflict of interest is cheating or doing anything wrong, but it is important in politics for everyone to know.
The President of the Democratic Party (DIKO) Nikolas Papadopoulos asks that you to define exactly what you mean by bank super profits.
SS: The bill proposal which we have submitted—both the first time and now—defines exactly what super profits are. What am I to assume? That Mr. Papadopoulos, who spoke so passionately against AKEL’s proposal in Parliament, did not read how super profits are defined? A key source of super profits is the fact that the gap between lending and deposit rates in the Cypriot banking system is one of the widest in the EU. This big difference is the big profit margin for banks, in addition to the excessive charges and abusive clauses they apply.
Nikolas Papadopoulos accuses you of populism because, he says, banks are an easy target, and he wonders in which other countries such a measure is being implemented, making a specific reference to Venezuela…
SS: And why should we look at what is happening in Venezuela and not at what Cyprus’ partners in the EU are doing? Twenty-four of the 27 EU member states have imposed a tax or levy on super profits, either of the banks or other economic activities. Only three countries have not touched on this issue: Malta, Luxembourg, and Cyprus.
I therefore find it strange, to say the least, that Mr. Papadopoulos is looking to Latin America and not to Europe. He obviously likes long journeys…
Where does the relationship between AKEL and DIKO stand?
SS: We seek to maintain the best possible relations with DIKO, but it does not depend solely on us. I will use a cliché – but I think it expresses the situation – that it takes two to tango. Let everyone be judged by their political choices and let everyone consider the prospects this creates for their party and their politics.
Has the money that will be generated been calculated?
SS: It amounts to several million euros, which we propose should be used to support programs and policies that facilitate the repayment of housing loans by vulnerable borrowers. Our proposal is similar to the taxation of windfall profits of the renewable energy companies. We propose supporting policies to tackle energy poverty.
Why is AKEL posing the dilemma “Either with society or with the banks”? Can’t one disagree because one believes that this proposal will have negative consequences?
SS: I do not rule out the possibility that there are genuine concerns. In politics, however, it is not intentions that count, but end results. Taxing super profits curbs banking arbitrariness, while the immunity regime that the political parties – their bodyguards – guarantee for the banks encourages it. It’s clear what’s at stake.
Will AKEL vote against the state budget again this year, or could it vote in favour under certain conditions?
SS: The Central Committee of the Party decides whether to vote for or against the state budget, and I would not want to prejudge its decision. However, this year’s budget follows the same pattern as the previous ones, which we voted against. It is essentially administrative and does not provide for anything in terms of a transition to a new economic model or a substantial strengthening of the welfare state.
The Cyprus economy records good economic indicators, but at the same time, we have the worst social indicators across the EU. Therefore, it would be surprising if the Party’s Central Committee decided that we would not vote against the budget.
