Society is being punished because of the indiscipline of a small minority

 

Statement by the General Secretary of the C.C. of AKEL A.Kyprianou on the government’s new measures

Indiscipline will cost us all dearly

AKEL C.C. Press Office, 31 March 2020, Nicosia

1. The government yesterday announced new restrictive measures for citizens aiming to control the spread of the coronavirus. It is the Government’s obligation and right to take decisions and as citizens we are obliged to comply with the measures so that the chain of the virus’ transmission can be broken.
2. The times we are going through are critical. We all have an obligation to work together to deal with the situation. The main responsibility for confronting the pandemic lies with the Government. However, it goes without saying that when the Government takes unilateral decisions we have every right to judge and express our own different views.
3. It is not right that the whole of society is accused because of the indiscipline shown by a very small section of the population. According to yesterday’s violations, the percentage recorded (Note: violation of the restrictions on public movements without justification) was 1.5% or 15 people per thousand. Nor is it right for the state to shift its own responsibilities on to society.
4. The Government says the measures are targeted. Many of them indeed are. However, a very important parameter is missing. The whole of society is being punished because of the indiscipline shown by a very small section of people. No separate measures are envisaged for this small minority. We strongly believe that additional penalties must be imposed on them.
5. We consider that the majority measures are in the right direction. However with regards some of them there should have been more reflection so that better adjustments could have been made. More specifically:

(i) In relation to housing, it is our view that the provisions of the relevant legislations should be implemented. Last night’s statements by the Minister of the Interior were unacceptable. We point out the retraction in his statements this morning.

(ii) We agree that there should have been greater control exercised over the number of exceptional out of home movements. The exceptions in moves out of home should have been better studied.

Here are some characteristic examples:

1. A) There are people who need to receive daily and regular care from their children because of health problems. If their children have to take care of their own home as well, the measures as decided cause huge problems.
2. B) Apart from professional farmers, other people too have fields and animals to attend to. Should they let their fields be destroyed and leave their animals to die?
3. C) What about dog owners? Police have proposed they go out when their owners go to a supermarket. This is not serious.

These are just some characteristic examples. We believe that a serious study could specify other cases too that need special handling.

Having noted all this, we address an appeal to everyone to be disciplined and implement the decisions that are taken even though we disagree. Indiscipline will cost us all dearly.