The General Secretary of the C.C. of AKEL Andros Kyprianou replies to journalists’ questions
AKEL C.C. Press Office, 18th May 2017, Nicosia
Specifically on economy issues – will there be concrete guidelines for the candidate AKEL will support to follow?
I will repeat what we have said over and over again. We are interested in the candidacy we shall support meeting certain specific criteria.
The first and most important thing is that it should be a winning candidate. We want to win these elections. We want to offer the Cypriot people an alternative choice. If I judge from people’s impatience about who the candidate AKEL will support, it is apparent that a very large section of the Cypriot people is not satisfied with the candidacies that have already been announced – neither Nicos Anastasiades, Nikolas Papadopoulos, nor Yiorgos Lillikas. The people are looking for something new; something that will have different specifications. We want to respond to this demand.
At the same time, we stress that the candidacy we will support must be ready to negotiate with consistency and commitment to the principles of the Cyprus problem. We are not in some vague phase in which the Cyprus problem is simply under discussion. As regards the Cyprus problem we have literally reached the substance of the issue. We need to know that the candidate has clear positions on how these issues would be handled and that these positions on the core issues must not be different to AKEL’s positions.
As far as the issues of the economy are concerned, we are interested in the important issues, the essential issues affecting society and working people, but also the economy. The candidate we shall back must have similar approaches to ours. We do not want him/her to necessarily have identical views on economic issues. I want to make this clear.
With regard to another very big chapter, in my opinion, for Cypriot society, which is the question of vested established interests, corruption and intertwining interests, we want a candidate characterized by honesty and determination prepared to fight the phenomena of intertwining interests and corruption. This, in my view, is necessary in the current critical phase Cypriot society is in. Cypriot society can no longer withstand any other phenomena of intertwining interests and corruption. We therefore need above all an honest candidacy.
Is the name of the General Secretary of AKEL not on the table of candidates?
I will repeat that the name of the General Secretary of AKEL is on the table, together with many other names. In my opinion, this option should be the last resort. We need to explore all other options, because we want to go to this election campaign with the greatest possible social co-operation. This is what we will be the targeting.
Have you been informed about all that happened yesterday with regards the Cyprus problem?
We have not been briefed. We’ve heard and read a lot of press reports. I wouldn’t like to comment on them. What I will say as something stemming from what was written and said about developments yesterday is that we are certainly worried.
I cannot hide our concern about the fact that it hasn’t been possible to reach an understanding on how we move forward on the Cyprus problem. I believe that everything should be done to avoid the procedure from collapsing. This does not mean that we have to retreat on issues of principle because as I understand it what is being discussed is procedural issues at this stage. Therefore, we must generate ideas that overcome any procedural problems.
At the same time, I want to say that, if despite everything there is a breakdown, a development that I abhor and consider that every effort must be made to avoid it, the responsibilities shouldn’t be apportioned on our side. This is something that the President of the Republic should have in mind when discussing and proposing and when he is negotiating about the procedure on which we must proceed.
Some circles and forces people blame you that because of your criticism of the President of the Republic you are assisting others to apportion responsibilities on us…
I think these assertions are ludicrous. You know, some people think we are living at a time when everybody else other than us does not think; that they have no perception, cannot come to conclusions and are waiting for AKEL’s views to formulate their own point of view. We don’t know a lot of things about what is happening at the negotiating table. The United Nations know what’s happening much better than us.
Would it be advisable for the National Council to convene?
I think it would be advisable to receive a briefing from the President of the Republic in whatever way he himself chooses. We are at a critical and decisive stage. It is good for political parties to know what has been said at the table. I consider as positive, I must say, the fact that the United Nations Secretary-General’s Special Representative on Cyprus Mr. Eide is making efforts to bridge the disagreements.
We support the position which states that in order to go to Geneva we must have arrive within range of a convergence on the issues of the internal aspect of the Cyprus problem. This has been the long-standing position of the Greek Cypriot side and we insist on it. We saw what happened in January in Geneva. The conditions weren’t ripe and mature to go. We rushed to go and the result was that the meeting failed and as a result we had negative developments. We therefore need to reach an agreement on the internal aspects and then go to Geneva.
We have put forward our point of view on how we can get within range of a convergence. AKEL believes that there should be an understanding concerning an informal and free debate between the two leaders on the important issues (property, territory, executive power, effective participation) and if the two leaders conclude that on these issues there is a likelihood of a convergence being recorded they should then formalize the dialogue. Otherwise, everything should be considered as null and void. We have submitted our proposal to both leaders for some months now. It seems they do not agree with our proposal. We believe that this is the only way to move forward.
Do they both disagree with this proposal?
I do not know what they have tabled yesterday at the negotiating table so I can express an opinion.
