Attorney-General’s Decision Sparks Controversy
Controversy has erupted in the wake of Attorney-General George Savvides’ decision not to prosecute former police drug squad chief Michalis Katsounotos. The decision has been met with criticism from Members of Parliament (MPs), who voiced their concerns during a recent House ethics committee meeting.
The conflict stems from an incident where Katsounotos, summoned by the Anti-Corruption Authority for questioning regarding an investigation into deputy attorney-general Savvas Angelides’ alleged conflicts of interest, refused to answer certain questions. Despite suggestions from legal experts that Katsounotos’ refusal could be criminally liable, the Legal Service declined to initiate proceedings.
Akel MP Irene Charalambidou supported the Anti-Corruption Authority’s stance, arguing that the right to remain silent applies only to self-incrimination. Charalambidou accused the attorney-general of going “the extra mile to cover up his decision” and highlighted the need for a compliance mechanism within such proceedings.
Anti-Corruption Authority head Harris Poyiadjis expressed his concern at the committee meeting, emphasizing the importance of cooperation in investigations and the potential confusion caused by the current situation. He stressed that suspects have the right not to answer questions only if those answers would incriminate them.
The case’s significance was further underscored by Charalambidou, who linked it to the Legal Service’s attempt to remove auditor-general Odysseas Michaelides from his post. She questioned whether there was a conflict of interest for the attorney-general and his deputy in suspending criminal prosecution against individuals who do not cooperate with investigations.
Volt MP Alexandra Attalides also weighed in, expressing her astonishment at the attorney-general’s justification that not prosecuting Katsounotos was “in the public interest.” Attalides called for empowering the Anti-Corruption Authority to conduct independent investigations, referencing a bill proposed in 2022 that remains undiscussed.
The debate continues as MPs consider revising the constitution to delineate the attorney-general’s powers more clearly, ensuring accountability and transparency in legal proceedings and anti-corruption efforts.
