[ad_1]
I have always believed that the flaw of the position of Attorney General is that it has too much power in judicial affairs, is uncontrolled, and exercises power without even giving reasons.
The history of Cyprus since 1960 shows that no Attorney General is in the habit of giving reasons for his serious actions such as suspending criminal prosecutions. Especially those projects of private initiative. He is not prohibited from doing so. The Constitution provides that the criterion for such actions is the public interest, but it does not undermine and is not prohibited from giving more detailed reasons why the suspension of prosecution prevents a person from seeking a criminal remedy for the violation of his rights. Here I feel it is necessary to quote the unique statement of the Court, according to which … “The Attorney General is himself a judge of the public interest and every such decision (such as: suspension of prosecution) is considered to be made in order to serve the purpose of the public interest and no explanation is required for this” (!)
This institution originated in the United Kingdom, but there, the Attorney General is a member of the government and is accountable to Parliament. Private criminal prosecutions are not suspended without cause. A British judge stated that one of the final and fundamental sanctions of the rule of law is the right of every private person to bring criminal charges. This statement was adopted in Parliament by the Attorney General of the United Kingdom in 1959. Other European countries also have a system of private criminal prosecutions, for example: in France. In fact, even if Cyprus enacted a law in 2016, in accordance with the corresponding EU law and in compliance with the requirements of the EU, requiring all victims in criminal proceedings to be informed to obtain information about their case, there is no compliance by the Attorney General. Most unorthodox, the Cyprus Court of Appeal considered that the law was irrelevant to the question of justifying the suspension of criminal prosecutions against the victims of the crimes prosecuted. Finally, the Parliament also overturned the relevant provisions of the law by a special amendment.
Let us look at the famous case of Thanasis Nikolaou, where neither the current nor the previous Attorney General showed the enthusiasm needed to conduct an effective investigation into this horrible murder. In fact, those present had the opportunity to file criminal charges against the police officers who neglected their duties. But since the Attorney General then appointed independent investigators as criminal investigators, he was considered to have been convinced that this was a criminal offense, that is, a crime. That is why the contradiction that he then vigorously denied through his representatives during the relevant inquests was considered very serious. Both his attitude during the death inquest and his previous hesitation in this case, not to mention inaction, were unacceptable behavior. I believe that Cyprus deserves better. It is not enough to talk about the rule of law when the head of criminal law does not apply it to the best of his ability in every case. However, according to our system, he seems to be responsible only for himself. It is utopian to start his removal process with Cyprus’ data. So I suggest that he ask himself whether he can continue to stay in his position after disappointing the people and resign with dignity and manliness.
[ad_2]
Source link
