-
.
- Ελληνικά
The right to classify a document as classified or to declassify a classified document rests solely with its author and no one else has any right to exercise personal judgment as to whether, in his or her opinion, the document is or is not classified.
This was stressed, inter alia, by the Attorney General of the Republic, Mr. George Savides, when asked today by media representatives on the issue of the development of the LNG terminal at Vasilikos and the arbitration proceedings between ETYFA and CPP in the London Court of Arbitration.
In statements coming out of a closed session of the Parliamentary Committee on Transport, Communications and Works where the issue of identification of holders and users of prepaid airtime mobile equipment and services was discussed and asked to comment on today's session of the Parliamentary Scrutiny Committee on the award and construction procedures for the LNG processing terminal at Vasilikos, Mr. Savides said. However, you give me the opportunity to refer to today's publications, which most readily referred to a confidential letter sent by the competent Minister to limited recipients, which was in fact carried over to these publications.
This gives me the opportunity to remind everyone that, the classification of any official document is the exclusive right of the author.
This gives me the opportunity to remind everyone that, the classification of any official document is the exclusive right of the author. Unfortunately, we witness leaks, transmissions, retransmissions and presentations of classified information by persons in broadcasts on television or radio, with the argument often being 'but [THE DOCUMENT] doesn't say anything serious, so why shouldn't I tell you? Taking these reports as a starting point and without specifically addressing these reports, I want to stress two things. That, the author of any classified letter has the absolute right to judge how to classify a letter and has the absolute right to declassify it. Anyone who gets hold of a classified classified document has no right to exercise personal judgment as to whether or not, in his opinion, it [THE DOCUMENT] is classified. Any transmission, retransmission, description or reference to secret classified content is a criminal offence punishable by seven years' imprisonment, and I limit myself to this."
Asked whether there is a risk that the London arbitration case could be "lost" because of the leaks, the Attorney General of the Republic replied:
"I will not comment at all on what is happening in London and whether anything is happening in London. I just want to report that a letter was sent by the Minister responsible for the matter, which certainly should and must be taken into account by everyone. The Minister sent it after an opinion from the Legal Service."
On the subject of the meeting of the Parliamentary Committee on Transport, Communications and Works, which was attended by Mr. Savvidis said that the presence of the heads of the Legal Service in the debate indicates the importance attached by them to the issue as a very important tool for the security of the State and the prevention and investigation of serious and organised crime. Mr. Savvidis said:
"My presence today, as well as that of the Assistant Attorney General in the relevant Committee on Transport, Communications and Works, was the result of our strong desire to move forward as soon as possible with the passage of the law on the identification of mobile phone owners and users of prepaid airtime. Today, the debate in the relevant committee started again. It is the result of a legislative proposal that started in 2009 and was reintroduced by the Chairman of the Committee, Mr Marinos Mousiutta. It was a closed session by decision of the Committee. Therefore, what I will say is very limited and consists of the fact that I believe that the tool of identification of holders and users of prepaid mobile phone airtime cards is a very important tool, both in terms of the prosecution of serious and organised crime and for the security of the State."
Asked as to where the legislative regulation of the issue, which dates back to 2009, "stumbles", the Attorney General of the Republic noted that "it is indeed strange why it took so many years" and recalled that in 2020 this particular proposal for a law was very close to proceeding for a vote by the Chamber of Deputies. "In 2019, in my capacity as Minister at the time, I was again presented to the Committee where just before the 2020 general election, we were very close, we were very close, this issue was very far advanced and it was almost ready to proceed to the Plenary. The various technical problems had been resolved, but perhaps because of the non-re-election of the original MPs who had proposed the Bill there was some delay there. Be that as it may, I do not think it is right to refer to what was not done in the past. The important thing is that today the House has the will to debate it. We have positioned ourselves. We consider it a very important tool and I hope that this time it will proceed with due speed to become part of the legislation and become a tool in the hands of the law enforcement authorities."
Asked to indicate what is pending for the bill to reach the plenary, Savvidis said that in today's closed session of the Committee "there will be an article-by-article discussion of the bill as it has been drafted and I imagine it will follow its course. I hope that it will be positive to secure a majority."
Asked whether telecoms providers are in agreement with the proposed law or have objections, Mr Savvidis replied that in the past some reservations had been expressed by providers. "Now I don't know whether or not they have expressed reservations, but here we have to weigh security and anti-crime issues, which in my opinion are much more serious than any economic issues they may raise or I understand they have raised in the past."
Finally, in response to a question as to whether recent cases related to mobile phone cards and the organisation of crime through prisons, the head of the Legal Service referred to the Police for statistics, noting however that "many times we could have had much better information if Cypriot prepaid mobile phone cards were identified. What I have to say, and it is also very important, is that when we were first discussing this bill in 2019-2020, about half of the countries in Europe had adopted the identification system. Now the trend, it seems, is that most countries are adopting it and it seems to be the right direction that many countries are following, which I hope that Cyprus will follow."
Contents of this article including associated images are owned by PIO
Views & opinions expressed are those of the author and/or PIO
Source
