Questions are being raised — loudly, insistently — yet somehow they vanish unanswered in the chaos, as the uproar drags every institution through the mud.
First question: why was there no investigation when the messages first surfaced?
Second: is a lawyer entitled to use a client’s personal material without their consent? Do they really have the right to take to the media — radio, television — to push their own narrative, even when it runs directly against their client’s wishes?
Third: why has the Cyprus Bar Association gone silent? Its former president admitted he knew, chose not to report it, and instead passed it on for “investigation” to a non-state body.
This is the country’s highest legal authority — an institution with both voice and responsibility in matters of justice. So why won’t it say, plainly and without evasions, what actually applies here? Instead of forcing the public to sit through this spectacle of lawyers tearing into each other, why not clarify the basics?
Are materials obtained through illegal surveillance admissible for investigation — yes or no? Is the consent of the person concerned required before any inquiry can even begin? And is the failure to report a rape, by those who are aware of it, a serious criminal offence under the Istanbul Convention?
Or is none of that the point? Is the only thing that really matters that the façade of the Cypriot state remains intact — no matter what’s rotting underneath?
ΟΥΦΟ
