Mr Alecos Markides is reported as saying (Cyprus Mail October 8) that the report of the commission of enquiry into the cyprus financial crisis “does not say anything dramatically new that wasn’t known beforehand”.
As a distinguished lawyer I am sure he realises that many cases go to court where the guilt of the defendant is popularly believed to be obvious. In that sense conviction provides nothing new.
But ‘knowing something and backing it up with systematic evidence are two different things. Having sat through most of the commission’s proceedings, I found that the testimony of the various witnesses provided a depth of understanding and a documentation of what happened that was both useful and necessary.
As for ‘new’. Attributing responsibility to political parties strikes me as something novel for Cyprus and a practice which hopefully other reports will not hesitate to follow where appropriate.
Of course, the dry legal tone of the report cannot fully reflect the picture of incompetence, corruption and political self-serving reflected in the testimony of the many witnesses. It is difficult to understand how and who elected these people. Perhaps some responsibility for the Cyprus crisis also lies in this direction.
Dr Jim Leontiades, CIIM and Economic Advisor to the Commission of Inquiry into the Cyprus Financial Crisis