Why only twice a day? And why are we putting up with it?

By George Psyllides

As the fight against Covid-19 drags on, more and more people have started questioning the various measures enforced by authorities worldwide in a bid to stem the spread of the virus. Cyprus, where the government has applied among the strictest of measures to restrict the freedom of movement, is no exception, though for the time being opposition is mainly voiced through social media and newspaper op-eds.

There were some street protests back in November, as people started suffering from pandemic fatigue but also questioning the usefulness of certain measures.

Those protests dissipated, as the number of infections exploded, spreading into care homes, and resulting in a rise in hospitalisations and many deaths. The rise led to a second lockdown, which lasted three weeks. Infections have dropped markedly from the high triple digits of December and January, but the authorities are still being cautious in reopening the economy, wanting to avoid a third wave.

A curfew is still in place, along with bans on gatherings, but perhaps the most irksome and controversial measure is the restriction on daily outings to just two and the need to ask for permission via text every time. To make matters worse only Cyprus and Greece have introduced such a measure.

Those who must go to work can skirt this, but many are now questioning the necessity of this measure, arguing that it is an unnecessary, unacceptable infringement of personal freedom.

“I know that we can get around the SMS message scheme now that we are going to work. On the way there and back, we can visit a friend, go to a shop, a garage or kebab shop without sending a message,” George Christou, a professional, told the Sunday Mail. “And I can get authorisation to go shopping and drive around for six hours pretending I am shopping – if the police stop me and say ‘Where is your shopping?’, I can simply reply I did not find what I was looking for. But it still infuriates me that I have to send an SMS asking for authorisation to leave home. I hate the fact that the state insists on exercising this control, just because nobody is reacting.”

The authorities believe two outings are enough under the circumstances. Being a small island, the measure is enforceable, although the feeling is that police should not be chasing SMS offenders as much as those not wearing masks or breaking other health and safety rules.

Police could not immediately provide a breakdown of offences recorded on a daily basis for reasons of comparison.

In the UK for instance, the government told people not to go out while in lockdown unless it was for work, shopping essentials, or exercise for a limited time.

But “unless you’re blatantly breaking the rules, there is no way for them to enforce anything,” a north London resident said. “They don’t know if it’s the first or twentieth time you’ve been out that day.”

However, perhaps the main reason for having the SMS at a time when restrictions are being eased comes down to one simple thing – psychology.

A health ministry source said exactly that: forcing people to send a text and seek permission is a constant reminder that the pandemic is still out there, and they need to be careful – a way of preventing people from letting their guard down, despite its loopholes.

A retired judge, who chose to remain anonymous, said “it is a difficult matter on which to have a clear position because of the pandemic,” that was the justification for restricting free movement.

He thought, however, “that our measures are vague, without reason and without explanation, and when there is no explanation for restricting freedom we are on a slippery path.”

Ombudswoman Maria Stylianou-Lottides said restriction on movement is in contravention of the constitution, “except for reasons of defence or public health”.

As everything had been done lawfully and in compliance with the constitution, the only question that could be asked about the SMS system was “whether it is proportionate to purpose”.

Everyone will have a different view on this matter, she said.

According to article 13 1 of the constitution, “every person has the right to move freely throughout the territory of the Republic and to reside in any part thereof subject to any restrictions imposed by law and which are necessary only for the purposes of defence or public health or provided as punishment to be passed by a competent court.”

Far more outspoken was former UK Supreme Court justice, Jonathan Sumption, who in a lecture last October, described the British government’s lockdown restrictions, that have never been as tough as those imposed in Cyprus, as the “most significant interference with personal freedom in the history of our country”.

Referring to the three months of lockdown, imposed earlier in 2020, he said the British government had “placed everybody under a form of house arrest, qualified only by their right to do a limited number of things approved by ministers”.

“The sheer scale on which the government has sought to govern by decree creating new criminal offences sometimes several times a week on the mere say so of ministers, is in constitutional terms truly breathtaking,” he said in the annual Cambridge Freshfield Lecture. He could have been referring to any number of governments including that of Cyprus.

Lord Sumption warned that a more authoritarian model of politics could stay with us after the end of the pandemic. “The government has discovered the power of public fear to let it get its way. It will not forget,” he said.

Sociologist Nicos Peristianis said there was a basis for the SMS measure’s psychological effect.

“It creates a ritual to start thinking about,” he said.

But why has the opposition to this measure been so muted in Cyprus?

The Dutch for example took to streets late in January to protest a government decision to impose a curfew. On several occasions they clashed with police who used water cannon and teargas to disperse them, as they looted supermarkets and smashed shop windows. In Cyprus, a curfew has been in place since November 5.

Peristianis said the main thing one needed to look at was the position towards freedom and individualism.

Greek Cypriots were not so politicised either, by which he meant politically aware and active, not in terms of having party membership.

In the Netherlands they have a heightened sense of freedom, Peristianis said, and this is considered a political issue.

“Freedom to them is hugely important.”

Cypriots on the other hand are not so politicised and they tend to be collectivists, following what the family does or the masses, Peristianis said.

But it could also be attributed on Philotimo, a Greek word that has no direct English translation, and although simplistic, roughly means that one will always do what is right and honourable irrespective of status.

“I think we’ve been convinced there is a basis to what we’ve been hearing,” about the virus, Peristianis said, adding that he was surprised that the measures worked in the end.