THE RULING by the full bench of the Supreme Court – that the appointment of Costakis Christoforou as President of the Commission for the Protection of Competition was against the law – was a big slap in the face of the Christofias government for the slapdash way, bordering on incompetence, in which it takes decisions.
In effect, the government’s appointment of Christoforou showed complete disregard for the law governing the appointment to the specific position. The biggest irony was that the law had been amended by government proposal, a few weeks before the Council of Ministers approved Christoforou’s appointment on a five-year contract. And the amendment was made so that Christoforou, a retiree public servant who had friendly ties with Christofias, would be eligible for the post.
However the Supreme Court ruled that he was not eligible as neither in the commerce minister’s proposal nor in the Council of Ministers’ decision was any justification provided for the appointment, as was required by the law. There was no mention of his qualifications, experience, career or knowledge in the decision, leading the Court to conclude that the appointee did not satisfy the requirements of the law which stipulated that he or she “should have specialised knowledge and experience of legal matters.”
The ruling was a triumph for the oil companies which had appealed against fines imposed on them by the Competition Commission, for the operation of a cartel, amounting to €43 million. A fresh investigation would now have to be launched, under the new President of the Commission. Other investigations being carried out by the Commission would have to be scrapped and started from scratch because Christoforou had been involved.
The slapdash way in which the government went about the appointment defies belief. In effect it offered companies under investigation an escape route, not by design but by incompetence. Why had it not consulted the Attorney General before reaching a decision on such an important appointment?
Such an appointment should have been legally water-tight because the position has sweeping powers and the incumbent would regularly be at loggerheads with big business. Did the commerce minister who proposed Christoforou check the certificates of his qualifications? How could the Council of Minister be so naive not to consider the possibility that after the first big fine Christoforou imposed, there would be a pack of lawyers looking for ways to overturn his decision?
This was another reason for sticking to the letter of law, even though in a properly run country, a government does not need additional reasons to comply with the provisions of the law. It should do things by the book all the time, even when it is offering positions to the friends of the president.
