IN THE END, Archbishop Chrysostomos got his way. The majority of Nicosia’s municipal councilors voted in favour of the big cathedral he wanted to build in the old part of town, in the grounds of the Archbishopric. The protesters, who attended Tuesday’s open session and frequently booed speakers, were unable to sway the vote against the construction of the cathedral.
And although they vowed to continue to fight the Church’s plans, there seems little, if anything, they can do to stop the project from going ahead. Inevitably, there was talk of taking legal action but against whom and over what? This was a lawfully taken decision by elected councilors – the accepted procedures were followed and the majority of the city council gave its approval. What grounds can there be for legal action?
True, the municipality’s aesthetic committee may have twice rejected the plans submitted by the Archbishopric, but its role is advisory – the municipal council could choose to ignore its decisions as they are not binding. This gave rise to rumours that the Archbishop had persuaded councilors to back his project, but even if this were the case it was a perfectly legitimate thing to do. Lobbying decision-makers and politicians is part of the democratic process and takes place in all countries.
Greens general secretary and professional activist, Giorgos Perdikis said that the vote could be overturned, “if pressure is brought to bear by active citizens and the political parties assume their responsibilities”. In other words opponents of the cathedral would be resorting to lobbying politicians in order to overturn the decision. This would be no different from what the Archbishop, who has more clout than Perdikis, had done.
There is little doubt that a huge cathedral, in the old town, will be out of place. It will not blend aesthetically with its surroundings and it will change the look of the area.
It does not help that the big, new cathedrals being built by the Church are architecturally uninspiring monuments to functionality. The Archbishop could have helped the situation if he had asked the Church architects to come up with a design for the Cathedral that blended in with the surroundings – even if this would have been more costly – instead of opting for the standard format. The only concession he was prepared to make was to reduce the height of the building from 26 to 23 metre.
There is one novelty. The cathedral will feature an underground car-park, which is something usually associated with office blocks or shopping malls. Strangely, the underground car park offers the only hope of the project being abandoned. Mayor Eleni Mavrou said that if archaeological remains were found when the digging begun, the underground car park would not go ahead and the project would be put into question.
Yet this is surely clutching at straws. The Archbishop does not seem like a man who would have any scruples about building on archaeological remains.
