Filenews 4 February 2021 - by Vasos Vassiliou
The "mother of all battles" will take place today in the Municipal Council of the Municipality of Nicosia and if it does not work behind the scenes, perhaps the decision to revoke the planning permission concerning the construction of the cathedral can be judged in the vote, since in addition to the Municipal Group of ACPL, the same view is said to have members of the Municipal Groups of DISY, DIKO , Solidarity and Ecologists, some of whom had even voted against the construction of the church.
If the City Council decides to revoke the permit, then the municipality must bring an action before a Court of Justice by applying for a revocation order.
At the same time, a matter of reconstruction of the buildings will be urgently raised before the Archbishop on the basis of his earlier commitments to preserve the preserved buildings which he instructed to be demolished. This position seems to be embraced by all municipal councillors, some of whom also favour the imposition of an administrative fine instead of a suspension of the planning permit. The imposition of an administrative fine instead of other harsher measures is also reportedly adopted by the Mayor of Nicosia, Konstantinos Giorgis, and as "F" informs, he threw in the idea at the previous meeting of the Municipality's Planning Committee without finding suitable ground.
Today's session is also expected to raise the issue of responsibilities with a view to bringing proceedings against all those who played a role in the decision to demolish the preserved buildings. Municipal councillors are not convinced by the explanations given by the Archbishop (who claimed that the preserved buildings were demolished because they were dangerous) considering that the demolition was a conscious act. They suggest that the first version given referred to a hazard that arose in one of the preserved not because of the last rains but because of the last earthquake! They also observe that if the Archbishop had intended to restore the preserved and not to demolish them, then their maintenance would have begun a long time ago, in order to complete the work before the opening of the church so that the area would show harmony instead of clutter. They also say that the technical services of the municipality, for about a year, had contacted the Archdiocese calling on those responsible to take care of the support of the buildings. As we were told, some "signs" had been observed, although the condition of the buildings was not such as to justify their collapse. Moreover, as they indicate, the restoration of the preserved ones was part of the construction programme of the cathedral and was also one of the reasons cited by municipal councillors to vote in favour of the construction of the temple.
What is planned if work continues
It is worth noting that in a press release of the scholar of the cathedral dated 9 February 2009 the following were mentioned concerning the project and especially the preserved ones: "... Creation of New Public Squares, enlargement of the road network, large parking for the world, restoration of listed buildings...".
It is also worth noting that in the context of the construction of underground parking spaces that extend to the boundaries of the listed buildings that were demolished, the municipality indicated to the Archdiocese that measures had to be taken so that the work did not affect the stability of the buildings mentioned, which was done.
A municipal official told "F" that when it is found that the owner is carrying out work without permission or even in violation of the permit issued (as was the case in the case of the preserved ones), then the municipality can actually issue an enforcement notice and ask the owner to restore the buildings to their former state. The same official said the archbishop could be given a 15-day period to submit plans on how to re-build the preserved structures.
When the plans are filed, work must begin immediately and evolve at the same time as the construction of the cathedral, otherwise penalties are imposed, while at the same time the owner can be brought before a Court because he is building without permission. As we have been told, the municipality will have to prove to the Court that if the Archdiocese continues to build, then irreversible situations will arise.
However, the municipality in the original letter sent to the Archdiocese makes it clear that the permission of the cathedral is called into question because it was total and covered the entire square and not only the temple.
Finally, the municipal official argued that the existing legislation is not effective for the planning authorities.
Heavy sentences under Averof's proposal
The fact that the legislation does not allow the planning authorities to achieve without hindrance the reconstruction of the listed buildings that are being demolished, led the president of the DISY, Averof Neophytou, to the tabling of a proposal for a law under which they can undertake the reconstruction of the buildings and charge the owner.
At the same time, the planning authorities will be able to impose an administrative fine equal to the value of the buildings, based on the land registry's estimate.
The same proposal also provides that the Court may order a stay of business until the case in question has been heard.
Furthermore, if the owner does not initiate the process of rebuilding the demolished building, the competent authority may fine him €200 for each day of continuation of the infringement.
According to the proposed law, if the owner receives notice but does not take appropriate action to carry out the necessary work, he is subject to imprisonment of up to one year or €20,000 or both sentences together.
Mr Neophytou told "F" that the proposal for a law also sends a message that the State and society will not tolerate phenomena of destruction of our cultural heritage and anyone who does so will pay a heavy price.
