GOC REACTS ANGRILY TO THE RELEASE OF THE HUMAN

C O N F I D E N T I A L NICOSIA 000410 SIPDIS SIPDIS E.O. 12958: DECL: 03/16/2016 TAGS: PGOV PHUM CY SUBJECT: GOC REACTS ANGRILY TO THE RELEASE OF THE HUMAN RIGHTS REPORT; BUT BETTER THAN LAST YEAR Classified By: Ambassador Ronald L. Schlicher; reasons 1.4 (B) and (D) ¶1. (C) Summary: Although somewhat more muted than last year, GOC authorities have once again lashed out at the human rights report on Cyprus. Privately, MFA officials criticized us for producing a "political document" that was aimed more at upgrading the Turkish Cypriot "entity" than at advancing human rights. Justice Minister Theodorou slammed the report in a March 16 press conference and insisted that the police would no longer respond to "questionnaires" from the U.S. Embassy without assurances that the report would be "objective." (Note: Theodorou himself is mentioned in the report in connection with allegations of nepotism.) Meanwhile, the police published a 17-page rebuttal to our report on the web. We intend to engage with both the MOJ and the police to assuage their concerns and reinforce the importance of open dialogue on these important issues. End Summary. MFA: REPORT IS A POLITICAL COMMENTARY ON A DIVIDED CYPRUS -------------- -------------- ¶2. (C) On March 8, Polchief presented the 2005 Human Rights Report on Cyprus to Evangelos Savvas in the MFA's Cyprus Question Division. We drew Savvas's attention, in particular, to a number of editing changes we had made to accommodate Greek Cypriot sensitivities. This included replacing "north Cyprus" with "area administered by the Turkish Cypriots" and restoring specific language that made clear the United States did not recognize the "Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus (TRNC)." Polchief urged Savvas and other GOC officials to read the report carefully and consider the changes we had made before commenting publicly. Savvas stressed that the GOC was still highly displeased by the fact that the report included a separate section on the Turkish Cypriots. This division of the report into two sections had nothing to do with human rights, but was rather aimed at upgrading the status of the Turkish Cypriot entity. The GOC viewed the U.S. Human Rights Report as a fundamentally political document. The division of the report was, he reiterated, unacceptable. Moreover, the report made no mention of the objective fact that the vast majority of human rights violations on Cyprus were a function of the Turkish invasion and occupation. The report did not even deign to use the word "invasion." This alone was incredibly offensive to Greek Cypriots, he said. Savvas noted that the government had been cooperative in providing the information that the United States had asked for in preparing the report. The GOC was beginning, however, to question the basis of this cooperation given that Greek Cypriot sensitivities with respect to the Cyprus issue were routinely ignored. WAITING FOR THE OTHER SHOE -------------- ¶3. (SBU) Media coverage that followed the release of the report was generally mild. A few papers offered the standard charges of hypocrisy, but official circles remained largely mute. A week after the publication of the report, however, Justice Minister Theodorou (who was mentioned in the document in connection with allegations of nepotism) held a press conference in which he dismissed the report as "prejudiced and pre-decided." He announced that, due to the report's "inaccuracies," the police would "no longer respond to American Embassy questionnaires unless it is given assurances that they (the Americans) will be objective." Theodorou pointed, in particular, to the report's failure to highlight an independent board that had been formed to investigate allegations of police corruption in relation to trafficking in persons. He neglected, however, to mention that the board had only been formed in February 2006. The Cypriot police, he continued, had been instructed to respond to the Embassy's questionnaire because the force operated in a climate of "complete transparency." The police had nothing to hide, since the level of respect for human rights in Cyprus was "indisputably high." On March 17, the police posted a 17-page rebuttal to the human rights report on the web, along with a press release noting the contents that had caused them "grief, bitterness and disappointment." The press release charged that the report was rife with inaccuracies and "misleading references." ¶4. (C) COMMENT: The official response to the release of this year's report was significantly less intemperate than the firestorm of protest the GOC launched in response to the 2004 report. While the government is still clearly displeased with the division of the report into two sections, our willingness to address some of their linguistic concerns has apparently helped to moderate the tone of the official response. Equally important, the 2005 report did not include the controversial issues of press freedom stemming from the April 2004 Annan Plan referenda. While we are concerned about the Justice Minister's insistence that the Police will no longer respond to our "questionnaires" (note: the authorities require us to communicate on this issue primarily in writing),we intend to engage with both the MOJ and the Police to discuss their concerns and reinforce the need for an open exchange on such critical issues as human rights and trafficking in persons. SCHLICHER