Attorney General denies bias in courtroom drama

The cross-examination of Attorney General George Savvidis continued today before the Supreme Constitutional Court. Savvidis faced intense scrutiny over his efforts to suspend Auditor General Odysseus Michaelides, which he initiated based on alleged misconduct.

During questioning, Savvidis confirmed that he was previously instructed by the President of the Republic to begin suspension proceedings against Michaelides but had chosen not to act on it. He did not specify which President issued the instruction.

Michaelides' legal adviser, Christos Clerides, accused Savvidis of showing "passion" and "fury" against the Auditor General, obstructing his work, and attempting to oust him since taking office. Savvidis denied these claims, stating that he did not intend to oust Michaelides from the start but acknowledged that their relationship had been fraught with hostility.

The court is examining whether Michaelides improperly intervened in criminal investigations, notably during the controversial "Golden Passport" period. Savvidis argued that Michaelides overstepped his authority and misrepresented facts, while Michaelides’ team claimed the Attorney General’s actions were aimed at undermining the Auditor General’s independence.

As the proceedings continued, both sides exchanged heated remarks. Savvidis defended his decisions, asserting his constitutional role and dismissing allegations of misconduct. He also addressed accusations of bias and misuse of authority in various cases, including the Yiannakis and naturalization investigations.

The court aims to conclude Savvidis' testimony by the end of the week, with the possibility of extending hearings into the afternoons if necessary.