Newsroom
President Nikos Christodoulides’ recent statements regarding Cyprus’ nominee for the European Commissioner post have sparked controversy, potentially setting a negative political and legal precedent for the Republic. Christodoulides indicated that the selection of Cyprus’ Commissioner-designate will depend on the portfolio allocated by European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen, according to a report by Pavlos Xanthoulis in this Sunday's Kathimerini.
Christodoulides stated that the specific portfolio offered by von der Leyen would dictate the name of the nominee Cyprus proposes. This conditional approach has raised concerns among EU officials, who view it as a restriction of Cyprus' prerogatives under the EU treaties. According to the EU Consolidated Treaty, each member state should have the autonomy to propose its Commissioner without such conditions.
An EU source criticized Christodoulides' stance as an “obvious self-limitation” of Cyprus' rights and a potential transfer of decision-making power from member states to the Commission President. This approach contrasts sharply with that of other member states, such as Greece, Spain, Sweden, and Finland, which have nominated their Commissioners without imposing conditions based on the portfolio.
Greek Prime Minister Kyriakos Mitsotakis, for instance, has emphasized Greece's right to propose its Commissioner independently of the portfolio offered, demonstrating a stark contrast to Cyprus' approach. Mitsotakis has submitted a single nomination, Apostolos Tzitzikostas, adhering to the treaties’ provisions.
In contrast, Hungary’s choice for Commissioner, Oliver Varhelyi, faces scrutiny. Varhelyi, seeking a second term, is perceived as a weak link in the upcoming European Parliament hearings due to previous controversial remarks. Some speculate that Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán might be using Varhelyi as a strategic pawn, potentially to deflect attention from a more preferred candidate.
The divergence in strategies among EU member states highlights the varying interpretations and implementations of the treaties’ provisions, with Cyprus’ approach drawing significant criticism for potentially undermining the principles of EU governance.
