Rule of law that is applied selectively is not rule of law. It is a form of authoritarianism in which the state decides who is allowed to break the law with impunity, making a complete mockery of the democratic principle of equality before the law. Cyprus’ football clubs and their directors have been systematically breaking the law for years, without any consequences. Directors of other businesses that have committed the same offences, in stark contrast, have ended up in prison and their assets taken so that their debts to the state are paid.
This contempt for the rule of law, in the case of football clubs, has been displayed by successive governments and the current one is continuing the tradition. It has prepared a law by which the percentage of the tax on betting that goes to football clubs will increase from 1.5 to 3 per cent and the increased revenue would go towards the payment of the debt of the football clubs to the state, which currently stands at €38m. The debts for unpaid VAT, income tax and social insurance, would be paid off in a 15-year period, with the condition that the clubs do not amass new debts to the state.
It is all part of an ongoing farce. There was another special plan for the clubs to settle their debts to the state, but over the last year the total debts increased by €4.8m, the clubs showing complete disregard for the condition of not creating new debts to the state. On what grounds does the finance ministry, which set up the latest repayment plan, think the clubs will promptly pay their dues? How will the top Nicosia club that has total debts in the region of €35m and is in effect bankrupt, be able to honour this agreement? Would the government throw the club off the scheme if it does not meet the condition of paying its current tax dues or will it come up with another repayment scheme?
The bill is currently at the House finance committee, awaiting approval, which is considered a certainty. No political party would dare vote against the bill, because football clubs represent a huge number of votes, but the go-ahead of the European Commission is still necessary as the latest scheme is a form of state subsidy – a reward for systematically breaking the law. As if this were not bad enough, the government, before the bill had been approved and before the Commission gave the green light, issued certificates to the clubs that they did not have outstanding debts to the state, so they could compete in European competitions.
What happens if the Commission rejects the proposal, deeming it a violation of EU directives? The government’s certificates would be invalid and the clubs would have competed in European competitions, unlawfully. What would happen then? Perhaps the government has not considered the consequences of such a turnaround, because the priority, as the finance minister Makis Keravnos said earlier this week, was for our clubs to take part in European competitions. And to make that possible the government has decided to reward the law-breakers, by using the taxpayer’s money to pay off their debts.
