MPs expressed differing opinions during the House institutions committee on Wednesday over the initial screening of a government bill seeking to remove the president and members of the advisory council from the obligation to submit asset declarations.

The proposal would exempt members of the body responsible for recommending appointments to semi-governmental organisations from declaring their assets, the so-called ‘pothen esches’ scheme, with government officials arguing that the council’s role is purely advisory and carries no executive authority.

Diko and Elam have backed the amendment, whilst Akel opposed it.

Alma and Direct Democracy expressed reservations and called for further clarification before taking a final position.

Committee chairman and Disy MP Demetris Demetriou outlined the history of the issue, explaining that a similar proposal had previously been rejected by parliament in 2025 after concerns were raised by members of the advisory council over their inclusion in the disclosure regime.

Justice ministry spokesperson Phaedra Grigoriou told MPs that the law was designed to cover public officials and politically exposed persons exercising authority and decision-making powers.

She argued that the advisory council’s function is consultative rather than executive.

“The character of the council is advisory and not decisive,” she stressed, remarking that the government believes its members should not fall within the provisions of the law.

Similar arguments were advanced by the legal service, the tax department and the deputy ministry to the president, which described the amendment as an application of the “principle of proportionality” and insisted that accountability mechanisms would remain intact.

Supporters of the amendment argued that members of the council neither exercise executive authority nor make final appointments and should therefore not be subject to the same disclosure obligations as public office holders who wield decision-making powers.

Opposition centred on concerns that the council still plays an influential role in the appointments process.

Akel MP Constantinos Constantinou argued that the reasons parliament originally included the body within the asset declaration framework remain valid.

“From the moment it receives CVs and recommends people to important organisations, we see no reason why it should not be included in the list,” he said.

Direct Democracy MP Diana Constantinides questioned how the public would view the exemption and whether transparency considerations should outweigh arguments based on proportionality.

Alma MP Irene Charalambides raised concerns regarding the institutional framework governing appointments, arguing that stronger safeguards and clearer procedures were needed.

Diko president Nicholas Papadopoulos defended the proposal, saying it had never been parliament’s intention for the advisory council to be subjected to the same disclosure requirements as officials covered by the legislation.

“This mistake must be corrected,” he affirmed.

The committee is expected to continue examining the bill before deciding whether to forward it to the House plenary for a vote.