The government of Cyprus has agreed to change a controversial law about public protests. This follows strong criticism from both inside the country and from an important international security organization. The decision came during an emergency meeting of parliament's Legal Affairs Committee.
The original law was passed in July after some small protests outside government buildings. It gave the police wide powers to control demonstrations. However, opposition parties, human rights groups, and legal experts immediately said the rules were too strict and unclear. They argued it limited the right to peaceful protest too much.
The criticism became stronger in September. The Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE) published a report. It said parts of the Cypriot law broke international human rights standards and could scare people away from organizing peaceful protests. This international opinion supported the arguments of the law's opponents.
Using the OSCE's report, opposition MP Irene Charalambides wrote a new bill to fix the law's problems. At the same time, the Justice Ministry was also working on changes based on the same international advice. During the committee meeting, officials discovered the two proposals were very similar. "What we prepared looks quite similar to Mrs Charalambides’ bill," said a ministry representative. Because of this overlap, the committee agreed to move forward with the changes.
The main changes will limit police power. For example, the original law let police ask protesters to remove face coverings at any time. The new version says police can only do this if a person is committing violence that threatens lives or property. The changes will also clearly state that protest organizers are not legally responsible for everything that happens at a demonstration.
The government's decision to reform the law, instead of repealing it completely, is seen as a victory for protest rights. Detailed discussions on the new text will happen in January, followed by a final vote. Experts say this situation shows how international organizations can help protect democratic rights and why governments should not make laws too quickly during a crisis.