Open letter to the President
https://www.neme.org/blog/open-letter-to-the-president
Addressed to the President of the Republic of Cyprus, we support this petition which discusses, the attitudes of the current administration of the Deputy Ministry of Culture and the state of the cultural sector in Cyprus.
Cyprus, September 1, 2025
To:
President of the Republic of Cyprus
CC:
House of Representatives,
Media
Mr President,
We are writing to you to express our deep disappointment and grave concern about the establishment of a “new order” at the Deputy Ministry of Culture, which has already had visible and serious consequences for the cultural life of the country.
The establishment of the Deputy Ministry of Culture and the transformation of the former Cultural Services into the Department of Contemporary Culture were made with the long-standing expectation that the state would recognise, strengthen and support cultural production, as well as the rights of cultural workers. However, three years later, under the current Deputy Minister of Culture, Dr. Vasiliki Kassianidou, in conjunction with the Director of the Department of Contemporary Culture, Dr. Ioanna Hadjicosti, and the General Director of the Deputy Ministry of Culture, Ms. Emmanuela Lambrianidi, cultural organisations and independent cultural workers are experiencing unprecedented disparagement, intimidation, and an environment that now openly undermines artistic and cultural production, the cohesion and health of the broader cultural ecosystem, and the sustainability of important institutions, festivals, NGOs, artists, and other cultural workers. This critical situation, which has already provoked numerous and intense public reactions from NGOs, groups, and individuals, is highlighted in the recent written response from the Deputy Ministry of Culture 1 to the latest collective letter from cultural organisations 2 on the issue of Cyprus’ participation in the Architecture Biennale.
In this response, which remained unsigned and it is unclear whether it came from the Deputy Minister, the Director General, or the Director of the Department of Contemporary Culture, not only is no responsibility taken, but inaccuracies, distortions of the facts, and public accusations against the selected group (among other things, that “violates basic principles of ethics” and that it is lying), thus highlighting the casual nature of the handling of the matter and revealing the lack of seriousness and the superficial approach with which issues of institutional responsibility are dealt with.
The picture that emerges is remarkable and indicative of a political and administrative structure that, instead of acting conscientiously towards society, prefers to constantly mislead and deflect responsibility elsewhere, never being accountable as its role requires. The issue of Cyprus’ participation in the Venice Biennale occupied a lot of space in public debate because of the unprecedented lack of seriousness in how it was handled. The focus of criticism was the Deputy Minister, who, in violation of her institutional role, proceeded with the “immediate withdrawal” 3 of the catalogue of Cyprus’ participation in the 19th Architecture Biennale, ignoring the fact that this catalogue was an integral part of the exhibition. 4 At the same time, with her statements that artistic expression would be limited exclusively to the “official languages of the Republic,” 5 she essentially encouraged methods of state censorship that are unacceptable in democratic regimes, thereby undermining the authority of her office.
The Director of the Department of Contemporary Culture, who is responsible for this matter, and the General Director, who is the administrative head, were completely absent from the public debate, and did not assume any responsibility either. The response of the Deputy Ministry, which came after months of attempts at misdirection, attacks on the Biennale team, and information about the targeted “punishment” of a low-ranking official, not only fails to address the crisis responsibly, but also reveals a complete lack of political stature, professional principles, sensitivity, and moral conscience. Furthermore, instead of responding substantively to the clearly articulated complaints, the Deputy Ministry resorted to inaccurate insinuations and comparisons with subsidies, implying that the protesting bodies are “funded” and therefore obliged to remain silent. The message, although indirectly expressed, was perfectly clear: if you receive support, you don’t speak out; if you speak out, you lose your support. This logic implies a mechanism of manipulation, where financial support is presented as a trade-off for conformity and silence. In this way, the institutional relationship between the state and cultural workers is transformed into a tool of silencing and abuse of power, posing a threat to civil society, individual cultural communities, and cultural workers in general. The management of public resources is not a privilege; they are intended for the benefit of citizens and must be allocated with transparency and respect, not exploited.
In this response, which remained unsigned and it is unclear whether it came from the Deputy Minister, the Director General, or the Director of the Department of Contemporary Culture, not only is no responsibility taken, but inaccuracies, distortions of the facts, and public accusations against the selected team (among others, that “violates basic principles of ethics” and that it is lying), thus highlighting the sloppiness of the handling of the matter and revealing the lack of seriousness and the superficial approach with which issues of institutional responsibility are dealt with.
The Director of the Department of Contemporary Culture, who is responsible for this matter, and the General Director, who is the administrative head, were completely absent from the public debate, and they too did not take any responsibility. The response of the Deputy Ministry, which came after months of attempts to mislead, attacks on the Biennale team, and information about the targeted “punishment” of a low-ranking official, not only fails to address the crisis responsibly, but also reveals a complete lack of political stature, professional principles, sensitivity, and moral conscience.
Furthermore, instead of responding substantively to the clearly articulated complaints, the Deputy Ministry resorted to inaccuracies, insinuations, and references to grants, implying that the protesting organisations are “funded” and therefore obliged to remain silent. The message, although indirectly expressed, was perfectly clear: if you receive support, you don’t speak out; if you speak out, you lose your support. This logic points to a mechanism of manipulation, where financial support is presented as a trade-off for conformity and silence. In this way, the institutional relationship between the state and cultural workers is transformed into a tool of silencing and abuse of power, posing a direct threat to civil society, individual cultural communities, and cultural workers in general. The management of public resources is not a privilege; they are intended for citizens and must be allocated with transparency and respect, not exploited.
The hasty announcement of the withdrawal of the Biennale publication constitutes censorship in itself, which the “response” in question attempts in vain to obscure. The persistent attempt to accuse the team of the 2025 Architecture Biennale of “breaching ethics” and “infringement of rights,” with the unfortunate invocation of the MED9 Declaration (which in no way justifies the restriction of artistic expression), constitutes a new attempt at silencing, the silencing of the act of denunciation itself. In essence, the MED9 Declaration stresses that “artistic freedom is a cultural right and must be guaranteed for all” and that “we seek to promote cultural rights […] by supporting artistic freedom and honoring Mediterranean cultural heritage.” We reasonably wonder whether the Deputy Ministry of Culture has read the declaration it has co-signed.
Under these circumstances, dialogue has now reached an impasse. For this reason, Mr. President, we are addressing you with the following indicative information.
- Are you aware that last year the Deputy Ministry promoted an extremely unfavorable and sweeping reform of the “Culture” grants program — that most of the country’s contemporary cultural production is dependent on — despite strong and well-documented opposition, 6 which the Directorate of Contemporary Culture countered with evasive responses? 7 As predicted, this reform led to the distribution of funding to significantly fewer beneficiaries, affected key sectors, and undermined long-standing festivals.
- Are you aware that government spending on culture places us at the bottom of the European Union 8 and that the “Culture” funding program is dysfunctional, as the maximum grant amounts for each approved application have remained unchanged for thirteen years, ignoring inflation and the skyrocketing costs of production and living?
- Are you aware that the “Artist Status” bill was presented to Parliament with serious flaws in its design, without any meaningful dialogue with those working in the cultural sector, while in a last-ditch attempt to consult on the matter in an open meeting with stakeholders, the Director of the Department of Contemporary Culture, Dr. Hatzikosti, stated bluntly: “Do whatever you want, I’ll still get my salary.” And it wasn’t the only time: in meetings with the group representing the visual arts organisations, she herself had stated that “you should not take subsidies for granted,” creating reasonable concern in the sector as to the motives behind such a position. Such divisive, dismissive, and without empathy responses reveal a highly problematic attitude on the part of the public administration toward the very people who work in the cultural sector, an attitude that undermines not only the prestige of institutions but also the prospect of a healthy cultural ecosystem, which cannot exist without respect, honesty, understanding, and meaningful cooperation.
- Are you aware that the state cultural policy, as implemented by the Deputy Ministry of Culture, does not support the sustainability of professional theater in Cyprus? Theater organisations continue to complain about inequality in the formulation of funding plans (THYMELI, Operating Expenses) that support organisations based on their “history,” while excluding not only newly established creative groups but also organisations that develop independent artistic identities. Furthermore, it remains problematic that children’s productions are included in the THYMELI framework and do not constitute a separate funding category, while small-scale productions (with 1 or 2 actors) have been downgraded as they are not competitive within the framework of THYMELI, and have been removed from the “Culture” program. 9
- Are you aware that the Deputy Ministry of Culture announced a logo competition for the Deputy Ministry itself with unacceptable terms, completely ignoring visual communication professionals? Although the Union of Cyprus Graphic Designers and Illustrators met with them and submitted clear recommendations, the composition of the judging panels remains unclear and the law requiring the participation of industry experts has not been complied with. At the same time, the Deputy Ministry requested the transfer of intellectual property rights without any explicit contract and without fair remuneration, while the amounts provided for in the competition are humiliating and insulting to the work and efforts of professionals. For all the above reasons, the Union reacted publicly. 10
- Are you aware that the Deputy Ministry of Culture is promoting, once again in a superficial and hasty manner, legislation for tax exemptions for donors to the cultural sector, which appear to favour exclusively foundations approved by the Deputy Minister, thus excluding more than 92% of active cultural organisations consisting of associations and non-profit companies, thereby prescribing a system of political favouritism? 11
- Are you aware that the assignments for the cultural activities of the Cyprus Presidency are being made with complete carelessness and lack of transparency? To date, there has been no public information, either about the official cultural program or about the appointed curators, while professionals involved in the process report non-meritocratic procedures, resignations, and cancellations of important events, which damage our country’s image and deprive the most experienced and recognized people in the cultural sector of opportunities. With the issue of the Cyprus Presidency, we seem to be facing yet another disaster of mismanagement and arbitrariness on the part of the state cultural body. The open letter addressed by the Visual Artists and Art Theorists Association – Fytorio 12 to the Department of Contemporary Culture was answered 13 in the usual incomplete, manipulative, and dismissive manner, without actually providing any response.
- Are you aware that Cyprus’ participation in the Venice Art Biennale became the subject of political intervention long before that of the Architecture one? Upon assuming her duties, the Deputy Minister made inaccurate and misguided public statements such as “we should only send high-quality proposals that reflect the Cypriot art scene and reward those who deserve to be rewarded,” 14 indirectly questioning the work and successes of previous national participations and disparaging the role of her predecessors and the established competent committees. The public stance of the committee members 15 on the statements was later met with hostility, and for the first time in history, while the competition for the next event was being announced, their term was not renewed. As a result, the timetables announced by the Deputy Ministry itself were not adhered to and, to date, the name of the individual or group selected by the new committee months ago has not been announced, exposing our country to the Biennale and the international public.
- Are you aware that the Deputy Ministry has completely suspended the activities of the two State Art Galleries in Nicosia, namely the Majestic and SPEL, which were previously vital cultural and educational hubs in the region?
- Are you aware that entire artistic sectors, such as the visual arts, which had been showing significant momentum, have been weakened by the removal, transfer, and departure of experienced staff from the Department of Contemporary Culture?
- Are you aware that, although the Department of Contemporary Culture engages in superficial campaigns and statistical “research” that reveal a managerialism mindset divorced from the basic functions and needs of the sector, no real progress has been made on any issue. On the contrary, at many levels there has been a continuous regression and reversal of previous achievements and gains in the cultural sphere, undermining the high intellectual level, professional experience, and multi-level activities of Cypriot workers in the cultural sector?
- Are you aware that officials from the Deputy Ministry and the Department of Contemporary Culture are systematically absent from the most important cultural events and festivals in the country? With this conspicuous absence, they are effectively devaluing the country’s cultural activity, demonstrating the distance that separates them from the sector they are supposed to serve.
Mr. President, this is an unprecedented phenomenon in the history of our country’s culture, documented by a wealth of public information. The leadership of the Deputy Ministry of Culture and the Department of Contemporary Culture, which should be the main champion of the cultural community, constantly stands against it, choosing to compete with it rather than serve it. The officials of the Deputy Ministry and the Department of Contemporary Culture themselves seem unaware of their role as political leaders and public servants, that they are accountable to the citizens they are duty-bound to serve, and that power in the public sector does not translate into privileges but into obligations. Now that you know, the responsibility lies in your hands. We call on you to make decisions and take action with a view to restoring institutional order, protecting artistic and intellectual creation, and safeguarding the public interest in the field of culture.
[This letter was drafted collectively by active members and representatives of the local cultural community and remains open for signatures until September 28, 2025.]
Notes
- gov.cy/politismos/apantisi… -foreon/ (14/8/2025)
- dialogos.com.cy/i-eleytheria… -dimioyrgias/ (10/8/2025), philenews.com/politismos… -architektonikis/ (12/8/2025) & kathimerini.com.cy/gr… -foreis (12/8/2025)
- philenews.com/kipros… -gegonoton/ (4/6/2025) & parathyro.politis.com… -ixitika (12/6/2025)
- philenews.com/kipros… -kimena/ (11/6/2025)
- sigmalive.com/news/all… -kipriako (4/6/2025)
- parathyro.politis.com… -politismos (30/5/2025)
- gov.cy/politismos/apantisi… -politismos-ii/ & gov.cy/media/2024/10/25102024YfypourgeioPolitismou.pdf (25/10/24)
- ec.europa.eu/eurostat… ?lang=en
- offsite.com.cy/eidiseis… -horigies-toy (29/12/2023) & reporter.com.cy/article… -kleisimo (4/1/2024)
- cagdi.org.cy/epikoinonia… -politismou/ (18/7/2025) & cagdi.org.cy/epikoinonia… -politismou-2/ (25/7/2025)
- drive.google.com/file… =sharing (26/8/2023)
- philenews.com/politismos… -proedrias/ (7/4/2025)
- gov.cy/politismos/anakoinosi… -2026/ (11/04/25)
- philenews.com/politismos… -sintoma/ (4/9/2023)
- kathimerini.com.cy/gr… -ergon (14/9/2023)
