Open Data discourse & privatisation: an open / experimentally paranoid investigation of the Open Data Hackathon, Cyprus 2016 & its contradictions

source code + presentations:

Open Data Cyprus Crowdhackathon backtrace

  • 2003: 2003/98/EC EU directive on PSIR (Public Sector Information Release)
  • 2011: Deloitte Cyprus commissioned by FinMin to produce report on PSIR compliance
  • ? 2013: EC Support Group for Cyprus constituted, ostensibly as part of the bailout deal
  • ? 2013: PSI directive amended, plain-language changes quoted from spanish gov document below
  • introduces the general authorisation for re-use of any public document in accordance with the access rules of each Member State ... 
  • introduces a limited extension of its field of application. European regulations on the Re-use of Public Sector Information will now be applicable to public archives, libraries and museums, but express authorisation of re-use is required, ... 
  • introduction of the recommendation to preferably publish information in standard, open and machine-readable formats, all of which with as much granularity as possible. Having recognised the right to re-use, it is recommended that this re-use should be without conditions or with the minimum possible conditions, set out in a licence for use, which is preferably available by electronic means.
  • Charges ... are still allowed, although the Directive seeks to limit the possibility of applying them. On one hand, the charges established should in principle be limited to marginal costs, only allowing a return on investment to be applied in those cases in which the public body owning the document needs to do so in order to maintain its public activity or to cover production costs. On the other hand, these charges should be set according to transparent criteria, including their electronic publication, with an obligation for greater justification as the charges move away from the principle of marginal costs. [oi 'oriakes xrewseis' p anafere o D Michail]
  • In the field of museums, archives and libraries, in which returns on investment require greater stability and longer agreement periods, the new legal regulation paves the way for public-private cooperation agreements of up to ten years. [up from 3?]
  • Member States must report on the implementation of the Directive [to the EC] every 36 months, paying particular attention to reporting cases of conflict between Administration and re-users received by the impartial supervising body that is also introduced by the Directive. Secondly, the Commission must draw up guidelines regarding licenses, charges, data for preferential publication, which will not be legally binding, but will introduce a harmonising factor in the implementation of the Directive in all Member States
  • ? 2014: EU directive transposed into national law - sans 2013 amendment?
  • ? 2014: data portal launched
  • 25 Nov 2014: day conference
  • ? 2015: national law amended?
  • July 2015: Cypriot SG merged with Greek SG to create Structural Reform Support Service
  • August 2015: Deloitte Cy appointed to oversee data portal roll-out and related activity till Oct 2016
  • sources agree Deloitte funded by EC
  • Deloitte claim 'nominated' by EC Support Group for Cyprus
  • TDDP say issued public tender which I've been unable to locate on
  • 11 Nov 2015: day conference - 'Η ενέργεια υλοποιήθηκε μέσα στα πλαίσια της πρώτης δράσης του έργου «Υποστήριξη των φορέων του Δημόσιου Τομέα ... '
  • 16 March 2016: press conference
  • 3 June 2016: 2.5h 'forum' held jointly? by TDDP and Deloitte at Cyta HQ with speakers from Deloitte, crowdpolicy, ministry
  • 6 July 2016: day conference
  • 10-11 Sept 2015: hackathon - 'To Open Data Cyprus Crowdhackathon αποτελεί την τελική και μεγαλύτερη δράση του Έργου «Υποστήριξη των φορέων ...'
Innovating with Open Data. (2016). Retrieved 2 September 2016, from
Ivri, I. (2016, September 11). Reflections about the Open Data Ecosystem in Cyprus (and Israel). Retrieved 18 November 2016, from

Themes / questions / challenges

Discrepancy / absurdity in the set-up: doesn't the power here lie with the government & the developers?

I mention one example where one of the few teams presenting an application  received a scathing response from one of the business-minded ‘dragon’ style judges, who commented on their disinterest in monetisation as “who are you? Philanthropists Limited?”