Firstly, I have just outlined this matter in my answer and in what I have already done in my communication with the Ministers. We do things according to the law and the rules. What is required, for example, is that whoever is employed in government - this does not separate or exclude other offices - should declare their interest. If they have done so, they have then complied with the requirements of the law.
Have you ever heard that whilst a citizen had complied with the law, the President went further to say that because the citizen had now told him about their business deals, he was then sacking them? I am sure this country would be up in arms. In other words, the President himself would not be complying with the law. So, I don't think I can say that if there is somebody who has declared their interest while working in my office, this should therefore serve as a reason for them not to get employment, etc. We have to keep it within the rules.
With regard to whether we support that harsher measures be taken if a person is found not to have complied, I can say yes, absolutely. This will depend on the degree of the infringement or on what was or wasn't done by that person. We cannot pre-empt whatever judgment would be given, because it would be according to specific cases, for the cases are going to differ.
Procedures must be followed according to rules and the law. Once a harsher decision has been made, it is absolutely to be supported. I publicly said that we do not want to be tolerant to people who are doing wrong things. Whatever decision is taken will be supported. What will not be supported is the lack of a serious decision on wrongdoers. That will not be accepted because that would be condoning wrongdoing. So, we are saying if you do wrong things, you will receive punishment for it, in whatever way, as prescribed by the law and the rules. [Applause.]