by pantheman » Thu Sep 06, 2007 12:24 am
[quote="CopperLine"]Pantheman,
For good or for bad, rights don't work in the way you describe them, nor - thank goodness - is it up to you (or me) who holds rights.
The simple story is this :
1. The RoC claims the sovereignty over the whole island and over all Cypriots, and it is on that basis that it applied for and was granted EU membership.
Granted
2. That basis of membership necessarily includes Cypriots in the north (not settlers, but TCs). By virtue of that inclusion, Turkish Cypriots became eligible, in principle, to be EU citizens.
Yes but only whilst they live in the south, since the Aqui is not applicable in the north
3. Since the TRNC claims sovereignty over the north and because that claim is rejected by almost all and sundry, the writ of the EU does not extend to the territory i.e, the acquis communitaire does not extend to the north.
4. However TCs are EU citizens, but can only exercise their rights where the EU's writ applies i.e, not in the north, therefore they can only enjoy the rights of EU citizenship if (a) they have EU citizenship (hence RoC applications) and (b) they are invoked outside the north.
So, they renounce the RoC government and support the illegal occupation whilst in the north, but expect to get the benefits offered in the south. Seems one way trffic here. And ontop of that they make no contributions to the RoC government like proper EU citizens. You can't have it both ways
The irony is that many, though I don't know if all, EU states allow the holding of dual nationality, citizenship and passports. TCs therefore like millions of other EU citizens, can hold citizenship in an EU state without having to renounce their citizenship of another state.
First, getting back to your complaint, Pantheman, that it has to be "a two way street" - no it is not; rights and the law don't work like that. We don't say "one for you, one for me. One more for me 'cos you forfeit one." Rights aren't a trade.
Second, why should average Jo TC be required to forfeit his/her citizens' rights because of the alleged illegalities of a government (especially on your claim, a foreign government or foreign-imposed government) ?
Well i thought that was obvious, here we have TCs who want to be EU citizens, want all the benefits when it suits them, but at they same time are not bound by the same rules as everyone else. ie respect for human rights, obeying international law, etc etc. seems you only want whats suits you when it suits you and the cost of everyone else.
Third, since TCs are EU citizens - by virtue of the RoC sovereign respresentation of all Cypriots - it seems perfectly reasonable and accurate to say that currently the rights of TCs as EU citizens 'are effectively denied or restricted'. That is a statement of fact.
God, here you go again, what are they actually denied, you said yourself if they come to the south they are eligable for whatever the EU provides, i still don't see what it is they are denied. If the RoC denied them the ID card, passport, then you ight have a point, but it issues them these documents faster than is does the GC population. They can get their free midical care, pensions paid, all without making any contributions. Is that what you call being denied? Is this correct behaviour of citizens? No mate it isn't. They have more say coming to the south than any GC going the other way.
Fourth, that TCs drive Mercs or anything else is totally irrelevant. If you want to "have some too", move north. It is as hard, in fact harder to earn enough for a Merc as it is in the south or anywhere else in Europe.
So, it begs the question then, where are they stealing the cash from then? I can tell you, from my land and that of many others whom have not given permission for them to take and sell onwards. From the criminal casinos, from the hugh drugs trade, from habouring criminals wanted worldwide by other law enforcement authorities. But, oh i almost forgot, the law does not prvail in the north, no one is made to follow the law in the north, poor isolated, rights denied people balh blah blah. Rubbish and you know it.
Fifth, me 'biased' ? me 'a TC' ? me 'middle of the road' ? me 'impartial' ? All descriptions you've used of me. None have I used.
So what, you don't have to use words like that to see from where you are hailing from. It is very clear in all your postings where you stand. But i won't harp on this, as we have been down this road before.
Sixth, that the rights of GCs have been abused is undeniable. But it is a basic principle of law that you've got to identify the perpetrator of a particular harm or abuser of a right. It just isn't going to stick to wave your arms in the air and say 'that lot did it !' Which lot ? Who ? Name them ? Which specific harm ? Which specific loss ? Which specific abuse ? All of that is difficult and protracted in law, and arguably that's why people try to shortcut the process by turning to politics which uses a broad tar brush aganist all and sundry.
That i can agree with, but the reverse is also true of the TCs who are always claiming that the GC are out for their blood, so thats why they feel they need the masses of troops in the north. The perpertrator in the GC case is Turkey lock stock and barrel, but there aint no law that can touch them is there?
So, please don't keep quoting me law this and the law that, it is quite obvious agian that the law stops at Turkeys door beacause certain major powers have allowed that to happen at the expense of the GC losses.
