Cyprus-Forum.com

[Pyrpolizer]

Thank you once again CopperLine.

I guess we have to wait for some more clarified news.

May I ask you a question relying on your legal expertise? Is it usual for the accused party or country to have a judge in the court? I think Turkey did have a judge in the court in previous cases against her -if my memory is correct.

[Nikitas]

Copperline and others,

The credibility of ECHR process of us Cypriots is getting a little peculiar. The ECHR will hear the Erel case where the demand is full return to the 1960 agreements granting full political rights to Turkish Cypriots. At the same time the ECHR is hearing cases of Greek Cypriot property owners and the tendency of the court is to refer them to the compensation committes of the TRNC (treating the committes and organs of a state the ECHR itself does not recgnise as sufficent "domestic remedies").

From my end it looks like the ECHR is applying ther principle of "masters of the north, partners in the south" even before it has been formally demanded.

[CopperLine]

Nikitas,
I stand to be corrected but this is my broad understanding of the ECHR response to the Cyprus property cases :

Property owners claim that their human rights have been abused - Artielc 1 of the Protocol and probably Article 13 & 17 of the main Convention. Plaintiffs can only petition the Court if they have exhausetd local remedy. Following this ECHR ruled against TRNC/Turkey for failing to (a) allow emjoyment of property rights and (b) failure to have adequate remedy mechanism in place. In the light of (a) fines and demands were issued and in the light of (b) TRNC/TUrkey were obliged to set up a proper remedy system i.e, a property commission to look at the cases. In relation to (b), the principle that the international Courts are operating to is that of making remedy as localised as possible.

Now of course once the property commission is set up people might say - have said - that it is not doing its job properly etc. Ultimately people could challenege the property commission
before the ECHR as well !

The problem with law, is not so much its corruptability - I think that this is a relatively minor problem - so much as (i) it can be an unbelievably slow process and (ii) it is so class dependent, i.e, if you haven't got money or the wherewithall to go to law then you are screwed.

[Nikitas]

Copperline,
Your last line- [law is] class dependent is the reason I do not practice law- there is no universal practice of the law but a variable level of services which are directly proportional and dependent on the client's wallet. And cases that take on average ten years to get to the court then the client's wallet has to be very fat indeed.

I am curious to see how the ECHR will balance the two categories of cases- claims by TCs for their political rights in the south, with the decisions (now they form a case law body) in the property cases.

[Pyrpolizer]

Copperline and others,

The credibility of ECHR process of us Cypriots is getting a little peculiar. The ECHR will hear the Erel case where the demand is full return to the 1960 agreements granting full political rights to Turkish Cypriots. At the same time the ECHR is hearing cases of Greek Cypriot property owners and the tendency of the court is to refer them to the compensation committes of the TRNC (treating the committes and organs of a state the ECHR itself does not recgnise as sufficent "domestic remedies").

From my end it looks like the ECHR is applying ther principle of "masters of the north, partners in the south" even before it has been formally demanded.

nIKITAS i AM AFRAID YOU ARE TOTALLY WRONG ON THIS.
The ECHR does NOT TEND TO DIVERT those cases to the property committee established in the occupied. What actually happened was that in the Mira Xenides Aresti case, the Turkish defense said there is already local remedy but the court said for this specific case it will judge by itself.

This means in future cases it will propably examine if the property committee is an acceptable/satisfactory local remedy. Officials in the EU already said that the few show cases that committe settled already will NOT be accepted as adequate reason.It has to prove beyond doubt it can settle thousands of cases. Even Talat himself said the property committee in the occupied will not be accepted eventually by the ECHR.

[Nikitas]

Pyro,

The two categories of cases coming to the court, on one hand TCs demanding full rights in the RoC, on the other GCs wanting compensation for property loss in the north, is the main issue. One wonders how the court will treat the claimants in each case. TO retain a coherent judicial approach it will have to face the problem as a whole, and come to the conclusion that the invasion has created conditions of necessity. If it takes a strictly legalistic approach and decides each case in isolation then we will have the peculiar result of TCs being granted full rights in the RoC while the GCs get compensation for the property loss in the north. I do not recall if the ECHR can offer remedies in rem, ie full return of the property itself.

It is conceivable that a TC living in usurped GC property in the north will be granted full political rights in the south, complete with the right to be employed in the land registry (to make the example extreme!).

[zan]

Copperline and others,

The credibility of ECHR process of us Cypriots is getting a little peculiar. The ECHR will hear the Erel case where the demand is full return to the 1960 agreements granting full political rights to Turkish Cypriots. At the same time the ECHR is hearing cases of Greek Cypriot property owners and the tendency of the court is to refer them to the compensation committes of the TRNC (treating the committes and organs of a state the ECHR itself does not recgnise as sufficent "domestic remedies").

From my end it looks like the ECHR is applying ther principle of "masters of the north, partners in the south" even before it has been formally demanded.

nIKITAS i AM AFRAID YOU ARE TOTALLY WRONG ON THIS.
The ECHR does NOT TEND TO DIVERT those cases to the property committee established in the occupied. What actually happened was that in the Mira Xenides Aresti case, the Turkish defense said there is already local remedy but the court said for this specific case it will judge by itself.

This means in future cases it will propably examine if the property committee is an acceptable/satisfactory local remedy. Officials in the EU already said that the few show cases that committe settled already will NOT be accepted as adequate reason.It has to prove beyond doubt it can settle thousands of cases. Even Talat himself said the property committee in the occupied will not be accepted eventually by the ECHR.

How many of the TC cases has the "RoC" sorted out then????A so called democratic country in which we still have to go through the courts to get what is ours.........Sarcastic........Or is there a little thing like the Cyprob in the way I wonder.......End of sarcasm..

[Nikitas]

Zan,

You are trying to be deliberately obtuse or what! While there is the TRNC how can the RoC offer full rights to the Turkish Cypriot community? Are you seriously suggesting that there would be a full complement of Turkish Members of Parliament, Vice President etc in the south while there also is a TRNC in the north? This goes beyond the "masters of the north, partners in the south" scenario, this is more like masters eveywhere and you GC wankers pay the bill.

[zan]

Zan,

You are trying to be deliberately obtuse or what! While there is the TRNC how can the RoC offer full rights to the Turkish Cypriot community? Are you seriously suggesting that there would be a full complement of Turkish Members of Parliament, Vice President etc in the south while there also is a TRNC in the north? This goes beyond the "masters of the north, partners in the south" scenario, this is more like masters eveywhere and you GC wankers pay the bill.

I am glad that you have said that and not me because many would have dismissed the fact if I had said it. That is exactly the point I was making. There is a little thing called the Cyprob that you and all GCs forget about when dealing with issues concerning your own personal problems and we are the barbarians for not dealing with them. ....BUT>>>>> when it comes to our problems...They will all be sorted the moment the TRNC/KKTC gives itself up....Can you see the double standards you are applying to this single problem....All rules apply at all times in Greek mathematics as well....As far as I know..... I hope my point has been taken...

[CopperLine]

Nikitas,
I'm with you in spirit at least when you say,

Your last line- [law is] class dependent is the reason I do not practice law

However I also see some instruments of law as necessary to exploit and fight over in class struggle and so do not give up on it entirely.

I echo fully your scepticism about the length of time for cases to be heard etc and the need for a fat wallet. (As an important aside, it is so blindingly obvious how in the 'Cyprus problem' the nationalist-ethnicist agenda has succeeded in eliminating consideration of the class character of Cyprus. Where do the already propertyless of pre-74, Greek speaking or Turkish speaking - feature in the decisive arguments about political settlement ? They don't.

I'm not sure I agree with your assessment that,

The credibility of ECHR process of us Cypriots is getting a little peculiar. The ECHR will hear the Erel case where the demand is full return to the 1960 agreements granting full political rights to Turkish Cypriots.

After all, the dispute is essentially over two different sets of human rights and would need to be examined accordingly. Clearly one can't trade, say, right to property against right to expression or association. So sure, it might throw up some ironies - even uncomfortable ones such as that you hinted at - but one could say that it was a measure of the robustness and depth of a common human rights regime if both sets of rights could flourish together or as one.