Cyprus-Forum.com

[brother]

Further to recent chats with a friend of mine we came up with a new solution we feel could work.

A GC and TC campaign togethar for the posts of president and vice president which they will rotate every six months, they decide between them who is the vice/president first, then they campaign together and are voted to power as ‘one’ candidate, (on a single voting slip as such, so the TCs and GCs don’t vote completely different ideological leaders, there is thus continuity.)…but their role is more ceremonial than actually powerful as such, much like the presidents of Italy or Greece (or the Queen in UK).

For law to be formally approved, both (vice-)president must sign the legislation to make it legal.

The country would be ‘split up’ into different departments(‘counties’/’cantons’). Each would be comprised of either GC or TC collections of villages/people(if a minority of others are there then in the local ‘council’, there should be a special department in their administration addressing it, so they are represented.) In cities this is most essential; in fact, the council should be made up of appointed members who act as ‘protectors’ of the rights of people in each canton or something.

Then a whole load of the ‘departments’ would be joined together under a regional council, working on regional matters. Maybe there should be about 5-7 regional departments.
So you would have ‘local’ kind of political issues/problems etc being worked at single departmental level, then larger regional stuff at a regional level, then the main stuff, by a parliament.

The parliament should have representatives for about 20,000 people, so 20,000 TC would have a TC representative, 20,000 GCs would have a GC one.(about 50MPs altogether) But when they vote/amend laws etc… half of each ‘ethnic group’ need to agree.-thus no ethnic group has more power than the other. They are political equals. Also it should force political parties from both sides to join together and become Cypriot parties, so they both get over half of the vote in each ethnic vote in parliament.

The Senate should have two members from each ‘region’, one a TC and the other a GC.

What do you guys think any chance this can work, it is complete equality and in time i believe it will take the gc/tc problem out of politics, all opinions expected from all who contribute on this forum.

[cannedmoose]

Brother, just some first thoughts on your comments, hoping that others will join in and discuss something you've obviously spent some time on... come on folks, support this kind of stuff... Apologies in advance for the length of this...

Sorry if at points I hijack your idea and go off with my own, but your suggestions did make me think about my own a bit, so hopefully you'll indulge me on this one!

A GC and TC campaign together for the posts of president and vice president which they will rotate every six months, they decide between them who is the vice/president first, then they campaign together and are voted to power as ‘one’ candidate, (on a single voting slip as such, so the TCs and GCs don’t vote completely different ideological leaders, there is thus continuity.)…but their role is more ceremonial than actually powerful as such, much like the presidents of Italy or Greece (or the Queen in UK).

For law to be formally approved, both (vice-)president must sign the legislation to make it legal.

Although your concept of ceremonial President/VP is a good one and certainly one that I would support. The fact that both would need to approve for a law to be passed is a recipe for impasse, particularly in sensitive areas. This is unless you intend this position to be purely ceremonial and effectively just a 'rubber stamp' for legislation - this is the role that the Queen takes in the UK. However, in the Cyprus example I think it would have to be stipulated that the President and VP would only have the right to return laws to Parliament in certain areas and would not have an endless right of veto - i.e. they could be forced to sign legislation by a majority of votes from the Representatives of both communities, then I think it would work (it would stop a hardliner overruling the majority).

The country would be ‘split up’ into different departments(‘counties’/’cantons’). Each would be comprised of either GC or TC collections of villages/people(if a minority of others are there then in the local ‘council’, there should be a special department in their administration addressing it, so they are represented.) In cities this is most essential; in fact, the council should be made up of appointed members who act as ‘protectors’ of the rights of people in each canton or something.

The cantonisation concept is an interesting one and one that in principle I agree with. However, the cantons concept is I think uniquely Swiss and works there by virtue of its long history and existence since the establishment of the state. Cyprus has a different experience, so I'm not sure that such a micro-division would work. I foresee a federal structure, with two defined constituent states, albeit with federal 'cantons' in the following locales:

1. Nicosia, with the federal canton boundary defined by the outer suburbs of the city, with an arm stretching to Nicosia international airport;
2. Famagusta, encompassing the city and its suburbs, encompassing the port area, city and the current Green line boundary at Deryneia;
3. Karpass, with its boundary effectively following the road from Davlos (near Kantara castle) on the north coast to Bogazi on Famagusta Bay, containing Apostolos Andreas;
4. Akamas, within its current recognised boundaries;
5. An enclave around Hala Sultan Tekke near Larnaka.
6. Larnaca international airport; Paphos international airport; Erkan international airport and the ports at Limassol and Larnaca would also be federal zones and subject to joint control.

In each of these areas (those that have a permanent population), I agree with your concept of joint councils responsible for day-to-day affairs, with the federal government responsible for strategic development issues and overall management of the territories - particularly Akamas and Karpass that I would hope to be declared national parks, with the resultant controls on over-development.

Then a whole load of the ‘departments’ would be joined together under a regional council, working on regional matters. Maybe there should be about 5-7 regional departments. So you would have ‘local’ kind of political issues/problems etc being worked at single departmental level, then larger regional stuff at a regional level, then the main stuff, by a parliament.

So effectively you're saying that groups of cantons, i.e. those clustered in particular regions would co-operate? Ultimately, would this not end up working on a similar basis to defined constituent state territories, given that there is virtual apartheid between the populations anyway? If you have a map see link below, this is where I would draw the boundaries for the Constituent state idea that I have (remembering that the CS territories would not include any of the federal zones). Sorry if the names are still the Greek ones, but that's the only detailed map I have.

http://www.intercyprus.com/maps/Cyprus_map_big.jpg

1. From Syrianochori on Morfou Bay, following the 'river' bed to through Kyra and Fyllia, meeting the current Green line boundary between Fyllia and Mammari.
2. Following the current Green line boundary to Agios Dometios, where it would skirt the capital following the federal zone border until it reached near Mia Milia.
3. It would then track the road from Mia Milia to Angastina, down to Pyrga and continue heading to Famagusta, whereupon it would meet the federal zone boundary at the outskirts of the city.

Sorry if that's detailed, but I'm trying to show you where I would define the two states. It may not accord exactly with how the population was distributed in 1960, but we're a long way from then now. It would result in the return of Morfou and the surrounding area to GC administration and would also return approximately half of Mesaoria. It would leave Kyrenia and the entire north coast, at least until it reached the federal zone at Karpass in TC control and provide them with the development opportunities along the northern stretch of Famagusta Bay. So, I think it's fair to both sides. Each of these states would be governed by their representatives from the Federal House of Representatives, within a separate CS chamber. So for 3 days a week, the CS chambers would meet, and would meet in joint session as the federal chamber (for all common responsibilities) for one day each week, with the remaining day given for constituency work.

The parliament should have representatives for about 20,000 people, so 20,000 TC would have a TC representative, 20,000 GCs would have a GC one.(about 50MPs altogether) But when they vote/amend laws etc… half of each ‘ethnic group’ need to agree.-thus no ethnic group has more power than the other. They are political equals. Also it should force political parties from both sides to join together and become Cypriot parties, so they both get over half of the vote in each ethnic vote in parliament.

So, going by your 20,000 figure, which is a good suggestion for individual constituency size, the TC population (assuming the majority of settlers are permitted to stay, which is the most likely outcome), if we assume the total population is around 800,000 people, of whom approximately 160,000 would be members of the TC community, this would mean a 40 seat house (with perhaps 1 seat each reserved for the Maronite, Latin and Armenia communities to give them a voice)... so 43 seats. Of these the TC community would have eight, with the remaining 32 allocated to the GC community. I would put a qualification on your requirement for half of each community to vote on laws... as it would be another recipe for deadlock if voting continued along ethnic lines. As I said before, I would foresee this as a joint chamber of Representatives, voting only on federal laws, limited in scope (at least initially). Given that the federal responsibilities would be so limited, it might encourage cross-community voting on certain issues, so hopefully the joint chamber would function as a development ground for the 'Cypriotisation' of government along non-ethnic lines.

The Senate should have two members from each ‘region’, one a TC and the other a GC.

I can see your point on this one, and you've obviously looked to the US model for the dual representative idea. I agree with this, although it wouldn't work for my own model. Your idea also requires that one member be a GC - wouldn't this possibly mean in ethnically homogenous areas that a GC would not represent the community? It just smacks a little of ethnic quotas again to me. The way I would see a senate working is pretty much how the House of Lords works in the UK, as a revising chamber, able to throw laws back at the House of Representatives to make changes and with the GC and TC senate members also functioning separately within each CS in a similar capacity when it comes to CS laws. In my concept it would follow the concept of joint sessions, along the same lines as the House of Representives. Then, to discuss CS state matters, the members of the Senate would form two separate chambers, following the same rules.

So, hopefully brother I've given you some thoughts on this... a little too detailed maybe, but what the heck, my mind needs some blue-skies thinking this morning, might wake me up a little. I guess that my concept of multi-level governments might be a bit confusing with:

1. Joint House of Representatives
2. GC CS Communal Chamber
3. TC CS Communal Chamber
4. Joint Senate
5. GC CS Senate
6. TC CS Senate
7. Federal President and VP

In addition to sub-levels such as councils and macro-level MEPs and whatnot, but it's something for others to chew on anyway.

[brother]

Thanks for your input cannedmoose and i have taken on a fair bit of your ideas but i will wait to see what others come up with and see if we can formulate a workable idea based on all the input recieved.

But i have really tried to make it fair as can be and at times where you have picked up on, sometimes there can be a little apartheid without intent and thats where good ideas are required to eliminate that problem.

[cannedmoose]

Thanks for your input cannedmoose and i have taken on a fair bit of your ideas but i will wait to see what others come up with and see if we can formulate a workable idea based on all the input recieved.

But i have really tried to make it fair as can be and at times where you have picked up on, sometimes there can be a little apartheid without intent and thats where good ideas are required to eliminate that problem.

We'll await further input with interest arkadaşım... insha'allah