Cyprus-Forum.com

[DT.]

Pantheman,
The explanation :

Part One - Precisely the because TRNC is not recognised then the principle is that the recognised authority must ensure that there is an effective local remedy. The recognised authority in northern Cyprus is Turkey i.e, as an occupying power. The international laws of occupation require the continued administration of law during the period of occupation.

Part Two - Cases brought before the ECHR must be against a particular respondent (in ECHR typically a state). In this case GC property claimants made claims against a Turkey (as the effective administrative authority over TRNC).


Part Three - ECHR rulings demanded that property cases be resolved at the local level (a standard principle in international law), and should only be referred to ECHR in case of procedural or substantive failure/inadequacies, or if the local remedy was ineffective in some significant way. The result of these rulings was that the TRNC, regarded by Turkey as the effective administration, were obliged to establish the Property Commission as the effective local remedy.

Part Four - The workings of the PC are under review by the ECHR to see whether or not the PC is actually and effective local remedy.


It seems to me that Turkey has a bigger interest in seeing the PC working effectively; the TRNC has an interest in it working effectively; and of course claimants have an interest in seeing it work properly (otherwise they have to take the long schlep through the ECHR, both time consuming and extremely costly)[/b]

There is an international Law of Occupation?

Is there a school for it as well?

[CopperLine]

DT
Yes there is international law of occupation. It derives mainly from the laws of war, but also from constitutional law and various civil law traditions.

It is not a school of thought, it is a body of positive law which like other international law is the product of treaty, custom and opinion.

Some examples, what law should/did operate in Iraq post March 2003 ? What law applied in Germany post May 1945 ? What law applied in Japan post August 1945 ? What law applies in the West Bank and Gaza, or in Kashmir ? Or .... in northern Cyprus ?

[Paphitis]

Court's Decision in English:-
http://cmiskp.echr.coe.int/tkp197/view. ... n=hudoc-en

If we don't get an acceptable solution with the forthcoming talks I believe we should sue the arse off Turkey for what it has done to Cyprus, and yes VP the displaced TCs can sue the ROC if they want to but guess who will come out on top. The ROC should publish guidelines showing GCs how to approach the ECHR, they could even provide lawyers. Once Turkey starts losing case after case and loads of cash it may decide to join the civilised world and realise that you can't fuck up other peoples' lives the way they have in Cyprus

Go ahead its every refugees right to go to court, TCs have started to apply as well, so the "RoC" will have to explain why they will not pay up until a solution is found but expect the other side of the dispute to cough up, double standards yet again one for GCs another for TCs, true to form. The positive side of these court cases will be that both sides will be forced to move on certain issues, maybe the current talks are related to actions taken by individuals who have taken to solving their probelsm themselves as waiting 34 years for their leaders with no results is enough.

How the hell are the TCs going to take the RoC to court? As far as I know the TCs are welcome to claim back their property. All they have to do is live in the Roc for 6 months. The reason for this is to avoid TCs double dipping by enjoying a stolen refugee property in the North.

It is Turkey that invaded Cyprus and created the illegal entity of "trnc". It is the GCs which are prevented from claiming their property in the"trnc". Whereas the TCs are free to obtain citizenship, vote, work, buy property, start an enterprise etc etc. So I ask again, how the hell are the TCs going to sue the RoC which is internationally recognised and does not deny the TCs any rights.

This just does not make any sense. Sounds like fantasy land to me.

BTW, I second the request for links to this rather eccentric claim. So whenever you are ready, please post some links.

You to will have to wait for these cases to come to fruition, you cannot use peoples land and then tell them to wait for a solution to be compensated neither can you force the people you claim are your citizens to live anywhere for 6 months, this is illegal and will get blown to pieces by the ECHR. You have to give all the citizens all their rights you cannot discriminate, you can ask for all the necessary domcumentary proof but forcing your citizens to live in a certain part of the country before allowing them their property is ridiculous and the "RoC" will be dancing a merry dance in front of the ECHR being told to pay compensation immediately and return of property.

But they are free to claim their property right now. All they have to do is prove that they do not benefit from the use of stolen GC land.

So I do not beleive there are any grounds here for legal actions.

But since you are saying that legal action is imminent, I would beleive you if YOU or anyone else posts a link to prove your assertion.

[DT.]

DT
Yes there is international law of occupation. It derives mainly from the laws of war, but also from constitutional law and various civil law traditions.

It is not a school of thought, it is a body of positive law which like other international law is the product of treaty, custom and opinion.

Some examples, what law should/did operate in Iraq post March 2003 ? What law applied in Germany post May 1945 ? What law applied in Japan post August 1945 ? What law applies in the West Bank and Gaza, or in Kashmir ? Or .... in northern Cyprus ?

so by Turkey not applying occupation law in the north on the inhabitants, it is in violation of international occupation law?

[Viewpoint]

Court's Decision in English:-
http://cmiskp.echr.coe.int/tkp197/view. ... n=hudoc-en

If we don't get an acceptable solution with the forthcoming talks I believe we should sue the arse off Turkey for what it has done to Cyprus, and yes VP the displaced TCs can sue the ROC if they want to but guess who will come out on top. The ROC should publish guidelines showing GCs how to approach the ECHR, they could even provide lawyers. Once Turkey starts losing case after case and loads of cash it may decide to join the civilised world and realise that you can't fuck up other peoples' lives the way they have in Cyprus

Go ahead its every refugees right to go to court, TCs have started to apply as well, so the "RoC" will have to explain why they will not pay up until a solution is found but expect the other side of the dispute to cough up, double standards yet again one for GCs another for TCs, true to form. The positive side of these court cases will be that both sides will be forced to move on certain issues, maybe the current talks are related to actions taken by individuals who have taken to solving their probelsm themselves as waiting 34 years for their leaders with no results is enough.

How the hell are the TCs going to take the RoC to court? As far as I know the TCs are welcome to claim back their property. All they have to do is live in the Roc for 6 months. The reason for this is to avoid TCs double dipping by enjoying a stolen refugee property in the North.

It is Turkey that invaded Cyprus and created the illegal entity of "trnc". It is the GCs which are prevented from claiming their property in the"trnc". Whereas the TCs are free to obtain citizenship, vote, work, buy property, start an enterprise etc etc. So I ask again, how the hell are the TCs going to sue the RoC which is internationally recognised and does not deny the TCs any rights.

This just does not make any sense. Sounds like fantasy land to me.

BTW, I second the request for links to this rather eccentric claim. So whenever you are ready, please post some links.

You to will have to wait for these cases to come to fruition, you cannot use peoples land and then tell them to wait for a solution to be compensated neither can you force the people you claim are your citizens to live anywhere for 6 months, this is illegal and will get blown to pieces by the ECHR. You have to give all the citizens all their rights you cannot discriminate, you can ask for all the necessary domcumentary proof but forcing your citizens to live in a certain part of the country before allowing them their property is ridiculous and the "RoC" will be dancing a merry dance in front of the ECHR being told to pay compensation immediately and return of property.

But they are free to claim their property right now. All they have to do is prove that they do benefit from the use of stolen GC land.

So I do not beleive there are any grounds here for legal actions.

But since you are saying that legal action is imminent, I would beleive you if YOU or anyone else posts a link to prove your assertion.

Why is it so diffcult for you to understand these cases have only been brought about by TCs and are in the early stages of being formed and lodged to the ECHR. The fact that you do not pay for land used by the "RoC" and do not give back people properties unless they reside in the "RoC" and have to go through GC courts to gain justice will come under scrutiny, the discriminaiton between citizens will also be exposed to all of the EU and world, good luck in the dock.

[boomerang]

Links?

[Paphitis]

Court's Decision in English:-
http://cmiskp.echr.coe.int/tkp197/view. ... n=hudoc-en

If we don't get an acceptable solution with the forthcoming talks I believe we should sue the arse off Turkey for what it has done to Cyprus, and yes VP the displaced TCs can sue the ROC if they want to but guess who will come out on top. The ROC should publish guidelines showing GCs how to approach the ECHR, they could even provide lawyers. Once Turkey starts losing case after case and loads of cash it may decide to join the civilised world and realise that you can't fuck up other peoples' lives the way they have in Cyprus

Go ahead its every refugees right to go to court, TCs have started to apply as well, so the "RoC" will have to explain why they will not pay up until a solution is found but expect the other side of the dispute to cough up, double standards yet again one for GCs another for TCs, true to form. The positive side of these court cases will be that both sides will be forced to move on certain issues, maybe the current talks are related to actions taken by individuals who have taken to solving their probelsm themselves as waiting 34 years for their leaders with no results is enough.

How the hell are the TCs going to take the RoC to court? As far as I know the TCs are welcome to claim back their property. All they have to do is live in the Roc for 6 months. The reason for this is to avoid TCs double dipping by enjoying a stolen refugee property in the North.

It is Turkey that invaded Cyprus and created the illegal entity of "trnc". It is the GCs which are prevented from claiming their property in the"trnc". Whereas the TCs are free to obtain citizenship, vote, work, buy property, start an enterprise etc etc. So I ask again, how the hell are the TCs going to sue the RoC which is internationally recognised and does not deny the TCs any rights.

This just does not make any sense. Sounds like fantasy land to me.

BTW, I second the request for links to this rather eccentric claim. So whenever you are ready, please post some links.

You to will have to wait for these cases to come to fruition, you cannot use peoples land and then tell them to wait for a solution to be compensated neither can you force the people you claim are your citizens to live anywhere for 6 months, this is illegal and will get blown to pieces by the ECHR. You have to give all the citizens all their rights you cannot discriminate, you can ask for all the necessary domcumentary proof but forcing your citizens to live in a certain part of the country before allowing them their property is ridiculous and the "RoC" will be dancing a merry dance in front of the ECHR being told to pay compensation immediately and return of property.

But they are free to claim their property right now. All they have to do is prove that they do benefit from the use of stolen GC land.

So I do not beleive there are any grounds here for legal actions.

But since you are saying that legal action is imminent, I would beleive you if YOU or anyone else posts a link to prove your assertion.

Why is it so diffcult for you to understand these cases have only been brought about by TCs and are in the early stages of being formed and lodged to the ECHR. The fact that you do not pay for land used by the "RoC" and do not give back people properties unless they reside in the "RoC" and have to go through GC courts to gain justice will come under scrutiny, the discriminaiton between citizens will also be exposed to all of the EU and world, good luck in the dock.

So what do you suggest. The RoC just hand over their properties, whilst at the same time those TCs are breaking RoC law by residing in stolen GC property. Get a grip.

The TCs are welcome to have their property back after they have proven no illegal ownership of stolen GC property. Sounds pretty simple. Another fact, the RoC provides legal avenues for TCs claiming their property. As a result, the TC applicants to the ECHR will be told to simply apply to the RoC and claim their property. Sounds pretty good to me.

[CopperLine]

DT
Broadly speaking, yes, that's the argument. That then goes to the heart of the question of recognition :

i. Turkey intervened - for whatever reason, for whatever motive, with whatever justification - and militarily occupies a territory. During the period of occupation, occupation law must apply (in accordance with international law).

ii. Between 1974 and 1983 occupation law, Turkey claims was in operation and Turkey claims to have been compliant with it.


iii. With the declaration of TRNC Turkey basically claimed that occupation law from the on no longer applied (because now TRNC was a sovereign state). Thus from 1983 until today TRNC law applies. Of course that no other state recognised TRNC is well known, and the basic position of other states, including RoC, is that occupation law should still be applied and upheld by the occupying power.

iv. Given the basic disagreement on recognition and therefore the application of which body of law, there is the present danger (and some people claim, wrongly in my view) that TRNC is law-less. It is not lawless, and the ECHR is basically saying that whatever the law is in northern Cyprus - occupation, Turkish, TRNC, RoC, English colonial, or whatever else - the effective administration has an obligation to uphold human rights. How is it - TRNC, or really Turkey - going to meet this obligation in respect of the property question ? Answer, the Property Commission

[boomerang]

Do you actually think that the rest of the world is stupid copperline?...

[CopperLine]

No Paphitis you are quite mistaken when you write :

The TCs are welcome to have their property back after they have proven no illegal ownership of stolen GC property.

A claimant does not have to prove the innocence of fellow community members before seeking remedy. This would be an absurd requirement which would cripple any legal system which rested on such a procedure.

For example, I'm a TC from Limmasol who wants to claim back my land. You are saying that I have to show that other TCs who I have never met nor have any knowledge of did not occupy stolen land before I can recover my land. For example, you are a GC from Kyrenia, who wants to claim back you land. You are saying that you have to show that other GCs who you have never met nor have any knowledge of did not occupy my land in Limmasol before you can recover your land. Holy moly !