Cyprus-Forum.com

[brother]

‘They have it all wrong’
By Simon Bahceli


British company speaks out over five new European arrest warrants for illegal development
SHAREHOLDERS in Levantine Property Ltd, a Kyrenia-based land development company that has been accused of planning to build on occupied Greek Cypriot lands in Famagusta, say they are innocent of any wrongdoing.

The denial came after news broke yesterday that lawyer Christodoulos Taramoundas would be applying for European arrest warrants for the arrest of five of the company’s shareholders. The lawyer claims that Levantine Property was planning to build on his Greek Cypriot client’s lands in Famagusta.

The threat to issue the warrants comes in the wake of five others reportedly issued against several Britons and four Turkish Cypriots over the past two weeks.

But Levantine’s Managing Director Ian Gordon was adamant yesterday that the warrants, if issued, would be targeting the wrong people.

“They are referring to land in Famagusta. We don’t own any land there,” he told the Cyprus Mail.
Gordon, a retired senior Scotland Yard detective, hinted, however, that confusion over the ownership of the land could stem from properties advertised on the company website.

“Although we advertise a development in Famagusta, the land belongs to a Turkish Cypriot,” he said.

Gordon added that most of Levantine’s projects to date had been focused on Turkish Cypriot rather than Greek Cypriot properties. Indeed, Levantine’s biggest project to date was on Turkish Cypriot-owned land in the village of Templos, near Kyrenia.

However, when asked if the land on which a project the company was carrying out in Karavas, west of Kyrenia, was Greek or Turkish Cypriot, Gordon conceded the land was originally Greek Cypriot, but that it had been given to a Turkish Cypriot as compensation for land lost in the south.
“As far as we are concerned, the land in Alsacak [Karavas] belonged to a Turkish Cypriot who we bought it from,” he said.

All five shareholders of Levantine stand to be targeted in the latest action by Greek Cypriots against those in the north exploiting their properties in their absence.

A warrant has even been issued for the arrest of Michael Hunt, the company’s first director who died several months ago.

Ian Smith, an estate agent who holds a 30 per cent shareholder in Levantine, criticised the government yesterday for allowing individuals to bring legal proceedings against those in the north by saying, “I think they should be concentrating on building bridges, and not doing things like this.”

He added his belief that the legal action was a politically move designed to “push the TRNC into taking action that hasn’t been properly thought out”.

Smith said he had received information that the arrest warrants against the five were accompanied by court summonses and that he and his colleagues would be seeking legal advice from their lawyers and EUPRO, a recently-formed body made up of non-Cypriots seeking to defend the ownership rights of foreigners living in Greek Cypriot properties in the north.

One of EUPRO’s founders Donald Crawford told the Cyprus Mail yesterday he believed Greek Cypriots had virtually no chance of getting the warrants enacted in the UK, insisting that living in a Greek Cypriot property in north Cyprus was not considered a crime as far as the EU was concerned.

“There are 19 crimes listed in the EU council’s directive on the European arrest warrant, and living in a Greek Cypriot house is not one of them,” Crawford said, adding that EU harmonisation of arrest warrants was aimed at “serious crime, such as murder, terrorism and drug trafficking”.
He said also that a warrant could not be enforced by a country unless the reason for the warrant was considered as a crime in the country where the alleged crime had been committed. He claimed an English court would therefore find itself unable to prosecute people for “unlawful use” of property on behalf of Greek Cypriot plaintiffs because Greek Cypriot rule did not extend to the north.

Crawford clearly believes EUPRO stand in good stead to defeat Greek Cypriot legal action if and when British police are ever forced to implement EU arrest warrants. EUPRO has, Crawford, says, employed top British law firm Addleshaw – Goddard, which he says “deals with one third of top FT companies” and “employs more QCs than you can count”.

He added: “It is extremely expensive, but we are building a million-pound war chest. Money is not an issue”.

Crawford further goaded the government by saying: “At first we though the Greek Cypriots were smart. But in fact they are our greatest ally. By attacking Turkish Cypriots [issuing EU arrest warrants against four of them], they simply united the whole country against them. Now money is pouring in. What a bad move.”

[Kifeas]

Brother, do you accept or aknowledge that the properties in the north do not legally belong to the GCs?

[brother]

[quote]Brother, do you accept or aknowledge that the properties in the north do not legally belong to the GCs?

[quote]

Kifeas i am confused, what do you mean that they do not belong to GC?

[Kifeas]

Brother, do you accept or aknowledge that the properties in the north do not legally belong to the GCs?

Kifeas i am confused, what do you mean that they do not belong to GC?

I ask you to tell me if the properties that GCs left behind in the north, do not any longer belong to them. In other words, if you consider that they are not the owners of these properties any more.

What you do not understand from the above question?

[cannedmoose]

Kifeas, the way your question was phrased in English made it seem that you think properties in the north are no longer owned by GCs, hence Brother's confusion...

[Murtaza]

Brother, do you accept or aknowledge that the properties in the north do not legally belong to the GCs?

Kifeas i am confused, what do you mean that they do not belong to GC?

I ask you to tell me if the properties that GCs left behind in the north, do not any longer belong to them. In other words, if you consider that they are not the owners of these properties any more.

What you do not understand from the above question?

They are Kifeas. Why are you asking this question?
Human's assets are not a subject to politics.

[detailer]

I would rather say they "legally" belong to GC.

[Kifeas]

Kifeas, the way your question was phrased in English made it seem that you think properties in the north are no longer owned by GCs, hence Brother's confusion...

It was a perfectly straightforward question. Technically it can even be answered with a "yes" or "no".
Anyhow, I believe the clarification I made later doesn't live the slightest doubt as to what my question was.

I am still waiting for his straightforward answer.

[Kifeas]

They are Kifeas. Why are you asking this question?
Human's assets are not a subject to politics.

Thanks Murtaza!
From where do you know this perfectly correct assumption?

[Kifeas]

I would rather say they "legally" belong to GC.

When you put something in quotations, it means you do not sincerely accept the validity of the term.

Why then the “legally” in quotations?

Do they legally belong to them or not?