Cyprus-Forum.com

[Dhavlos]

On voting rights, couldnt you have a small, capped number of GC representatives in the TC 'const. state', and vis-versa for TCs in the GC 'const. state'?

So it would be the same number of representatives, for both sides (e.g. 10% of the deputies) regardless of their proportion in the population? Please clarify for me what you are thinking.

no, have it in proportion of population.
i havent really thought this through, so dont bother about it.

I know this is going in circles, but i just dont like the idea of two 'zones/states'.

I think a lasting solution, if there was one unified cyprus, where in parliament, every decision reached should have at least 50% majorities in both communities so that both communities are guaranteed to benefit from it and there will not be any room for exploitation.

[Alexandros Lordos]

I see most TCs are voting No. It would be very useful feedback for me if I could have the reasons for this No, in order to improve the proposal.

[Alexandros Lordos]

Revised Residence / Voting Rights: There will be no limit to the number of Greek Cypriots who may choose to reside in the north

There has to be a limit, otherwise Turkish Cypriots will become a minority in their own state. TC's have to have gurantee of long term sovereignty of their own constituent state.

That's right. Maybe GC can hold the property and get the rent for it. Giving limitless residence rights to GC in north will make the restrictions on their voting rights meaningless after a while.

I can understand your concern - and I assume that this is the main reason this proposal has mostly been getting "No" from TCs so far, but you have to think what your alternative is. If you ARE going to enforce a quota on the number of GCs coming to the north, then you cannot at the same time ask that they shouldn't have voting rights - such a proposal would not be balanced. So what we would end up having, is 30% GC voters in the TC constituent state, whereas in the GC state TC voters would be only 5%. This would unbalance the "political equality of the solution" that TCs tend to seek, since the TC state politicians will have to satisfy GC voters whereas the GC state politicians will not be under a similar constraint. Are you sure that you prefer this over separate voting but without residence limits?

I suppose my proposal is leading to a situation where bizonality will gradually become irrelevant, and bicommunality will prevail. The state would eventually evolve into a bicommunal unitary state, similar to the 1960 constitution, where the two communities would enjoy political equality while the populations become totally mixed.

I would personally prefer that the number of GC's coming to north is limited but they also have a limited voting in north rather than none.

Well, what you are proposing could be done, it's not a total non-starter with GC public opinion, though it would be a "hard-sell". The only prerequiste is that there should be no timetable restrictions, (ie as many as wish to relocate within the permanent limit should be allowed to so do immediately), the GCs in the north should have autonomy over their cultural rights and education (not just those living in Karpas area), and there should be some provision for the official use of Greek on municipality and constituent state level, because you can't expect that these people should have to speak turkish before they can participate in the local politics.

[-mikkie2-]

I see most TCs are voting No. It would be very useful feedback for me if I could have the reasons for this No, in order to improve the proposal.

Improve? You are kidding aren't you?

You understand what I mean now Alex. No matter what 'proposal' you put forward, no matter how logical or sensible will inevitably be skewed towards what the TC's want at the expense of the GC's.

There is no point making such proposals, when in the end they get trashed in this way. It is obvious they don;t want to live with us, hence the minimal return of refugees and restrictions of residency they want to place on GC's. I am sorry to say it, but I really think you are wasting your time.

[Khan]

mikkie i dont understand you. What is so uncompromising about wanting to safeguard your political, economic and cultural status on the island?

[Piratis]

I would personally prefer that the number of GC's coming to north is limited but they also have a limited voting in north rather than none.

It is very interesting to see the hypocrisy and the double standards of some TCs that repeat over over again.

When it comes to the whole Cyprus, numbers do not matter. Their 18% is not a minority (in some wired way not even them can explain) and it should have the 50% of power.

When it comes to a possible state that they might have, numbers matter. They want to be the majority (suddenly they remembered this word, that up until now it meant nothing) and to the GC minority of their possible future state not only they don't give the 50% power, they don't even want to give equal personal voting rights!!

Sorry, but I will not bother with this kind of bargains, and I don't think they are useful in any way. We are talking about our human rights here, not about selling carpets.

What should be done is an agreement on universal principles first. By universal, it means that they should be applied equally in all cases in Cyprus, and all countries that want to be involved in the Cyprus solution should apply them as well. Only this way the double standards will end.

How about using things like the universal declaration of human rights (http://www.un.org/Overview/rights.html) and the EU principles as a start? Anybody disagrees with this? If yes why?

[gabaston]

Piratis


Please……………. you keep on about this democratic majority thing 82-18 .

Its simple if one party has the majority of power as you suggest then they can pass any law they see fit. This law can be to the detriment of the other party. We had this democracy with a veto in the sixties – re it didn’t work, it failed, it died, kapputski.

Democracy does not always work fairly in every given situation. Possibly what we could do with in Cyprus right now is a fair minded dictator with the wisdom of soloman.

The kind of democracy you advocate can only work with the will of all the people, and you haven’t got enough people to will that type of democracy.

[Alexandros Lordos]

I see most TCs are voting No. It would be very useful feedback for me if I could have the reasons for this No, in order to improve the proposal.

Improve? You are kidding aren't you?

You understand what I mean now Alex. No matter what 'proposal' you put forward, no matter how logical or sensible will inevitably be skewed towards what the TC's want at the expense of the GC's.

There is no point making such proposals, when in the end they get trashed in this way. It is obvious they don;t want to live with us, hence the minimal return of refugees and restrictions of residency they want to place on GC's. I am sorry to say it, but I really think you are wasting your time.

Hey Mikkie2, take it easy

Not every change that the TCs may want is necessarily at the expense of GCs, just like not every change that the GCs may want is necessarily at the expense of TCs.

For instance, in the example of residence rights, if TCs really feel more comfortable with a permanent limit + voting rights rather than with No permanent limit + separate voting, then their gain is the sense of security (that they remain in control of the CS) and our gain is the moderating influence that GC voters in the north will have. Of course, if the TCs want both a permanent limit and separate voting, then it starts becoming ridiculous, but I have not yet heard anyone express such an extreme and one-sided suggestion.

I am still waiting to hear from our TC friends why they are rejecting this proposal, and which points they would like to see being handled in a different way.

[Piratis]

Its simple if one party has the majority of power as you suggest then they can pass any law they see fit. This law can be to the detriment of the other party. We had this democracy with a veto in the sixties – re it didn’t work, it failed, it died, kapputski.

What we had in the 60s was not good enough, maybe thats one of the big reasons why it didn't work. The TCs were given 30% governmental jobs, which the government was not able to fulfill and in retaliation the TCs blocked the budget. This had a result the proposal for the 13 points and it went from there.

If they ever let Cyprus to have a normal system just like the other democratic countries in the world it will work just fine here also. We are in 2005, not 1960.

The kind of democracy you advocate can only work with the will of all the people, and you haven’t got enough people to will that type of democracy.

Most people want democracy, apart from those that benefit by not having one because they get way more power than they would get if democracy existed.

[detailer]

Well, what you are proposing could be done, it's not a total non-starter with GC public opinion, though it would be a "hard-sell". The only prerequiste is that there should be no timetable restrictions, (ie as many as wish to relocate within the permanent limit should be allowed to so do immediately), the GCs in the north should have autonomy over their cultural rights and education (not just those living in Karpas area), and there should be some provision for the official use of Greek on municipality and constituent state level, because you can't expect that these people should have to speak turkish before they can participate in the local politics.

Ok I couldnt see the language etc. problems behind my proposal. Again greek can be used in the formal documentation of TC state, no problem for me. Another solution would be to use English as a complementary to Turkish.

Personally, I would not have any problems with greeks having cultural autonomy either in northern state.

By the way, I really liked your cross voting suggestion for more co-operation.

Piratis,

I provided another way of compromise, why do you think that everything a TC proposes is against GC human rights.

If GC becomes majority in North, their lack of voting in the northern state will be riduculous after a while and I am sure this will be a matter of bomb ready to explode.

Instead of that, I am suggesting that there would be an upper limit for GC to stay in North ( If Northern state is %28, limit would be %40, if %25 %30 for example). In this way, TC will know that they would no lose the majority in North and GC will the right to have an impact where they live. This will also provide some stronger cooperation between TC and GC and will work like a "laboratory" environment to show if TC and GC can get well in an "unified" state. This can sort out trust problems imo.