Cyprus-Forum.com

[insan]

Nikitas, can u please interprete the below quoted explanation?

In 1990 a major development was an initiative by the Secretary-General to provide a more elaborate definition of the concept of bi-zonality in his 8 March 1990 report to the Council. In it he also raised the concept of political equality. (The report was subsequently endorsed by the Council in resolution 716 of 11 October 1991.) It said:

“The political equality of the two communities in and the bi-communal nature of the federation need to be acknowledged. While political equality does not mean equal numerical participation in all federal government branches and administration, it should be reflected inter alia in various ways: in the requirement that the federal constitution of the State of Cyprus be approved or amended with the concurrence of both communities; in the effective participation of both communities in all organs and decisions of the federal Government in safeguards to ensure that the federal Government will not be empowered to adopt any measures against the interests of one community; and in the equality and identical powers and functions of the two federated States.” “The bi-zonality of the federation should be clearly brought out by the fact that each federated State will be administered by one community which will be firmly guaranteed a clear majority of the population and of the land ownership in its area.” (S/21183, Annex I)

4.3 . Bi-zonality and political equality revisited

In 1992, Secretary-General Boutros Boutros-Ghali introduced a new “Set of Ideas” for a draft settlement, further expanding the previous concepts and proposing a secular, bi-zonal, bi-communal federal republic composed of two politically equal states, to be submitted to both communities for referendum (S/23780). The plan defined the relationship between Greek and Turkish Cypriots as not one of majority and minority, but rather one of two communities in the state of Cyprus. The concept of political equality picked up the idea endorsed by the Council in resolution 716. Bi-zonality would be reflected in the fact that each state in the federation would exercise jurisdiction over a clear majority of the population and of land ownership in its area. The plan included a description of the powers and functions of the federal government, and provided for the demilitarisation of the island and the upholding of the treaty of guarantee and of alliance. The plan did not include measures on territorial adjustment or displaced persons. The Council endorsed the plan in resolution 750 of 10 April 1992. However, the 1992 talks were not successful.

[url]http://www.securitycouncilreport.org/site/c.glKWLeMTIsG/b.4474149/k.DEB5/Special_Research_Report_No_3brCyprus_New_hope_after_45_years_on_the_Security_Council_agendabr4_September_2008.htm[/url]


Nikitas, plz enlighten us; how TCs and Turks misinterpreted the political equality concept.

[Hermes]

The bi-zonalityof the federation should be clearlybrought out by the fact that each federated State will be administered by one community which will be firmly guaranteed a clear majority of the population and of the land ownership in its area.” (S/21183, Annex I)

How do you propose to prevent Greek and Turkish Cypriots from moving and settling in both areas? How do you square this with the established property rights of the exiled owners? Do you propose to ban Greek Cypriots from purchasing property in the north but not any one else from the EU? What do you think will happen when any such restrictions on the freedom of movement are challenged in the EU courts? Do you think G/Cs will accept a plan which denies them such rights as enjoyed by fellow citizens in the EU?

Answers on a postcard please...

[Viewpoint]

freedom of move ment and settlement cannot be stopped but permanent residence for voting purposes can there is a big difference. As the GCs claim Cyprus is to small to divide so political voting can be staged in a country wide melting pot whereby the top GC and TC candidates will be voted into serve the country in both the lower and upper houses.

[Nikitas]

this is where the idiocies of the past, and they were idiocies because they veered away from principles that the UN has in its own charter and which are also enacted in the European Convention of Human Rights to which TUrkey, the UK, Greece and Cyprus all belong.

Now add the EU acquis and the idiocy is complete. WHile belonging to the EU the BASIS of which is the freedom ov movement and establishemt, we Cypriots are seeking limits on these principle but only towards each other, not against all EU nationals!!!! Now that is major idiocy!!!!

Look at this example- a company, what they call a Societe Anonyme in Europe, cannot be forced to divulge the names of its shareholders. Greece was fined recently because it passed a law trying to deviate from this principle.

Such a S.A. company buys a major chunk of land in Cyprus. It just so happens that all shareholders are TCs and the land is in Limassol. Now what?

And how is this geographic separation of the two communities enforced in the future and forever? This is not theory, this is practice. If a settlement is reached there will be a major rebuilding of Varosha with the majority of construction jobs going to TCs. How do you exclude TCs from moving to areas around Varosha so they can be near their work, when some of the available housing might be in nearby Derynia or Larnaca. Is someone going to be policing every house to make sure people do not stay more than X number of nights?

These technical fixes do not work with human behavior. It would be much simpler to leave the political rights, ie voting for national and local government, in the two constituent states and leave out the rest of the nonsense. With a reasonable territorial arrangement most GCs can be under GC administration, and all TCs will be under TC administration. From then on the movement of the population cannot be controlled. People go to where jobs are. But their political rights remain attached to their constituent state.

[insan]

The bi-zonalityof the federation should be clearlybrought out by the fact that each federated State will be administered by one community which will be firmly guaranteed a clear majority of the population and of the land ownership in its area.” (S/21183, Annex I)

How do you propose to prevent Greek and Turkish Cypriots from moving and settling in both areas? How do you square this with the established property rights of the exiled owners? Do you propose to ban Greek Cypriots from purchasing property in the north but not any one else from the EU? What do you think will happen when any such restrictions on the freedom of movement are challenged in the EU courts? Do you think G/Cs will accept a plan which denies them such rights as enjoyed by fellow citizens in the EU?

I many times stated that; I'm personally not against the return of GC refugees, settlement/property purchase of non-refugee GCs and foreign nationals in TC constituent state as long as it is well organised and doesn't lead to economic, social, political and psychological uneasiness between the people of 2 communities. I even support the idea of granting "political equality" to the GC residents(citizens) of TC constituent state; when their proportion reaches, say; 1/4+ of TC residents(citizens) of TC constituent state.

[Nikitas]

Interesting case involving discrimination is the one involving Greek hunting licenses. Greece claimed that it is too small to accept hunters from other EU nations and limited licenses to Greeks and to permanent non Greek residents.

This regulation was rejected by the EU becaue it discriminated against non Greek and non resident EU nationals. Greece was forced to change the rules and bring in a test of competence available to all applicant and on top of that they have to provide interpreters for non Greek speakers!

The basis of the EU is equality among all EU nationals. Deviations from the rule can be temporary, but they cannot be permanent.

Considering that the EU is a one huge quari federation with a great deal of practical experience in this field, the less we deviate from its rules the easier it will be in the long run.

[Nikitas]

Insan, it might be more practical and easier to implement the total attachment of political rights to each constituetn state than allow partial movement of these rights to the state of domicile. Then people will know what is what, and how to behave. In addition to simplicity there is the issue of security and avoidance of any new minority issues arising. TCs will be in political control of their constituent state and GCs of theirs, but will have rights of residence all over the island and that is where the Federal government will come and oversee that the treatment of all citizens is fair and non discriminatory.

I am a great believer in simple arrangements. They are far less likely to go wrong.

[Hermes]

freedom of move ment and settlement cannot be stopped but permanent residence for voting purposes can there is a big difference. As the GCs claim Cyprus is to small to divide so political voting can be staged in a country wide melting pot whereby the top GC and TC candidates will be voted into serve the country in both the lower and upper houses.

What do you mean "permanent residence for voting purposes" can be stopped?

[Viewpoint]

freedom of move ment and settlement cannot be stopped but permanent residence for voting purposes can there is a big difference. As the GCs claim Cyprus is to small to divide so political voting can be staged in a country wide melting pot whereby the top GC and TC candidates will be voted into serve the country in both the lower and upper houses.

What do you mean "permanent residence for voting purposes" can be stopped?

Do we agree people should be able to move and settle in which ever state they want?

When voting for political representation everyone all over the island will vote for the candidates they wish GCs and TCs....the top candidates with the most votes go forward to represent us in government in both houses...the first 75 GCs and 35 TCs with a balance of voting to pass bills...50% of each state in the lower house and 3 out of 5 upper house for each state.

[insan]

The whole problem stems from the fact that there is no such thing as “politically equal communities” in the world!

You’re all welcome to search the Internet and prove me wrong. Whoever heard of a community-based government running a country in the 21st century?

It’s a load of rubbish manufactured by some to appease Turkey and only applicable to Cyprus... how convenient!

Perhaps, it would have been more meaningful if it was defined as "2 politically equal nationalities" and thus; base the solution on a multi-national, multi-cultural, bi-zonal federative state?

Insan it is pointless after negotiating for 35 years towards a federal system only to find out on whim Muhtar X can drop the word federal as and when he pleases. Meaningful talks have ended. Let us face reality and prepare for other eventualities.
The real question for us TCs from now on is do we wish for annexation with Turkey or Independence with or without EU. That is now a more worth wile discussion point as far as I am concerned. The RoC is like a lame karpaz eshek unable to stand, it is only a matter of time before somebody puts it out of its misery like in the old western films. GCs can have their GRoC and we will have what ever we chose with the help of our mother as it were.

If u ask my personal opinion re Fredo, I like the political stance of many EU states which liberal, lterate, universal minded, honest politicians r dominant but on the other hand seeing the racist, discriminatory, prejudiced, selfish, christian-oriented, mealy-mouthed political stance of some EU states and some political groups of EU urge me be away from EU and get closer to non EU member states; especially the Turkic states.

There r 6 independent Turkic states, why not one more? Time is approaching fast to begin officially talking about partition of Cyprus.