Cyprus-Forum.com

[Gasman]

eg. they have taken insufficient precautions to ensure against providing banking facilities to those benefiting from infringement of property rights.

Well how far would you want to take this? I already mentioned huge Insurance companies who insure said properties.

How about the Utility Companies who provide water, electricity, etc. to 'those benefiting from infringement of property rights'?

How about the TCs who work for such companies?

Your seeming to want to reduce to abject poverty and starve everyone over there to death certainly doesn't make it sound as if YOU would ever want to, or expect to live in Harmony with TCs any time in the future.

You are tying this to infringement of property rights - what help would it be to those who consider their rights have been infringed to know that whoever 'infringed' them had had to switch to another Bank? How will that assist them with property claims?

[Malapapa]

I also cannot see what satisfaction would be gained if by some miracle you stopped them operating over there. Plenty of other banks for people to choose from. (Or are you dreaming of an outcome where all the head honchos and employees of the Bank would be sent to prison and all the investors lose their money? Or what?)

Read this from the LA Times, 25 November 1986...

http://articles.latimes.com/1986-11-25/ ... uth-africa

[Malapapa]

Your seeming to want to reduce to abject poverty and starve everyone over there to death certainly doesn't make it sound as if YOU would ever want to, or expect to live in Harmony with TCs any time in the future.

It's likely many poor blacks were adversely affected - in the short term - by the withdrawal of Barclays and other multi-nationals from South Africa. I hope you're not arguing that it wasn't a worthy strategy to force Barclays into pulling out back then.

[Gasman]

The link you gave said nothing about 'illegality' that I could see. Mentioning declining profits and the anti-apartheid demos.

I don't see any major demos in Cyprus objecting to HSBC.

And, unlike Oracle, I don't agree that what we have here is 'apartheid' the same as it was in SA.

Although declining profits and other business considerations were involved in Barclays' decision to pull out--the largest withdrawal yet in dollar terms--Ball told newsmen that "political factors," including anti-apartheid protests in Britain and the new American economic sanctions on South Africa, "have precipitated this transaction."

At a news conference in London on Monday, Barclays Chairman Timothy Bevan acknowledged that the anti-apartheid campaign has played a role in the bank's pullout.

[Malapapa]

The link you gave said nothing about 'illegality'

It depends whether you believe profiting from the Apartheid regime was legal or not. It was certainly immoral. And it would probably be deemed illegal in 2010, if not 1986.

I don't see any major demos in Cyprus objecting to HSBC.

I'm not sure HSBC has much of presence in the free areas (if any), otherwise perhaps there would be objections. Do you think free Cypriots approve of HSBC operating in the north of Cyprus potentially providing banking services to carpetbaggers and others benefiting from human rights violations, without the permission of the Central Bank? Because I certainly don't.

And, unlike Oracle, I don't agree that what we have here is 'apartheid' the same as it was in SA.

Perhaps not, but it's possible HSBC's operations in the north can be brought to task in the same way that Barclays' activities in South Africa were brought to task. And that's what's happening here.

[Gasman]

Mala - I repeat, despite your interpretation and the claim of it being 'immoral', the link you gave said nothing about 'illegality'.

But, back to HSBC. I found this on the 'Embargoed' website:

One of the most recent examples of the Greek Cypriot administration's aggressive campaign to preserve the embargoes has been directed against global banking giant HSBC following the launch of its operations in North Cyprus. HSBC became the first major foreign bank to open branches in the North when it took over Turkish bank Demirbank in 2002.

As soon as the details of HSBC's involvement in North Cyprus was made public, the Greek Cypriot authorities began to campaign for their withdrawal. A senior manager from the Greek Cypriot Central Bank went to London to pressure the British Financial Services Authority to stop HSBC's operations in the North. According to a report in the Greek Cypriot paper The Cyprus Weekly on 11 January 2002, the Greek Cypriot Finance Minister Mr. Takis Clerides issued threats and stated that, 'If after this, more needs to be done, we will do what it takes and act accordingly'.

Well, not sure what 'do what it takes' or 'act accordingly' meant, but that was EIGHT YEARS AGO! So, what have they been doing for the past eight years? They certainly haven't managed to stop HSBC operating there have they? Do you think it has taken them that long to seek advice?

[Malapapa]

Mala - I repeat, despite your interpretation and the claim of it being 'immoral', the link you gave said nothing about 'illegality'.

What is your point exactly? Should Barclays not have been hounded out of South Africa? Don't you believe multi-nationals, profiting from the Apartheid regime, were acting immorally? (if not illegally at the time?)

But, back to HSBC. I found this on the 'Embargoed' website:

One of the most recent examples of the Greek Cypriot administration's aggressive campaign to preserve the embargoes has been directed against global banking giant HSBC following the launch of its operations in North Cyprus. HSBC became the first major foreign bank to open branches in the North when it took over Turkish bank Demirbank in 2002.

As soon as the details of HSBC's involvement in North Cyprus was made public, the Greek Cypriot authorities began to campaign for their withdrawal. A senior manager from the Greek Cypriot Central Bank went to London to pressure the British Financial Services Authority to stop HSBC's operations in the North. According to a report in the Greek Cypriot paper The Cyprus Weekly on 11 January 2002, the Greek Cypriot Finance Minister Mr. Takis Clerides issued threats and stated that, 'If after this, more needs to be done, we will do what it takes and act accordingly'.

Well, not sure what 'do what it takes' or 'act accordingly' meant, but that was EIGHT YEARS AGO! So, what have they been doing for the past eight years?

I'm not in a position to answer that as I represent neither the Cypriot government nor the Central Bank. Of course, ultimately, Barclays was pressured into withdrawing its operations from South Africa by people (in this case, UK students) rather than by any government.

They certainly haven't managed to stop HSBC operating there have they?

Indeed not. Governments can be pretty ineffective sometimes, can't they? Especially when it comes to keeping banks in check.

Do you think it has taken them that long to seek advice?

I've absolutely no idea. Please note however, the year 2002 was before Cyprus's EU accession and, more importantly, before the monumental ECJ ruling on the Orams.

What is your problem about HSBC? Are you a shareholder? Do you work for them?

I'm a concerned HSBC customer.

[Gasman]

What is your problem about HSBC? Are you a shareholder? Do you work for them?

No on both counts. And I don't have 'a problem'. You seem to be the one with a problem concerning them.

If you feel they are acting 'immorally' and maybe 'illegally', why haven't you stopped dealing with them?

I am just expressing my opinion and my opinion is that you won't get far with your complaint.

Because it seems that your Govt has already tried it and either got nowhere or given up (despite them saying they would do whatever it takes).

Let's face it - despite the embargoes on the TRNC, trade with them has increased every year. I cannot see any powers that be deciding that the year in which they are (allegedly) trying to reach an amicable 'solution' with them being the year in which they start falling out of their pram about this HSBC business, not when they've had plenty of time to do their worst up until now and seemingly haven't bothered.

Embargoes will presumably be lifted once a solution is agreed upon (or do you think that is not even a remote possibility?) Why would they press for them to be enforced at the same time as purporting to be working for a solution to have them lifted?

And, you say Cyprus was not in the EU in 2002 - that's true, but they've been in it for more than five years since then. I'm not sure what difference them being in the EU makes to the original RoC complaint anyway. Unless there are different grounds for complaint now.

[Malapapa]

If you feel they are acting 'immorally' and maybe 'illegally', why haven't you stopped dealing with them?

You know what a fag it is to change banks? Getting the FSA to pressure HSBC to withdraw from the north is less hassle.

I am just expressing my opinion and my opinion is that you won't get far with your complaint.

I've actually made some progress, if you read the thread from the start.

Because it seems that your Govt has already tried it and either got nowhere or given up (despite them saying they would do whatever it takes).

That was 2002. A lot has changes since then.

Let's face it - despite the embargoes on the TRNC, trade with them has increased every year. I cannot see any powers that be deciding that the year in which they are (allegedly) trying to reach an amicable 'solution' with them being the year in which they start falling out of their pram about this HSBC business, not when they've had plenty of time to do their worst up until now and seemingly haven't bothered.

The climate is very different for HSBC in the north, post the very recent ECJ ruling.

Embargoes will presumably be lifted once a solution is agreed upon (or do you think that is not even a remote possibility?) Why would they press for them to be enforced at the same time as purporting to be working for a solution to have them lifted?

Because a concerned customer has brought certain matters to the attention of the regulators, obliging them to act.

And, you say Cyprus was not in the EU in 2002 - that's true, but they've been in it for more than five years since then. I'm not sure what difference them being in the EU makes to the original RoC complaint anyway. Unless there are different grounds for complaint now.

The very recent ECJ ruling, combined with EU membership, makes matters different. It has served to clarify the status of a number of HSBC customers.

[vaughanwilliams]

Your seeming to want to reduce to abject poverty and starve everyone over there to death certainly doesn't make it sound as if YOU would ever want to, or expect to live in Harmony with TCs any time in the future.

It's likely many poor blacks were adversely affected - in the short term - by the withdrawal of Barclays and other multi-nationals from South Africa. I hope you're not arguing that it wasn't a worthy strategy to force Barclays into pulling out back then.

Given that South Africa now has one of the highest, if not THE highest, murder rate in the world and that the black government which took over after apartheid has singularly failed in improving the lot of most poor black South Africans, I would say that acts like the one against Barclays helped precipitate the country into the state it now finds itself in. So, yes, I would say it turned out NOT to be a worthy strategy as it has back-fired the country into its present state.