Cyprus-Forum.com

[Malapapa]

Does anyone have a link to profiles of the members of the "IPC" bench? Is every single "judge" a brainwashed Turk/Turkish Cypriot?

What is their background? Is there a legitimate judiciary or are political hack appointments told by the Turkish Army to avoid grants of Restitution?

Sümer Erkmen
(President)
[email protected]
[email protected]
TC
Born in Nicosia. She completed her primary and secondary school education in Lefkoşa, and went to Ankara for her higher education at Middle East Technical University at the Department of Management under the Faculty of Administrative Sciences

Güngör Günkan
(Vice - President)
[email protected]
TC
Born in Nicosia. After having completed his primary and secondary education in Cyprus, he studied at the faculty of Civil Engineering at İstanbul Technical University, and graduated with a MSc. degree in Civil Engineering and returned to the island.

Ayfer Said Erkmen
(Member)
[email protected]
[email protected]
TC
Born in Nicosia. After his graduation from the Department of Business Administration at the Middle East Technical University (METU) in Ankara in the year 1969, he completed his postgraduate studies, respectively, at Aston University in Great Britain,

Romans Mapolar
(Member)
[email protected]
Australian?
Graduate Law Degree - Ankara University Faculty of Law Graduate Interpreter and Translator - Victoria University
Employment History: The Presidential Office Of Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus Position: Legal Advisor to the President of the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus.

Hans-Christian Krüger
(Member)
[email protected]
German
Born in Berlin in 1935. He received his graduate and postgraduate
education at the Michigan University (USA) at the Department of Law.

Daniel Tarschys
(Member)
[email protected]
Swedish?
Professor in Political Science and Administration at the
University of Stockholm. He has been Secretary General of the Council of
Europe, Secretary of State in the Swedish Prime Minister’s Office,

[halil]

how can you apply to IPC ?

The application process starts upon the filling in the application form setting forth the claims of the applicant. All applications, along with their attachments, which are submitted to the secretariat of the Commission in order to be sealed, shall bear the signature of the applicant or his/her representative or advocate. In case the application is lodged by the advocate, a retainer for the plaintiff shall also be filed. The affidavit attached to the application shall be signed by the affiant. If the application is made in person, the application and affidavit may be filed in a manner that is indicated in the sample application and affidavit forms which are provided by the Commission. The application form shall include the following information: the number of the application, applicant's name and surname, identity card and/or passport number, address; the claims as regards the confidentiality of the proceedings, if any, the Ministry responsible for Housing Affairs in TRNC and/or TRNC Office of the Attorney General representing the Ministry as the Respondent; the name, surname and communication address of the applicant's advocate; if the applicant doesn't hire an advocate, the applicant's communication address and telephone number; the claims of the applicant, the description of the movable and/or immovable property for which the application is filed, the applicant's rights on such property as well as information as regards the existence of any mortgages on the respective property. In the affidavit attached to the application, the applicant gives detailed information about the facts constituting the basis of his/her claims. The applicant shall also present the certified copies of his/her identity card and/or passport, the title-deed of the respective property, the originals and copies of the documents indicating his/her shares in the respective property and also the document proving that s/he is still the rightful owner of the respective property as duly approved by the certifying officer. As regards the movable properties, the applicant shall submit bill of exchanges, bank transfer, exchange transfer or any other document in original or in duplicate or duly certified copies proving that the payment took place before 13 February 1975 or s/he shall submit the originals, copies or certified copies of any document that may be maintained from the records of any official authority and/or real or legal personality, proving that this movable property was transferred to the applicant by way of inheritance, donation and/or gift before 13 February 1975. The applicant shall also present the originals or certified copies of the documents proving that the applicant had to abandon the movable property, which he used to own and which is cited in the application before 13 February 1975 in the north


Which documents are required ?

Application Form. Application form shall include the summary of the applicant's claims. Affidavit. The applicant shall present detailed information about the immovable property in question, as well as his/her claims. Certified copies of the applicant's identity card and/or passport. If the application is lodged through a representative, the certified copies of the identity card and/or passports of both the representative and the property owner shall be submitted.

If the property cited in the application is a movable property, originals and certified copies of the property registration documents (title-deeds). If the property cited in the application is an immovable property, the originals or certified copies of a receipt, bill of exchange, bank transfer, exchange transfer or any other document proving the payment had been made before 13 February 1975.

If the application is lodged through an advocate, a retainer by the plaintiff shall be submitted.

If the application is lodged through a representative, a special power of attorney shall be submitted.

[halil]

the originals of each document shall be presented before certification.

[YFred]

the originals of each document shall be presented before certification.

Halil, The memebrs of the IPC are just incredible. It's Game set and match to TRNC.
It looks like TRNC is two steps ahead of roc. Talat must be congradulated on this one.

[Piratis]

This is an absurd conclusion. If this was the case then there wouldn't be a need for a ECHR, since all cases could be settled fairly at the local level.

Indeed this is the situation for property in the North. It can be settled via a local remedy. The ECHR only role now is to ensure that hsi local remedy continues to be sufficent to meet the requirments on Turkey with regards to indivduals human rights re property.

The remedy could be provided by the illegal occupier, namely Turkey, and not by any "North". Turkey has recognized that she is solely responsible for the crimes commited in the part of Cyprus she illegaly occupies.

You claimed that the "IPC" and the ECHR will have the same opinion of what can be returned and what can not. This is certainly a baseless claim. The ECHR has convicted Turkey 1000s of times, and most of those cases involved Turkish citizens who did not receive justice in Turkish courts.

Furthermore, when Cyprus is liberated neither the "IPC" nor ECHR will be needed to decide what can be returned and what can not. And until that happens our refugees can be compensated for the loss of use of their properties by suing TCs and foreigners for trespass in the courts of Cyprus.

It is your choice if you wish to wait for some mythical 'liberation' of Cyprus and in the mean time seek what monies you can from trespass cases in the RoC courts against users of property and not Turkey vs gaining back your property now if possible or taking compensation now or later if not.

The liberation of Cyprus is not a matter of "if" but a matter of "when". The reason most people will not use that "IPC" is that "if possible" point regarding the return of properties. We have a very different view of what is possible and what is not when it comes to the return of properties, and we will not let you make this decision unilaterally, although this is clearly your aim.

Will you provide the same choice for TC with property in the South ? Every indication is that eventualy you will be forced to do so but you will delay and provaricate as much as possible untill then, much as Turkey has done.

The TCs already have a choice. They can take their properties back by meeting certain criteria, and if they don't like those criteria they can always take their case to the courts, and later on to the ECHR if they are still not satisfied.

The numbers of people who have settled via the IPC is indeed so far very low compared to those who are eligable to claim, but still significantly higher so far than the number who have taken the route of waiting for 'liberation' whilst seeking monies for trespass in the mean time, which currently stand at 1 person.

The Apostolides case was a test case as the Titina Loizidou case was for the ECHR. Now there is a precedence a lot more will follow, especially now that perusing the ECHR route became more difficult. (the government will help to move things in this direction also)

[Kikapu]

the originals of each document shall be presented before certification.

Halil, The memebrs of the IPC are just incredible. It's Game set and match to TRNC.
It looks like TRNC is two steps ahead of roc. Talat must be congradulated on this one.

Your kind of Democracy, huh, YFred.!

[YFred]

the originals of each document shall be presented before certification.

Halil, The memebrs of the IPC are just incredible. It's Game set and match to TRNC.
It looks like TRNC is two steps ahead of roc. Talat must be congradulated on this one.

Your kind of Democracy, huh, YFred.!

You telling me you are not impressed with the list, and an all GC roc set up descriminating against all TCs in the south is more democratic and fairer. FFS man what the hell is the matter you?

[SKI-preo]

Malapapa are they serious? only 2 have legal backgrounds. What does the Civil Engineer do? give a report on foundations and sewerage services. Romans Mapolar is a Turkish Cypriot who lived in Australia. This is a trap. They are not even judges! They're Members so they cannot make embarrassing formal judgements against Turkey. Tribunals, Commissions and Quasi judicial forums are used to circumvent legal issues and to railroad parties into horse trades. Unless Restitution is granted in significant numbers then the IPC is a simply a trap.

[halil]

the originals of each document shall be presented before certification.

Halil, The memebrs of the IPC are just incredible. It's Game set and match to TRNC.
It looks like TRNC is two steps ahead of roc. Talat must be congradulated on this one.

we will see ... how my GC friend will satisfy ....i will share it in here.

[erolz3]

You claimed that the "IPC" and the ECHR will have the same opinion of what can be returned and what can not. This is certainly a baseless claim. The ECHR has convicted Turkey 1000s of times, and most of those cases involved Turkish citizens who did not receive justice in Turkish courts.

The ECHR has validated the IPC in terms of its terms of operation and its practice to date. The ECHR will of course maintain a role to look at accusations that it is no longer abiding by these terms but as things stand currently the ECHR considers the IPC view as compatible with its own.

The ECHR has explicitly stated that return of property in every case where such is desired is NOT the basis on which the IPC needs to work.

The reason most people will not use that "IPC" is that "if possible" point regarding the return of properties. We have a very different view of what is possible and what is not when it comes to the return of properties, and we will not let you make this decision unilaterally, although this is clearly your aim.

It is NOT the TC that have made or will make these decision unilateraly but the ECHR. You may have a very different view to that of the ECHR but you just can not 'defeat' the ECHR on such matters.

The Apostolides case was a test case as the Titina Loizidou case was for the ECHR. Now there is a precedence a lot more will follow, especially now that perusing the ECHR route became more difficult. (the government will help to move things in this direction also)

Indeed time will tell which 'route' becomes the most popular for GC. The idea that the ECHR has become more difficult is just not the case. The IPC is now the quickest and cheapest and also non binding mechanism for GC to seek redress for thei loss of property. Its decisions are those that the ECHR would itself make and it you believe otherwise you have the right to appeal ot the ECHR on that basis.