Cyprus-Forum.com

[vaughanwilliams]

You can not refuse to recognise and register a transaction that has the willing consent of all parties involved just because you do not like the transaction.

Can someone answer my question above? Has the Cypriot Land Registry recognised previous transactions made by Turkey through its IPC on Cyprus? There have been a number already. Have they all been declared null and void?

Do you really think that if they had, you wouldn't have heard about it through the press and internet?
You are starting to grasp at straws.

[Malapapa]

You can not refuse to recognise and register a transaction that has the willing consent of all parties involved just because you do not like the transaction.

Can someone answer my question above? Has the Cypriot Land Registry recognised previous transactions made by Turkey through its IPC on Cyprus? There have been a number already. Have they all been declared null and void?

Do you really think that if they had, you wouldn't have heard about it through the press and internet?
You are starting to grasp at straws.

I'm merely asking the question.

[Solveit]

B25, nothing could be more convenient for Turkey/TRNC if the responsibility for obstruction of individuals attaining restitution of their property rights was move to the GC govt. Suddenly 1,400 problems disappear.

Cracking post Acikgoz

B25, an 'instructor' in WHAT exactly? The ROC institute of stupid ideas? Ever thought of entering GC politics?

[Sotos]

B25, nothing could be more convenient for Turkey/TRNC if the responsibility for obstruction of individuals attaining restitution of their property rights was move to the GC govt. Suddenly 1,400 problems disappear.

Cracking post Acikgoz

B25, an 'instructor' in WHAT exactly? The ROC institute of stupid ideas? Ever thought of entering GC politics?

If you offer restitution of their property rights then there is no problem. If you offer money for compensation then those money will count only as compensation for the loss of use and the refugee will still keep his own property in the occupied areas since the Land Registry will not authorize any transfer of the title deeds. So whose human rights will the RoC violate? You are the ones who violate our human rights because you are foreigners who you illegally occupy what belongs to Republic of Cyprus and to Cypriots, not Turks. Did you not read this part in the ECHR ruling?

[Sotos]

You can not refuse to recognise and register a transaction that has the willing consent of all parties involved just because you do not like the transaction.

Can someone answer my question above? Has the Cypriot Land Registry recognised previous transactions made by Turkey through its IPC on Cyprus? There have been a number already. Have they all been declared null and void?

Do you really think that if they had, you wouldn't have heard about it through the press and internet?
You are starting to grasp at straws.

It seems that the Land Registry approved NONE of the transactions of this "IPC"! There is only one transaction pending that they might approve and in that case both the TC owner of the land in the free areas and the GC owner of the land in the occupied areas went to the Land Registry and applied for land swap. This exchange is not approved yet. It is what I said before. If you want any legal and official transaction involving land you HAVE to go to the Land Registry and apply and then the land registry will decide if the transaction can be made or not. Otherwise such transaction never officially happens.

[erolz3]

If you offer restitution of their property rights then there is no problem. If you offer money for compensation then those money will count only as compensation for the loss of use and the refugee will still keep his own property in the occupied areas since the Land Registry will not authorize any transfer of the title deeds. So whose human rights will the RoC violate?

Once more because you seem to have trouble understanding. A GC accepts a deal from the IPC that involves exhange of his land in the North for that of TC land in the South. He goes to enjoy the use of his property in the South, but the RoC tells him - this is not your property, we refuse to let you do what you want with your own property (ie exchange it volunatarily). Who's rights are the RoC violating ?

You seem to think you can use the land registry to violate peoples rights and stop them doing what they want with their properties for some political agenda - the fact is you can not, not without ending up infront of the ECHR again.

[Kikapu]

One thing the RoC can do if they wish to do so, is to buy the GCs land in the north directly from the GCs who may want to sell it to Turkey with the IPC. If the IPC is offering today's depressed land prices in the north to the GCs, then the RoC can offer them 10% premium of the IPC's offer and buy the land themselves. The only reason the GCs would go to the IPC is either to get their land back or to get money from Turkey for not being able to use their land. As for selling it, why not sell it to the RoC or to any other GC in the RoC. I would think a move like this would put the IPC out of business in a hurry.

Firstly there are GC who wanted restitution of their property, wnet to the IPC and got it. Sure for those that want compensation in cash money then an offer from the RoC to pay them more for it than the market rate the IPC will give them is attractive, though they do not get any money for compensation for loss of use via this route. If that were to happend it would not worry the IPC , or Turkey for that matter one bit for the IPC is not a 'business'. Its function is to provide a local means of redress so that Turkey is deemed to have met the conditions of the judgments gainst it at the ECHR. As long as that means exists it serves its purpose if people choose to use that means or not. If they choose not to its certainly cheaper for Turkey.

Erol, what I'm saying is, the GC's can go to the IPC to do 2 things only.

1) to get their land back

2) get compensation from Turkey for not being able to use their land since 1974

If the GCs were to sell their land to the RoC, sure it will be cheaper to Turkey, but at the same time, Turkey won't be able to buy cheap land from the GCs either. Instead, it can be bought by the RoC just so to ensure there is pleanty of GC owned land in the north in order to make the claim true, that the north is occupied by Turkey and that most of the land in the north belongs to the GCs.

[erolz3]

It is what I said before. If you want any legal and official transaction involving land you HAVE to go to the Land Registry and apply and then the land registry will decide if the transaction can be made or not. Otherwise such transaction never officially happens.

If the land registry 'decides' who can sell and exhange their own land in direct conflict to the owner of that lands wishes for some political agenda then it will be found to be denying those people their rights. It really is very very simple.

[DTA]

One thing the RoC can do if they wish to do so, is to buy the GCs land in the north directly from the GCs who may want to sell it to Turkey with the IPC. If the IPC is offering today's depressed land prices in the north to the GCs, then the RoC can offer them 10% premium of the IPC's offer and buy the land themselves. The only reason the GCs would go to the IPC is either to get their land back or to get money from Turkey for not being able to use their land. As for selling it, why not sell it to the RoC or to any other GC in the RoC. I would think a move like this would put the IPC out of business in a hurry.

Firstly there are GC who wanted restitution of their property, wnet to the IPC and got it. Sure for those that want compensation in cash money then an offer from the RoC to pay them more for it than the market rate the IPC will give them is attractive, though they do not get any money for compensation for loss of use via this route. If that were to happend it would not worry the IPC , or Turkey for that matter one bit for the IPC is not a 'business'. Its function is to provide a local means of redress so that Turkey is deemed to have met the conditions of the judgments gainst it at the ECHR. As long as that means exists it serves its purpose if people choose to use that means or not. If they choose not to its certainly cheaper for Turkey.

Erol, what I'm saying is, the GC's can go to the IPC to do 2 things only.

1) to get their land back

2) get compensation from Turkey for not being able to use their land since 1974

If the GCs were to sell their land to the RoC, sure it will be cheaper to Turkey, but at the same time, Turkey won't be able to buy cheap land from the GCs either. Instead, it can be bought by the RoC just so to ensure there is pleanty of GC owned land in the north in order to make the claim true, that the north is occupied by Turkey and that most of the land in the north belongs to the GCs.

You are truly clever I think you should tell them to do so... I can't see a downside at all....

oh.... except for ... You know what you figure that out yourself.

[Sotos]

Erol you can continue living in your dream. I am telling you of what actually happens. The Land Registry didn't authorize any transaction made by this "IPC" and there is just one case pending where the TC and the GC went to the Land Registry and applied for the land swap together. You are the criminals who illegally occupy our country and this is why we have these problems. You created all the human rights violations which we are now trying to solve. But we will not solve them your way. You don't allow the GCs to freely enjoy their properties and you are trying to force them to sell them to you!! This is a forced sale. Republic of Cyprus should protect its citizens from the Turkish invaders.