Cyprus-Forum.com

[Malapapa]

And why are you all calling yourself professor,instructor, VIP ?????

Cant you just be who you are ?

I am a Lecturer and have qualifications from a Uk University.

Bloody well earn the title like I had to !!!!!

And there was I thinking it was a myth that the UK education system was in terminal decline.

[Kikapu]

And why are you all calling yourself professor,instructor, VIP ?????

Cant you just be who you are ?

I am a Lecturer and have qualifications from a Uk University.

Bloody well earn the title like I had to !!!!!

Believe me it is not sign of intelegence or serious post. It's the number of posts that dictate it. Even if most of the posts are crap.

You are a living proof of that, for sure.!:lol:

You've got a be jokin old man, what?
Any comments on the old 90%

Perfect example of what I'm talking about.!

You think you are the originator of that saying, YFred, that the possession is 90% of the law.? Hardly.!! MR-from-NG has been using that phrase from 3-4 years ago, and if you are dumb enough to challenge me, I can pull up few of his quotes from 3-4 years ago if you like.!

Once again, you are well behind others and that you cannot create anything original yourself.!

Just to touch on what the ECHR has stated, in the powers they have given the IPC, has nothing to do with the reality of the facts, and that is, the original GC owners are still the owners as long as they do not accept compensation from the IPC for their properties. As long as the IPC is in place, the occupiers of the GC properties in the north today have been given protection by the ECHR courts to be able to have rights to stay where they are as not to create unnecessary hardship by evicting them to give the property back to the GC owner, which the ECHR regard it as a Human Rights issue I guess, therefore, the IPC will do just that, just because the ECHR allows the IPC to determine the outcome. What the ECHR said only applies to the operation of the IPC and it is not written in stone as to what the future should be for those living in the GC properties if a solution is found. Once a solution is found, the IPC, which is the arm of the occupying force, Turkey, will be disbanded, which means that what the ECHR said will also be null and void in how the IPC operate. At that point, there is no saying what will happen, but at NO TIME does the GC loses it's rights of ownership of his property in the north, so if by chance that the present occupiers of the GC properties do remain in the GCs properties now or even after a solution, they will be paying rent to the GCs, and the GCs will become the biggest property renters in the north to others. In the meantime, all those who paid hard cash to "purchase" stolen GC properties will have nothing to show for as being the "owners" of that property they live in, but instead, will be forced to pay rent every month to the GC owner. If they do not pay the rent each month, then they will be evicted based on the eviction laws of each state. As with all property ownership in every country, the property owner also has the right to give reasonable notice to the renter to vacate the property because he or member of his family would want to live in that property.

In the short term, nothing has changes regarding the GC owner taking possession of his property in the north because of the ongoing division. There never was a groundswell of GCs going to the IPC to get restitution and of all those who did, only a handful had been given it, which were mainly just land I would venture to guess and not any structures/buildings. Therefore, nothing has changed. The ruling by the ECHR is only valid as long as there is not a settlement so not to get involved with any GC owners looking for redress from the ECHR against Turkey. I suspect the same will apply to future TCs applying to the ECHR for their property in the south against the RoC. The ECHR will direct the TCs to the RoC as being the first remedy and the GCs to the IPC. In the ECHR ruling, I did not see where it says that the IPC can only deal with issues regarding restitution, exchange and compensation and not damages for being denied usage for the last 36 years. If that is the case, then the GCs can go and ask ONLY for damages for not being able to use their properties due to the occupation of the north. Perhaps even the TCs with property in the north can also put a claim against Turkey for compensation for their property values not appreciating in the north as the TCs properties have done in the south due to occupation of the north. That will be interesting to see if any TC will want money from the IPC for loss of appreciated values of their property in the north due to Turkey's occupation of the north.? If the IPC refuses to deal with that issue, then they are not addressing the GCs (TCs) claims for redress of their choosing, in which case, the ECHR will be once again flooded with claims by the GCs, I suspect. Bottom line is, if there is any victories/defeats in this ECHR ruling, is ONLY as good and valid as the IPC exists. After a settlement, it will not exist and then all bets are off and only the Rule of Law of Cyprus will deal with the property issues after a settlement.

The question I have is, is the north now are more willing to have a settlement or less. Are they willing to have a settlement and lose this advantage given to them by the ECHR through the IPC regarding the property issues and keep Turkey as an occupying power "forever", or will they want to have a settlement and lose that advantage through the IPC.? If the north though they can get a recognition in the future, then they will not have the incentive to have a settlement based on EU Principles, but if recognition is not coming, then there is no advantage by not having a settlement since the GCs will continue to keep the north isolated and keep Turkey out of the EU. The GCs still have the ruling on the Orams to use the courts in the south to get as much satisfaction as possible against all the EU nationals and all those who have property in the south but use GC properties in the north. The "chess game" goes on and nothing very much has changed as far as I can see in the short or long term.! A settlement based on True Federation, True Democracy, Human Rights, International Laws and EU Principles is what will restore every one's rights for the long term and not short term victories in the courts by either side.!

[Kikapu]

And why are you all calling yourself professor,instructor, VIP ?????

Cant you just be who you are ?

I am a Lecturer and have qualifications from a Uk University.

Bloody well earn the title like I had to !!!!!

And there was I thinking it was a myth that the UK education system was in terminal decline.

[Kikapu]

By the way, how is that BBF Power sharing thread that I put together which Bir had asked you so nicely to read coming along.??

I read it, its seems that you put some time and effort in to it, and there could be some merit in what you wrote, but this merit would depend on where your so called 'TC zones' are located, total Tc population figures in reference to the so called 'settlers', population and economic safe guards and sustainabilty of the so called TC zones and much more.

I only dealt with the "Power Sharing" issues and not solving the whole problem, but if you want me to, just ask for it.!:roll:

Just for your information, I hated your condesending tone at the start of that thread.

What condescending tone.??? What are you talking about.???

By the way, did you just read only the opening post or did you read all the way through the thread.??

[YFred]

And why are you all calling yourself professor,instructor, VIP ?????

Cant you just be who you are ?

I am a Lecturer and have qualifications from a Uk University.

Bloody well earn the title like I had to !!!!!

Believe me it is not sign of intelegence or serious post. It's the number of posts that dictate it. Even if most of the posts are crap.

You are a living proof of that, for sure.!:lol:

You've got a be jokin old man, what?
Any comments on the old 90%

Perfect example of what I'm talking about.!

You think you are the originator of that saying, YFred, that the possession is 90% of the law.? Hardly.!! MR-from-NG has been using that phrase from 3-4 years ago, and if you are dumb enough to challenge me, I can pull up few of his quotes from 3-4 years ago if you like.!

Once again, you are well behind others and that you cannot create anything original yourself.!

Just to touch on what the ECHR has stated, in the powers they have given the IPC, has nothing to do with the reality of the facts, and that is, the original GC owners are still the owners as long as they do not accept compensation from the IPC for their properties. As long as the IPC is in place, the occupiers of the GC properties in the north today have been given protection by the ECHR courts to be able to have rights to stay where they are as not to create unnecessary hardship by evicting them to give the property back to the GC owner, which the ECHR regard it as a Human Rights issue I guess, therefore, the IPC will do just that, just because the ECHR allows the IPC to determine the outcome. What the ECHR said only applies to the operation of the IPC and it is not written in stone as to what the future should be for those living in the GC properties if a solution is found. Once a solution is found, the IPC, which is the arm of the occupying force, Turkey, will be disbanded, which means that what the ECHR said will also be null and void in how the IPC operate. At that point, there is no saying what will happen, but at NO TIME does the GC loses it's rights of ownership of his property in the north, so if by chance that the present occupiers of the GC properties do remain in the GCs properties now or even after a solution, they will be paying rent to the GCs, and the GCs will become the biggest property renters in the north to others. In the meantime, all those who paid hard cash to "purchase" stolen GC properties will have nothing to show for as being the "owners" of that property they live in, but instead, will be forced to pay rent every month to the GC owner. If they do not pay the rent each month, then they will be evicted based on the eviction laws of each state. As with all property ownership in every country, the property owner also has the right to give reasonable notice to the renter to vacate the property because he or member of his family would want to live in that property.

In the short term, nothing has changes regarding the GC owner taking possession of his property in the north because of the ongoing division. There never was a groundswell of GCs going to the IPC to get restitution and of all those who did, only a handful had been given it, which were mainly just land I would venture to guess and not any structures/buildings. Therefore, nothing has changed. The ruling by the ECHR is only valid as long as there is not a settlement so not to get involved with any GC owners looking for redress from the ECHR against Turkey. I suspect the same will apply to future TCs applying to the ECHR for their property in the south against the RoC. The ECHR will direct the TCs to the RoC as being the first remedy and the GCs to the IPC. In the ECHR ruling, I did not see where it says that the IPC can only deal with issues regarding restitution, exchange and compensation and not damages for being denied usage for the last 36 years. If that is the case, then the GCs can go and ask ONLY for damages for not being able to use their properties due to the occupation of the north. Perhaps even the TCs with property in the north can also put a claim against Turkey for compensation for their property values not appreciating in the north as the TCs properties have done in the south due to occupation of the north. That will be interesting to see if any TC will want money from the IPC for loss of appreciated values of their property in the north due to Turkey's occupation of the north.? If the IPC refuses to deal with that issue, then they are not addressing the GCs (TCs) claims for redress of their choosing, in which case, the ECHR will be once again flooded with claims by the GCs, I suspect. Bottom line is, if there is any victories/defeats in this ECHR ruling, is ONLY as good and valid as the IPC exists. After a settlement, it will not exist and then all bets are off and only the Rule of Law of Cyprus will deal with the property issues after a settlement.

The question I have is, is the north now are more willing to have a settlement or less. Are they willing to have a settlement and lose this advantage given to them by the ECHR through the IPC regarding the property issues and keep Turkey as an occupying power "forever", or will they want to have a settlement and lose that advantage through the IPC.? If the north though they can get a recognition in the future, then they will not have the incentive to have a settlement based on EU Principles, but if recognition is not coming, then there is no advantage by not having a settlement since the GCs will continue to keep the north isolated and keep Turkey out of the EU. The GCs still have the ruling on the Orams to use the courts in the south to get as much satisfaction as possible against all the EU nationals and all those who have property in the south but use GC properties in the north. The "chess game" goes on and nothing very much has changed as far as I can see in the short or long term.! A settlement based on True Federation, True Democracy, Human Rights, International Laws and EU Principles is what will restore every one's rights for the long term and not short term victories in the courts by either side.!

Kicks baby, so much venom, is it really necessary?
I never claimed it was my original idea, simply that I had heard many lawyers mention it and it is used in courts.

Now back to realities, It is called a compromise. Most people will have their property back and some will take compensation and some will have to take compensation and we shall have peace.

Now everybody back to their property is pissing in the wind and you know it, so stop talking crap and hiding behind human rights. Lets just correct most of the furkin wrongs first and we'll pick up the rights bit too afterwards.

Dare I ask for you to comment? No I will not, thanks. I can just as easily paste any one of your posts and get the result. Crap will always be crap and all that what?

[Kikapu]

Kicks baby, so much venom, is it really necessary?
I never claimed it was my original idea, simply that I had heard many lawyers mention it and it is used in courts.

Now back to realities, It is called a compromise. Most people will have their property back and some will take compensation and some will have to take compensation and we shall have peace.

Now everybody back to their property is pissing in the wind and you know it, so stop talking crap and hiding behind human rights. Lets just correct most of the furkin wrongs first and we'll pick up the rights bit too afterwards.

Dare I ask for you to comment? No I will not, thanks. I can just as easily paste any one of your posts and get the result. Crap will always be crap and all that what?

Where is the venom.??

Of course not everyone will be able go back to their properties. That is the reality. Public projects will remain as such and compensation paid out to the owners. All other properties should and can be given back to their original owners to do as they wish with them. The more important issue is the territorial adjustments of the north and south states, which will solve most of the property issues automatically, since most TCs and GCs will only want to live in their "own" respective states.! Human Rights issues is not only regarding properties, but also Cypriots freedom to move about their own country to live where they want as well as taking part in the political process in the area that they live in.!

[YFred]

Kicks baby, so much venom, is it really necessary?
I never claimed it was my original idea, simply that I had heard many lawyers mention it and it is used in courts.

Now back to realities, It is called a compromise. Most people will have their property back and some will take compensation and some will have to take compensation and we shall have peace.

Now everybody back to their property is pissing in the wind and you know it, so stop talking crap and hiding behind human rights. Lets just correct most of the furkin wrongs first and we'll pick up the rights bit too afterwards.

Dare I ask for you to comment? No I will not, thanks. I can just as easily paste any one of your posts and get the result. Crap will always be crap and all that what?

Where is the venom.??

Of course not everyone will be able go back to their properties. That is the reality. Public projects will remain as such and compensation paid out to the owners. All other properties should and can be given back to their original owners to do as they wish with them. The more important issue is the territorial adjustments of the north and south states, which will solve most of the property issues automatically, since most TCs and GCs will only want to live in their "own" respective states.! Human Rights issues is not only regarding properties, but also Cypriots freedom to move about their own country to live where they want as well as taking part in the political process in the area that they live in.!

Sorry Kicks baby, totally forgot, your fangs and venom sack was removed some time ago you toothless gufi.

[DTA]

By the way, how is that BBF Power sharing thread that I put together which Bir had asked you so nicely to read coming along.??

I read it, its seems that you put some time and effort in to it, and there could be some merit in what you wrote, but this merit would depend on where your so called 'TC zones' are located, total Tc population figures in reference to the so called 'settlers', population and economic safe guards and sustainabilty of the so called TC zones and much more.

I only dealt with the "Power Sharing" issues and not solving the whole problem, but if you want me to, just ask for it.!:roll:

Just for your information, I hated your condesending tone at the start of that thread.

What condescending tone.??? What are you talking about.???

By the way, did you just read only the opening post or did you read all the way through the thread.??

Everything is inter-connected, especially the points that I raised, even you should know that!

I read through some of the pages but not all, is there anything that you feel that I should look out for?

by the question I originally raised was:

what is your ideal solution to the cyprus problem, dont duck it just tell us.

[Kikapu]

By the way, how is that BBF Power sharing thread that I put together which Bir had asked you so nicely to read coming along.??

I read it, its seems that you put some time and effort in to it, and there could be some merit in what you wrote, but this merit would depend on where your so called 'TC zones' are located, total Tc population figures in reference to the so called 'settlers', population and economic safe guards and sustainabilty of the so called TC zones and much more.

I only dealt with the "Power Sharing" issues and not solving the whole problem, but if you want me to, just ask for it.!:roll:

Just for your information, I hated your condesending tone at the start of that thread.

What condescending tone.??? What are you talking about.???

By the way, did you just read only the opening post or did you read all the way through the thread.??

Everything is inter-connected, especially the points that I raised, even you should know that!

I read through some of the pages but not all, is there anything that you feel that I should look out for?

by the question I originally raised was:

what is your ideal solution to the cyprus problem, dont duck it just tell us.

1) If it's going to be a settlement based on True Federation, True Democracy, Human Rights, International Laws and EU Principles which is what I support, hence my views on my BBF thread.

2) If it's going to be a settlement NOT based on the above principles that I have stated, just as what the Annan Plan was, then you are asking the repeat of the 1960s events all over again in the near future.

I support No.1. Which do you support.??

[DTA]

By the way, how is that BBF Power sharing thread that I put together which Bir had asked you so nicely to read coming along.??

I read it, its seems that you put some time and effort in to it, and there could be some merit in what you wrote, but this merit would depend on where your so called 'TC zones' are located, total Tc population figures in reference to the so called 'settlers', population and economic safe guards and sustainabilty of the so called TC zones and much more.

I only dealt with the "Power Sharing" issues and not solving the whole problem, but if you want me to, just ask for it.!:roll:

Just for your information, I hated your condesending tone at the start of that thread.

What condescending tone.??? What are you talking about.???

By the way, did you just read only the opening post or did you read all the way through the thread.??

Everything is inter-connected, especially the points that I raised, even you should know that!

I read through some of the pages but not all, is there anything that you feel that I should look out for?

by the question I originally raised was:

what is your ideal solution to the cyprus problem, dont duck it just tell us.

1) If it's going to be a settlement based on True Federation, True Democracy, Human Rights, International Laws and EU Principles which is what I support, hence my views on my BBF thread.

2) If it's going to be a settlement NOT based on the above principles that I have stated, just as what the Annan Plan was, then you are asking the repeat of the 1960s events all over again in the near future.

I support No.1. Which do you support.??

You have only given me two options, where I have given you an open ended invitation to to tell us what you ideal solution would be... thats not very fair is it.