Cyprus-Forum.com

[Piratis]

In sum, in my view the scene looks like this : if we've got property claims in the north we can either,
(a) go through the long, tortuous but ultimately effective process [according to ECHR] of applying to the IPC; or,
(b) go through the even longer and even more tortuous process of the ECHR and still not get the property back, perhaps just a favourable judgment and possible pecuniary damages ; or,
(c) go through the longer, still tortuous RoC and wider EU litigation which has harassment value but will still not get the property back; or finally,
(d) seek a political settlement in which property restitution is an agreed priority.

I disagree.

Now there is a precedence, the cases of trespass through Cyprus and EU courts can be way faster than any other alternative. Also in this way the refugee can get a good compensation for the illegal use of his property by TCs/foreigners, without having to give up his property.

Why would anybody waste their time with this "IPC" that would offer some tiny amounts of money in exchange for the property of the refugee, when the refugee can take probably as much money in what will be effectively "rent" and still keep the ownership of his property?

Litigation thought Cyprus courts will be faster, will offer a reasonable amounts to the refugee for the illegal use of his property while the refugee will keep the ownership of his property, and it will be the method supported by the Government of Cyprus. So you can be certain that this is the route that most refugees will choose.

The only ones that will go to the "IPC" are those whose properties are not currently used by anybody.

[CopperLine]

Will this now mean there will be a flood of applications coming form the GC refugees? or will they be declared traitors and persecuted by their own?

I don't think that it will be a flood but I do think that the numbers applying to the IPC are likely to increase. After all, the ECHR has endorsed and confirmed the effectiveness of the IPC so, for example, a GC who had a claim but who had not yet sought settlement (say for lack of effective local remedy, or lack of money/time/expertise to go through ECHR) might now think that they'd have a go through IPC. The ECHR has said that the IPC procedure is basically sound, if slow, and the levels of compensation or other forms of resolution seem appropriate.

From both a TC and a GC perspective I would have thought that submitting more claims through the IPC would be a good thing : for TCs it can show that 'justice' is being done in conformity with ECHR and that the decades of insecurity about land claims can be resolved amicably and fairly thereby heightening the legitimacy of TC. And for GCs it keeps up the pressure on the IPC, is more likely to resolve individual claims sooner rather than later compared with any other current alternative.

Nevertheless a great deal of effort and support still needs to be afforded to the IPC if it is to work adequately.

[Viewpoint]

That would mean those GC refugees that have no intention of returning to the North state if we ever found a solution could now effectively have closure by selling their property rights to the north state.

[CopperLine]

In sum, in my view the scene looks like this : if we've got property claims in the north we can either,
(a) go through the long, tortuous but ultimately effective process [according to ECHR] of applying to the IPC; or,
(b) go through the even longer and even more tortuous process of the ECHR and still not get the property back, perhaps just a favourable judgment and possible pecuniary damages ; or,
(c) go through the longer, still tortuous RoC and wider EU litigation which has harassment value but will still not get the property back; or finally,
(d) seek a political settlement in which property restitution is an agreed priority.

I disagree.

Now there is a precedence, the cases of trespass through Cyprus and EU courts can be way faster than any other alternative. Also in this way the refugee can get a good compensation for the illegal use of his property by TCs/foreigners, without having to give up his property.

Why would anybody waste their time with this "IPC" that would offer some tiny amounts of money in exchange for the property of the refugee, when the refugee can take probably as much money in what will be effectively "rent" and still keep the ownership of his property?

Litigation thought Cyprus courts will be faster, will offer a reasonable amounts to the refugee for the illegal use of his property while the refugee will keep the ownership of his property, and it will be the method supported by the Government of Cyprus. So you can be certain that this is the route that most refugees will choose.

The only ones that will go to the "IPC" are those whose properties are not currently used by anybody.

Piratis,
What you say is effectively my option (c), although I don't refer to trespass.

Which is the precedent you've referred to regarding "trespass" ?

A GC who was not interested in recovering the land, just compensation - since many, perhaps the majority of GCs both still in Cyprus and outside Cyprus have moved on and built lives in which they have no intention of living in northern Cyprus - would have an interest in going the IPC route.

The levels of compensation are not "tiny"as you allege. The ECHR's opinion, as reported in the press release, was "Nor was it of the opinion that the sums of compensation awarded under Law 67/2005 would fall short of what could be regarded as reasonable compensation."

Surprisingly, what no one has highlighted on this thread so far is the following :

"Having nonetheless examined the substance of Mrs Ariana Lordou Anastasiadou’s complaint (application no.13751/02), because it was not persuaded that she had had any realistic prospect as a non-property owner of applying either to the IPC or “TRNC” courts, the Court found that the facts of her case did not disclose any present interference with her right to respect for her home, as she had not been living in the family home for almost her entire life. The possible inheritance of a share in the title of that property was hypothetical and speculative. Consequently, this part of the application was rejected as manifestly ill-founded."

In other words it is not a breach of ECHR provisions to reject claims based on supposed inheritance. Now that is significant.

[eracles]

In other words it is not a breach of ECHR provisions to reject claims based on supposed inheritance. Now that is significant.

Which to me, kind of highlights that ECHR is only one avenue that GCs may wish to proceed. In any case, what stops somone asking for compensation for the years of not being able to enjoy their property, from the IPC, but not requesting restitution and keeping their legal title deed. Is there a case for that?

[Piratis]

In sum, in my view the scene looks like this : if we've got property claims in the north we can either,
(a) go through the long, tortuous but ultimately effective process [according to ECHR] of applying to the IPC; or,
(b) go through the even longer and even more tortuous process of the ECHR and still not get the property back, perhaps just a favourable judgment and possible pecuniary damages ; or,
(c) go through the longer, still tortuous RoC and wider EU litigation which has harassment value but will still not get the property back; or finally,
(d) seek a political settlement in which property restitution is an agreed priority.

I disagree.

Now there is a precedence, the cases of trespass through Cyprus and EU courts can be way faster than any other alternative. Also in this way the refugee can get a good compensation for the illegal use of his property by TCs/foreigners, without having to give up his property.

Why would anybody waste their time with this "IPC" that would offer some tiny amounts of money in exchange for the property of the refugee, when the refugee can take probably as much money in what will be effectively "rent" and still keep the ownership of his property?

Litigation thought Cyprus courts will be faster, will offer a reasonable amounts to the refugee for the illegal use of his property while the refugee will keep the ownership of his property, and it will be the method supported by the Government of Cyprus. So you can be certain that this is the route that most refugees will choose.

The only ones that will go to the "IPC" are those whose properties are not currently used by anybody.

Piratis,
What you say is effectively my option (c), although I don't refer to trespass.

Which is the precedent you've referred to regarding "trespass" ?

A GC who was not interested in recovering the land, just compensation - since many, perhaps the majority of GCs both still in Cyprus and outside Cyprus have moved on and built lives in which they have no intention of living in northern Cyprus - would have an interest in going the IPC route.

The levels of compensation are not "tiny"as you allege. The ECHR's opinion, as reported in the press release, was "Nor was it of the opinion that the sums of compensation awarded under Law 67/2005 would fall short of what could be regarded as reasonable compensation."

Surprisingly, what no one has highlighted on this thread so far is the following :

"Having nonetheless examined the substance of Mrs Ariana Lordou Anastasiadou’s complaint (application no.13751/02), because it was not persuaded that she had had any realistic prospect as a non-property owner of applying either to the IPC or “TRNC” courts, the Court found that the facts of her case did not disclose any present interference with her right to respect for her home, as she had not been living in the family home for almost her entire life. The possible inheritance of a share in the title of that property was hypothetical and speculative. Consequently, this part of the application was rejected as manifestly ill-founded."

In other words it is not a breach of ECHR provisions to reject claims based on supposed inheritance. Now that is significant.

Yet another example of why litigation thought the Cyprus courts is the best route to follow for our refugees.

Why sell your land to the Turks for the amount that the Turks want to give you, when you can effectively "rent" it to them and charge them as much as you want?

Now I think of it, I have some empty plots I am not planning to use for a while, and I am only paying taxes for them every year without gaining anything. How about you coming and building something illegally on them?

[BirKibrisli]

Will this now mean there will be a flood of applications coming form the GC refugees?

No. It means there will be a flood of cases in the courts of Cyprus for trespass.

The ruling of Apostolides VS Orams made it much easier to prosecute individual trespassers (Foreigners or TCs) while this ruling makes it more time consuming to convict Turkey for human rights violations.

So you can easily guess which route the GC refugees will choose.

Piratis,
To prosecute anybody for tresspass you need to have the personal details of the individuals,then prepare and serve summons on them to appear in court,having first proved to the court that the right papers were served on the right people,and in the required time period...This is not going to be easy given the realities of the trnc...

For me,this latest decision like the one before is yet another reminder that we need to solve our little problem comprehensively and politically via negotiations,and not through courts or commissions in Cyprus or abroad...Lets keep our eyes firmly on the ball...We need to find a fair and peaceful solution which will last for a long time,till our people learn to trust and respect each other enough to live together as one people,one nation...

[Get Real!]

Will this now mean there will be a flood of applications coming form the GC refugees?

No. It means there will be a flood of cases in the courts of Cyprus for trespass.

The ruling of Apostolides VS Orams made it much easier to prosecute individual trespassers (Foreigners or TCs) while this ruling makes it more time consuming to convict Turkey for human rights violations.

So you can easily guess which route the GC refugees will choose.

Piratis,
To prosecute anybody for tresspass you need to have the personal details of the individuals,then prepare and serve summons on them to appear in court,having first proved to the court that the right papers were served on the right people,and in the required time period...This is not going to be easy given the realities of the trnc...

For me,this latest decision like the one before is yet another reminder that we need to solve our little problem comprehensively and politically via negotiations,and not through courts or commissions in Cyprus or abroad...Lets keep our eyes firmly on the ball...We need to find a fair and peaceful solution which will last for a long time,till our people learn to trust and respect each other enough to live together as one people,one nation...

You’d be hard pressed to find any GCs these days who believe that TCs have good intentions for Cyprus other than the Turkification of it!

The solution is a military one and no matter how much my compatriots may dread it, in time the will all realize that it’s the only option that will yield the desirable results for the indigenous Cypriots.

At the outbreak of war, most if not all illegal Turkish settlers will flee like roaches running from pesticide, thus solving the illegal settler issue. A considerable number of “Turkish Cypriots” will also have to abandon Cyprus as there is no way the already bankrupt “TRNC” can ever recover itself after the first week or two of infrastructure damage as they have zero reserves unlike the RoC. The “TRNC” entity will not survive a war forever putting an end to TC aspirations of a separate state… not that many will stick around to ever ask for one again!

After a war with Cyprus, Turkey’s chances of ever joining the EU will be gone forever and Europe will no longer be able to look at Turkey in the same light again for decades to come.

The RoC can give and take punishment for 2-3 months and that’s plenty of time to alter the current foul Cyprus demographics and geopolitics.

The UN SC will have no option this time but to issue binding resolutions and/or treaties settling the CyProb once and for all thus saving the Cypriot nation from Turkish strangulation.

The Turkification of Cyprus (the REAL Cyprus problem) will be completely thwarted within a month or two or for the duration of the war, and the price for all that would be infrastructure damage and thousands of casualties… all of which can be replenished within 10-15 years, which is a very small price to pay considering what avoidance of war will bring to Cyprus!

[Epiktitos]

Will this now mean there will be a flood of applications coming form the GC refugees?

No. It means there will be a flood of cases in the courts of Cyprus for trespass.

The ruling of Apostolides VS Orams made it much easier to prosecute individual trespassers (Foreigners or TCs) while this ruling makes it more time consuming to convict Turkey for human rights violations.

So you can easily guess which route the GC refugees will choose.

Piratis,
To prosecute anybody for tresspass you need to have the personal details of the individuals,then prepare and serve summons on them to appear in court,having first proved to the court that the right papers were served on the right people,and in the required time period...This is not going to be easy given the realities of the trnc...

For me,this latest decision like the one before is yet another reminder that we need to solve our little problem comprehensively and politically via negotiations,and not through courts or commissions in Cyprus or abroad...Lets keep our eyes firmly on the ball...We need to find a fair and peaceful solution which will last for a long time,till our people learn to trust and respect each other enough to live together as one people,one nation...

You’d be hard pressed to find any GCs these days who believe that TCs have good intentions for Cyprus other than the Turkification of it!

The solution is a military one and no matter how much my compatriots may dread it, in time the will all realize that it’s the only option that will yield the desirable results for the indigenous Cypriots.

At the outbreak of war, most if not all illegal Turkish settlers will flee like roaches running from pesticide, thus solving the illegal settler issue. A considerable number of “Turkish Cypriots” will also have to abandon Cyprus as there is no way the already bankrupt “TRNC” can ever recover itself after the first week or two of infrastructure damage as they have zero reserves unlike the RoC. The “TRNC” entity will not survive a war forever putting an end to TC aspirations of a separate state… not that many will stick around to ever ask for one again!

After a war with Cyprus, Turkey’s chances of ever joining the EU will be gone forever and Europe will no longer be able to look at Turkey in the same light again for decades to come.

The RoC can give and take punishment for 2-3 months and that’s plenty of time to alter the current foul Cyprus demographics and geopolitics.

The UN SC will have no option this time but to issue binding resolutions and/or treaties settling the CyProb once and for all thus saving the Cypriot nation from Turkish strangulation.

The Turkification of Cyprus (the REAL Cyprus problem) will be completely thwarted within a month or two or for the duration of the war, and the price for all that would be infrastructure damage and thousands of casualties… all of which can be replenished within 10-15 years, which is a very small price to pay considering what avoidance of war will bring to Cyprus!

Has Paphitis hacked GR!'s CF account?

[Get Real!]

Has Paphitis hacked GR!'s CF account?

Unless you’re a supporter of the Turkification of Cyprus like most of these “Turkish Cypriots”, you should start using your head to predict what will happen to Cyprus in 30 or 50 years time if Turkey is allowed to continue doing what she is currently doing to the Cypriot nation.

Don’t just worry about the next year or two but try to see the bigger picture, or the long term picture of what Turkey along with these so-called “Turkish Cypriots” are slowly but surely doing to Cyprus.