Cyprus-Forum.com

[YFred]

If they want restitution and only resitituion and IPC deems such is not possible they can apeal that decision in the TRNC hight corut.

This is where you've started to talk through your arse!

1. The IPC is a Turkish institution not Turkish Cypriot!

2. In European law and indeed that of the rest the world, there is no such thing as the "TRNC" let alone its "high court" so get your facts right and quit suggesting stupidities!

Well picked up!

The "IPC" is Turkish. No "trnc" authority would be deemed as a suitable 'local remedy' since it is not recognized.

And on the positive side, the mere fact that Turkey has set up the "IPC" is an acknowledgment that the "trnc" is a non entity. The sword cuts both ways it seems.

Carry on with that mentality and it will not be long before TRNC is recognised too.

[Paphitis]

If they want restitution and only resitituion and IPC deems such is not possible they can apeal that decision in the TRNC hight corut.

This is where you've started to talk through your arse!

1. The IPC is a Turkish institution not Turkish Cypriot!

2. In European law and indeed that of the rest the world, there is no such thing as the "TRNC" let alone its "high court" so get your facts right and quit suggesting stupidities!

Well picked up!

The "IPC" is Turkish. No "trnc" authority would be deemed as a suitable 'local remedy' since it is not recognized.

And on the positive side, the mere fact that Turkey has set up the "IPC" is an acknowledgment that the "trnc" is a non entity. The sword cuts both ways it seems.

Carry on with that mentality and it will not be long before TRNC is recognised too.

I will sleep easy tonight, rest assured!

[erolz3]

If they want restitution and only resitituion and IPC deems such is not possible they can apeal that decision in the TRNC hight corut.

This is where you've started to talk through your arse!

1. The IPC is a Turkish institution not Turkish Cypriot!

2. In European law and indeed that of the rest the world, there is no such thing as the "TRNC" let alone its "high court" so get your facts right and quit suggesting stupidities!

You just playing sematics. Turkey is the 'putable' party (the one that is responsible for the denail of indivduals rrights) - the ECHR demands that Turkey offer a local remedy. Turkey can choose what 'offices' they use to do that. Turkey chooses to use the IPC as its local means of remedy and it can and will also choose to use TRNC hight court as its local court of appeal of such decisions. The recognition of the TRNC or lack of it does not come into it. Either there is a valid local remedy or there is not. If there is not then the ECHR will make Turkey provide one. Whether Turkey makes you apply to an IPC in Girne or Ankara makes no difference, just as whether any appeal is heard in a court in Girne or in Istambul makes no difference. It is Turkey's choice how and where you seek fair redress. The ECHR only cares that it does offer it, not where it offers it.

[YFred]

If they want restitution and only resitituion and IPC deems such is not possible they can apeal that decision in the TRNC hight corut.

This is where you've started to talk through your arse!

1. The IPC is a Turkish institution not Turkish Cypriot!

2. In European law and indeed that of the rest the world, there is no such thing as the "TRNC" let alone its "high court" so get your facts right and quit suggesting stupidities!

Well picked up!

The "IPC" is Turkish. No "trnc" authority would be deemed as a suitable 'local remedy' since it is not recognized.

And on the positive side, the mere fact that Turkey has set up the "IPC" is an acknowledgment that the "trnc" is a non entity. The sword cuts both ways it seems.

Carry on with that mentality and it will not be long before TRNC is recognised too.

I will sleep easy tonight, rest assured!

When it happens, you will run around like a headless chicken, not that different to when the IPCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCC was recognised. Don't say I didn't warn you, what?

[erolz3]

And on the positive side, the mere fact that Turkey has set up the "IPC" is an acknowledgment that the "trnc" is a non entity. The sword cuts both ways it seems.

This is nonsense. The ECHR rulings no more require Turkey to accept in generic terms that the TRNC is not a valid body for it, than applyuing to the IPC requires recongntion of either the TRNC or Turkeys rights to be in Cyprus.

[Paphitis]

And on the positive side, the mere fact that Turkey has set up the "IPC" is an acknowledgment that the "trnc" is a non entity. The sword cuts both ways it seems.

This is nonsense. The ECHR rulings no more require Turkey to accept in generic terms that the TRNC is not a valid body for it, than applyuing to the IPC requires recongntion of either the TRNC or Turkeys rights to be in Cyprus.

If that were the case, then the "trnc" would have set up its own 'local remedy'. But Turkey acknowledges that this would never be accepted by the ECHR as such!

You can keep you head in the sand all you like.

[Paphitis]

If they want restitution and only resitituion and IPC deems such is not possible they can apeal that decision in the TRNC hight corut.

This is where you've started to talk through your arse!

1. The IPC is a Turkish institution not Turkish Cypriot!

2. In European law and indeed that of the rest the world, there is no such thing as the "TRNC" let alone its "high court" so get your facts right and quit suggesting stupidities!

Well picked up!

The "IPC" is Turkish. No "trnc" authority would be deemed as a suitable 'local remedy' since it is not recognized.

And on the positive side, the mere fact that Turkey has set up the "IPC" is an acknowledgment that the "trnc" is a non entity. The sword cuts both ways it seems.

Carry on with that mentality and it will not be long before TRNC is recognised too.

I will sleep easy tonight, rest assured!

When it happens, you will run around like a headless chicken, not that different to when the IPCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCC was recognised. Don't say I didn't warn you, what?

[YFred]

If they want restitution and only resitituion and IPC deems such is not possible they can apeal that decision in the TRNC hight corut.

This is where you've started to talk through your arse!

1. The IPC is a Turkish institution not Turkish Cypriot!

2. In European law and indeed that of the rest the world, there is no such thing as the "TRNC" let alone its "high court" so get your facts right and quit suggesting stupidities!

Well picked up!

The "IPC" is Turkish. No "trnc" authority would be deemed as a suitable 'local remedy' since it is not recognized.

And on the positive side, the mere fact that Turkey has set up the "IPC" is an acknowledgment that the "trnc" is a non entity. The sword cuts both ways it seems.

Carry on with that mentality and it will not be long before TRNC is recognised too.

I will sleep easy tonight, rest assured!

When it happens, you will run around like a headless chicken, not that different to when the IPCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCC was recognised. Don't say I didn't warn you, what?

Shleep well my little Sheeeeeeeeepriot friend.

[Get Real!]

And on the positive side, the mere fact that Turkey has set up the "IPC" is an acknowledgment that the "trnc" is a non entity. The sword cuts both ways it seems.

This is nonsense. The ECHR rulings no more require Turkey to accept in generic terms that the TRNC is not a valid body for it, than applyuing to the IPC requires recongntion of either the TRNC or Turkeys rights to be in Cyprus.

If that were the case, then the "trnc" would have set up its own 'local remedy'. But Turkey acknowledges that this would never be accepted by the ECHR as such!

Precisely!

[erolz3]

If that were the case, then the "trnc" would have set up its own 'local remedy'. But Turkey acknowledges that this would never be accepted by the ECHR as such!

You can keep you head in the sand all you like.

Lol - I am the one with my head in the sand ? Really ?

For cases brought to the ECHR it is the ECHR that decides who is and who is not the 'putable party'. When the first cases were brought Turkey argued that it was not the putable party but that the TRNC was. The ECHR rejected this argument and said Turkey is putable. This happend 10+ years ago and has not changed the fact that Turkey still recognises the TRNC. There is nothing new here. The ECHR does not recognise the TRNC as a state. Turkey does recognise the TRNC. That the ECHR does not, does not mean Turkey can not either. It just means that the ECHR and Turkey disagree on this issue as Turkey does with the rest of the world and has done since 74 and 84. No change , no difference nothing to see here. Same old same old.