Cyprus-Forum.com

[Jerry]

The judgment does not infer [sic, you mean implies] at all that present occupier has greater rights. What it does consider is that current residents also have human rights that need to be weighed in the balance. It is for this reason, I think, that the point about limiting inheritance claims is significant.

But in practice it will be the IPC who decides who has the greater right.

On the ECHR's alleged "... unwillingness/inability to order Turkey ..." I really think that that is an unfair charge. The ECHR regularly finds against Turkey, imposes penalties, etc - in fact more so and in reference to the widest range of breaches than just about every other party to the ECHR.

That may be so but there is nothing in this judgment that restricts Turkey from further exploitation, in that regard the judgment is short changing one side in favour of the other.

Putting it crudely the ECHR can either try to protect the human rights of GC property claimants in the best way available to it or it could just say 'screw it, there's bugger all we can do; you're on your own'

We had the option of using the IPC before this ruling so the GCs would have been better off without it. Its effect has been to embolden the "trnc" and will certainly lead to more GC land being "sold off"

[Kifeas]

so kifeas do you believe it was a political ruling to help(save)talat?

nowing the echr that for the forseable future(next months to t/c community elections)it really dosent matter because it will be changed to a legal ruling in the future(3-5 years)and not one of political expediancy

It was Definitely a political ruling, but I am afraid it was also a case of bribing, not necessarily with cash. A certain number of judges from some countries were already predetermined, some others have been mislead, and some bribed. There is no other explanation. I do not think it was done for Talat's favor. It was done in order to help Turkey get off the difficult corner it was placed.

[Viewpoint]

When its a Greek judge its not bribery what hypocrites you GCs really are.

[bill cobbett]

When its a Greek judge its not bribery what hypocrites you GCs really are.

The matter of the Greek judge and the claim of apparent bias was looked at, was investigated, in a transparent and argued way by the GB Appeal Court.

The matter of Turkish bribes (if any) or Turkish influence (if any) in this ECHR ruling won't be open to the same kind of investigation will it?

If you can't see the difference between the two cases you really are more of a one-lined, ask questions but never answer any, fool than we gave you credit for so if you have , as usual, nothing to add to debate, clear off!

[erolz3]

If at some stage the IPC is found by the ECHR to have failed to be a fair local means of redress, the order by the ECHR ruling will be to ammend it so that it is again. There really is no other way forward for the ECHR. They say its fair now. If they find it is no longer fair later it will be changed until they say its fair again. If you hope that the ECHR will 'scrap it' if it is found to be unfair in the future I think you are dreaming.

[Viewpoint]

When its a Greek judge its not bribery what hypocrites you GCs really are.

The matter of the Greek judge and the claim of apparent bias was looked at, was investigated, in a transparent and argued way by the GB Appeal Court.

The matter of Turkish bribes (if any) or Turkish influence (if any) in this ECHR ruling won't be open to the same kind of investigation will it?

If you can't see the difference between the two cases you really are more of a one-lined, ask questions but never answer any, fool than we gave you credit for so if you have , as usual, nothing to add to debate, clear off!

Obviously hit a raw nerve, appeal if you have the option or balls.

[CopperLine]

so kifeas do you believe it was a political ruling to help(save)talat?

nowing the echr that for the forseable future(next months to t/c community elections)it really dosent matter because it will be changed to a legal ruling in the future(3-5 years)and not one of political expediancy

It was Definitely a political ruling, but I am afraid it was also a case of bribing, not necessarily with cash. A certain number of judges from some countries were already predetermined, some others have been mislead, and some bribed. There is no other explanation. I do not think it was done for Talat's favor. It was done in order to help Turkey get off the difficult corner it was placed.

Kifeas this is just a libel : cheap, baseless crap

[Piratis]

We will send some cases to the "IPC" and later to the ECHR in order to change this ruling, which as Kifeas said will take a few years.

Meanwhile we will proceed will a lot more cases for trespassing, something which can be dealt with in our own courts.

[bill cobbett]

If at some stage the IPC is found by the ECHR to have failed to be a fair local means of redress, the order by the ECHR ruling will be to ammend it so that it is again. There really is no other way forward for the ECHR. They say its fair now. If they find it is no longer fair later it will be changed until they say its fair again. If you hope that the ECHR will 'scrap it' if it is found to be unfair in the future I think you are dreaming.

Yes, this is an important point ....we had the seven test cases before the ECHR and would like to think, in an ideal world, that the "work" of this Scammy Crapission would come under closer scrutiny if any of the seven cases go there.....in an ideal world, .... won't be closed down, but amended.

.... but Turkey knows this and it will do the barest of minimums, with a few well-timed "judgments" to meet the equally minimal ECHR expectations.

[Viewpoint]

Again Turkey is one step ahead.