Cyprus-Forum.com

[BirKibrisli]

I think in this decision lies the clear indication as to how the property issue would be settled one day...When the original owners and occupants die out,the only thing their inheritors would be entitled to would be compensation...so those who think time and legality is on the GC side better think again...Unless we can find a solution very soon the property issue would settle itself and with it any possibility of reunification...And it won't be too long before the international human rights court rule that it is violating their human rights for the TCs to be isolated from the rest of the world and prevented from enjoying the full benefits of being EU and world citizens...

[Jerry]

I think in this decision lies the clear indication as to how the property issue would be settled one day...When the original owners and occupants die out,the only thing their inheritors would be entitled to would be compensation...so those who think time and legality is on the GC side better think again...Unless we can find a solution very soon the property issue would settle itself and with it any possibility of reunification...And it won't be too long before the international human rights court rule that it is violating their human rights for the TCs to be isolated from the rest of the world and prevented from enjoying the full benefits of being EU and world citizens...

It's not quite as simple as that. The Court declined to accept the IPC as a proper body to compensate GCs unless it offered restitution as a remedy. Now that restitution is on offer it must be granted in some cases, for example on land that is not farmed or inhabited. Having granted restitution the "trnc" can hardly refuse the GCs access and use of their property - otherwise they would be infringing their human rights. The IPC will probably be shown up as the racist tool of Turkey if it refuses to return vacant land.
One could also take the view that, just as the Annan proposals boosted the exploitation of GC property, the Court's decision will accelerate mass immigration from the mainland in order to make use of "empty" GC land.

[YFred]

I think in this decision lies the clear indication as to how the property issue would be settled one day...When the original owners and occupants die out,the only thing their inheritors would be entitled to would be compensation...so those who think time and legality is on the GC side better think again...Unless we can find a solution very soon the property issue would settle itself and with it any possibility of reunification...And it won't be too long before the international human rights court rule that it is violating their human rights for the TCs to be isolated from the rest of the world and prevented from enjoying the full benefits of being EU and world citizens...

It's not quite as simple as that. The Court declined to accept the IPC as a proper body to compensate GCs unless it offered restitution as a remedy. Now that restitution is on offer it must be granted in some cases, for example on land that is not farmed or inhabited. Having granted restitution the "trnc" can hardly refuse the GCs access and use of their property - otherwise they would be infringing their human rights. The IPC will probably be shown up as the racist tool of Turkey if it refuses to return vacant land.
One could also take the view that, just as the Annan proposals boosted the exploitation of GC property, the Court's decision will accelerate mass immigration from the mainland in order to make use of "empty" GC land.

You have one small problem. RoC is doing everything in their power to stop GCs applying to the IPC. After a few years when the ECHR concludes that due to lack of applications, they consider the matter solved, who will the GCs blame then?

[Jerry]

I think in this decision lies the clear indication as to how the property issue would be settled one day...When the original owners and occupants die out,the only thing their inheritors would be entitled to would be compensation...so those who think time and legality is on the GC side better think again...Unless we can find a solution very soon the property issue would settle itself and with it any possibility of reunification...And it won't be too long before the international human rights court rule that it is violating their human rights for the TCs to be isolated from the rest of the world and prevented from enjoying the full benefits of being EU and world citizens...

It's not quite as simple as that. The Court declined to accept the IPC as a proper body to compensate GCs unless it offered restitution as a remedy. Now that restitution is on offer it must be granted in some cases, for example on land that is not farmed or inhabited. Having granted restitution the "trnc" can hardly refuse the GCs access and use of their property - otherwise they would be infringing their human rights. The IPC will probably be shown up as the racist tool of Turkey if it refuses to return vacant land.
One could also take the view that, just as the Annan proposals boosted the exploitation of GC property, the Court's decision will accelerate mass immigration from the mainland in order to make use of "empty" GC land.

You have one small problem. RoC is doing everything in their power to stop GCs applying to the IPC. After a few years when the ECHR concludes that due to lack of applications, they consider the matter solved, who will the GCs blame then?

They cannot stop the applications Fred. I think it's more likely that the ECHR will interpret the token restitution rate of about 3% as an indication of the failure of the IPC.

[Acikgoz]

1. ... Now that restitution is on offer it must be granted in some cases, for example on land that is not farmed or inhabited. Having granted restitution the "trnc" can hardly refuse the GCs access and use of their property - otherwise they would be infringing their human rights....

2. ......the Court's decision will accelerate mass immigration from the mainland in order to make use of "empty" GC land.

2 interesting points raised that outside more info make sense.
1. It appears that you have to be over (2010 - 1974 = 36) 36 + 12 i.e. 48 and have lived there to be able to conceive restitution - will be curious what proportion of the population that deem themselves refugees and fit into that catgegory that would therefore qualify to resettle into the northern zone. I cannot remember what proportion of resettlement had been allowed for in the Annan plan, but would venture a guess that it approximates those remamining in that category.

2. The knee jerk reaction would suggest the untouched GC lands in the north be either populated or worked to secure rights onto it. How that would play out in an economic downturn we are currently having not sure, no longer as in the south the property bonanza with ever increasing prices and fat cat developers scooping the cream...

One other aspect not sure about, given the RoC govt is anti-application (despite lawyers pressing applying to IPC) what do they expect will happen in the longer term? I cannot figure their game plan - could it even be they believe a political solution is best and too many IPC applicants will undermine their desired solution or any solution at that?

[Acikgoz]

Rights Court blow
STRASBOURG - The European Court of Human Rights decided on Thursday that children of Greek Cypriot refugees do not have the right to appeal for properties in the occupied part of Cyprus unless the property was registered in their names.
The decision was in reference to the cases of Asproftas and Petrakidou v Turkey, and is considered as a very negative development in the property rights of displaced Greek Cypriots.
It specifically upturns arguments included in the 4th Intergovernmental application of Cyprus v Turkey in 2001.

Anyone know what the 4th Intergovernmental application of Cyprus v Turkey in 2001 is about? We are moving into more complex territory, which as predicted was likely to occur, although what it all means is certainly not clear to me.

[hissyfits]

I agree Yfred,

Nobody is asking for the decision of the IPC to be accepted. Dissatisfied applicants will have the opportunity to appeal to the ECHR 's if the IPC decision is unjust. However you have to TEST the system before you can collect evidence that the system is not working fairly. Sitting back and doing nothing, simply sends out the message to everyone that GC's are not co-operating and basing their decisions on assumptions rather than constructive argument. Knocking something before its even been tried. If you apply and all applicants requesting restitution are refused, you have the evidence that it is indeed unjust.
The ECHR do not want to play the game any longer. They want a solution and appear to be more interested in getting a solution and moving on than continuing to play the waiting game.

People guilty of crimes serve their sentence and are then freed. How long should both sides suffer? It's time to move on and the ECHR appears to be coming round to this view judging by their verdicts and decisions. I truly believe that the property/land in dispute belongs to the displaced owner and that if wished by the owner, it should be returned. However with owners refusing to use the I,PC I feel that more doors will close and what will be on offer will get less and less. "Use it or lose it" springs to mind.

[Gasman]

Sitting back and doing nothing, simply sends out the message to everyone that GC's are not co-operating and basing their decisions on assumptions rather than constructive argument. Knocking something before its even been tried.

Agree strongly with that.

The ECHR do not want to play the game any longer. They want a solution and appear to be more interested in getting a solution and moving on than continuing to play the waiting game.

Agree strongly with that too.

The knee jerk reaction would suggest the untouched GC lands in the north be either populated or worked to secure rights onto it.

And that's what those in the North are already saying.

But recently I have been reading a lot of negative stuff written about this 'refugee' status being handed down to children etc.

With it being said that it could result in a greater number of 'refugees' than was the original number of inhabitants of the whole of Cyprus in 1974.

I think it is good to keep in mind that there is probably a lot more thought and said 'off the record' about all this (by some of the 'world powers') than is 'officially' stated by them.

And to bear in mind the importance to those world powers of 'keeping Ankara on side' in the context of what is happening in the rest of the world, not just in relation to the 'Cy Problem'.

I also think (my personal view) that GCs depended too heavily on the EU being their champions and saviours where all this was concerned.

Most countries who joined before Cyprus did regret having done so now! But they weren't looking at the EU to fight their territorial battles for them.

[BirKibrisli]

I think Jerry's prediction will probably be fulfilled...withing 15 years they're will not be any vacant or unused GC refugee land in the trnc..

As far as I am concerned,the ECHR is simply telling us that it will not allow us to use it for our political purposes...In other words, "settle your political problems amongst yourselves,and only come here if you have a truly valid reason"...

[Piratis]

I said several weeks ago that we should take our cases to our own courts. Those who are illegally trespassing on our land can be sued for this.

Those who are trespassing on our land, be it TCs or foreigners, will have to pay (1) a fine for their illegality and (2) rent for the time they have been using our properties.

This will be very easy to do with EU citizens who have assets in other EU countries (see Orams case) and even easier to be done with TCs who have assets in the free areas of the Republic of Cyprus.

Beyond that we all know what is the one and only way to liberate Cyprus. Whatever we do until then will be just to ease the problems of our refugees, not permanently solve the problem of Turkish aggression and expansionism against our island.