Cyprus-Forum.com

[brother]

Turkish Cypriots grapple with property conundrum
By Simon Bahceli


THE TURKISH Cypriot administration is seeking ways to rectify what it now accepts as the illegal expropriation of Greek Cypriot properties in the north, it emerged yesterday.
“We are working on a number of proposals to bring local law into line with international law,” said a source close to a four-person ‘government’ committee established to find ways to overcome what the international community sees as the illegal ownership of Greek Cypriot properties north of the Green Line.

Property ownership is arguably the biggest stumbling block in finding a solution to the Cyprus problem, and for the north in particular it is an issue that has brought widespread condemnation over what the world has deemed its disregard for the rights of displaced Greek Cypriots. That the north is now seeking ways to overcome the problem marks a major policy change, and could be a signal that it is now willing to embrace international and European law.

The source told the Mail that the main focus of the “brainstorming” being undertaken by the committee was to look for a way forward for the north in the light of a European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) ruling in April stating that a property compensation commission set up under the previous Turkish Cypriot leader Rauf Denktash could not be accepted as a valid channel of recourse for Greek Cypriots seeking compensation or retribution for properties they were forced to abandon during and after the 1974 Turkish invasion.

“According to the ECHR conclusions to the Arestis case, the main problem with the commission was that there was no possibility that Greek Cypriots could gain restitution to their properties,” the source said.

One way forward, then, would to be to make restitution a possibility for Greek Cypriot refugees.

Another focus of discussion, it emerged yesterday, was a law introduced soon after the declaration in 1983 of the ‘Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus (TRNC)’ that claimed ownership by the ‘state’ of all Greek Cypriot properties in the north. The commission will now look at ways of carrying out expropriation in an internationally-recognised legal way.

“In order to be legal, expropriation of property can only be exercised if it is carried out in the interest of the public, there is no discrimination involved, notification is given to the owner and prompt compensation is paid,” the source said. If such criteria are to be acknowledged, the “global expropriation” of all Greek Cypriot properties that took place in 1985 would need to be repealed.

The source explained that expropriation could be used for the benefit of displaced Turkish Cypriots from the south, as expropriation carried out to house displaced persons could be justified as expropriation for public benefit.
The source explained, however, that the implementation of internationally acceptable criteria for the expropriation of property would mean a law introduced in the north in 1994 allowing the distribution of Turkish Cypriot title deeds for Greek Cypriot properties – a move that saw thousands of Turkish mainlanders, and Turkish Cypriots who were not refugees from the south, gaining ‘title deeds’ for the Greek Cypriot properties they were occupying – would need also need to be repealed.

A possible way around this problem could be, the source said, the establishment of a “guardian of Greek Cypriot properties” similar to the guardian of Turkish Cypriot properties in the Republic. This way those using the property would be asked to pay rent that would be held in a fund payable to the owner as and when a solution to the Cyprus problem is found.

Another source close to the committee said, however, that ways of dealing with such issues were by no means clear cut.

“We have information that the south’s guardianship law is being challenged by some Turkish Cypriots,” the source said, indicating that the north would possibly need to wait for the outcome of such cases before pursuing its own guardianship law. The source also warned that an increasing number of Turkish Cypriots were discovering that their properties in the south had not been dealt in ways that would be deemed legal by international law.

“It’s not just about what the north needs to do, but what needs to be done overall regarding disputed property in Cyprus,” the source said, adding: “We are trying to look at this problem using general principles and by looking at what has happened in other countries in similar situations.”

The problem with Cyprus, however, is that the problem is in many ways unique.
“Our problem is that people lost their properties over 30 years ago, and since then other people have established their lives and families in them.” Success in finding a way out of the conundrum, the source said, would be to uphold the rights of owners without causing massive unrest among current users.

“Just because the conditions under which the properties were taken were unpleasant, it does not mean the current users do not have human rights too,” the source said.
While the sources that spoke to the Cyprus Mail insist no decisions have yet been taken on a way forward for the north, it is evident that the authorities are intent on addressing the damage that has been done to the image of the Turkish Cypriot community by its past disregard for international law.

“I feel optimistic now that we can find a way forward because the Turkish Cypriots, by saying ‘yes’ to the Annan plan, have overcome the hurdle of accepting that you cannot ignore the property claims of Greek Cypriots.”









to me this seems like a move in the right direction

[magikthrill]

[quote="brother"] I feel optimistic now that we can find a way forward because the Turkish Cypriots, by saying ‘yes’ to the Annan plan, have overcome the hurdle of accepting that you cannot ignore the property claims of Greek Cypriots.”

i dont see how this is true seeing as the annan plan gave most of the properties of GCs to settlers who have been on the island for no more than 30 years...

[Yiannis]

to me this seems like a move in the right direction

I couldnt agree with u more Brother.Lets hope that these proposals will not stay just in papers.

[Viewpoint]

Yes its a step in the right direction we to could follow the GC lead and have a guardian for land used, we to could place something in a fund just like the south. This amount will of course be paid out when we find a solution on exactly the same valuation scales used by the GC administration. would that make everyone happy???

[Alexandros Lordos]

Yes its a step in the right direction we to could follow the GC lead and have a guardian for land used, we to could place something in a fund just like the south. This amount will of course be paid out when we find a solution on exactly the same valuation scales used by the GC administration. would that make everyone happy???

Yes, If there was to be a "TC guardian of GC properties" I would consider that a very positive development - it would definitely help to build trust and goodwill between the two sides, and it will help us to start speaking "the same language".

Developing compensation scales for "loss of use" would also be acceptable, if on the same level as the GC guardian, though it would only work in practice if Turkey agrees to fund it.

With hundreds of ECHR petitions hanging over Turkey's head, however, it will probably be much cheaper for her to agree to such a scheme ...

[Kifeas]

Yes its a step in the right direction we to could follow the GC lead and have a guardian for land used, we to could place something in a fund just like the south. This amount will of course be paid out when we find a solution on exactly the same valuation scales used by the GC administration. would that make everyone happy???

Yes, If there was to be a "TC guardian of GC properties" I would consider that a very positive development - it would definitely help to build trust and goodwill between the two sides, and it will help us to start speaking "the same language".

Which GC properties? Those few that have not been sold, re-sold and /or have not been constructed, or the even fewer that no separate "TRNC" title deeds have been issued against them?

In theory it sounds good, in practice … impossible! Too late!

[Viewpoint]

Kifeas

Which GC properties? Those few that have not been sold, re-sold and /or have not been constructed, or the even fewer that no separate "TRNC" title deeds have been issued against them?

In theory it sounds good, in practice … impossible! Too late!

Kifeas whatever the TRNC does will be evaluated negatively by you so I really didnt expect any other type of a response, your anti TC/TRNC feelings are well known to all.

Thats why the TC Guardian would be there to evaluate which properties can be physically returned and which cannot. Those that cannot be returned due to heavy investment need to be compensated via a fund to which I agree with Alex initially Turkey and the international community should contribute to. The equivelent land exchanged by the TC in the south where heavy investment is evident could be valued so that the fund is aware of the value of properties that can be sold to meet compensation payments to GCs when a solution is found.

[Alexandros Lordos]

Kifeas

Which GC properties? Those few that have not been sold, re-sold and /or have not been constructed, or the even fewer that no separate "TRNC" title deeds have been issued against them?

In theory it sounds good, in practice … impossible! Too late!

Kifeas whatever the TRNC does will be evaluated negatively by you so I really didnt expect any other type of a response, your anti TC/TRNC feelings are well known to all.

Thats why the TC Guardian would be there to evaluate which properties can be physically returned and which cannot. Those that cannot be returned due to heavy investment need to be compensated via a fund to which I agree with Alex initially Turkey and the international community should contribute to. The equivelent land exchanged by the TC in the south where heavy investment is evident could be valued so that the fund is aware of the value of properties that can be sold to meet compensation payments to GCs when a solution is found.

I think that if there will be a TC guardian, then this guardian must not allow any further construction on GC properties, just as no further construction on TC properties was allowed after the GC guardian was instituted.

As for properties that have already been invested on, this should be dealt separately as part of a Comprehensive Settlement. I don't think it is up to either Guardian to unilaterally decide which properties are to be returned and which compensated.

The compensation I was referring to was "compensation for loss of use", for use of property that was deprived in intervening decades, a totally separate issue from "compensation for exchanging a property".

[Viewpoint]

Alex

I think that if there will be a TC guardian, then this guardian must not allow any further construction on GC properties, just as no further construction on TC properties was allowed after the GC guardian was instituted

Although in principle I agree with you Alex, the statement of until a solution is found can be a term of 100 years or more do we wait this long? for a county to develop economically land has to be utilized add to this the problem of the majority of land in the north being disputed land where does that leave us, at the mercy of GCs? is this the real agenda? do we waiting for GCs to decide which plan is best for them only to find they again vote NO. Although technically a good idea, in all practicallity not possible, unless we think of the reverse and see this as an incentive for the GC administraion to move quickly towards resuming negotiations that will result in a solution??

As for properties that have already been invested on, this should be dealt separately as part of a Comprehensive Settlement. I don't think it is up to either Guardian to unilaterally decide which properties are to be returned and which compensated.

The compensation I was referring to was "compensation for loss of use", for use of property that was deprived in intervening decades, a totally separate issue from "compensation for exchanging a property".

Sure the comprehensive settlement issue covers all compensation and return etc as the guardian will only be a care taker until a solution is found isnt it the same for the south?

The Guaradian will only determin which properties have been invested on and those that can be return if a solution is ever found otherwise nothing will be transacted, it will only be documented.

For example if a hotel has been built on disputed land then this should be documented so we value both the land in the north and south to firstly calculate the difference and exactly how much can be returned if a solution is found.

[Alexandros Lordos]

The Guaradian will only determin which properties have been invested on and those that can be return if a solution is ever found otherwise nothing will be transacted, it will only be documented.

For example if a hotel has been built on disputed land then this should be documented so we value both the land in the north and south to firstly calculate the difference and exactly how much can be returned if a solution is found.

I like the idea of documenting the extent of the problem ... This is exactly the type of "hard facts" we need, if rationality is to prevail in the future.

As for further construction on GC properties, I can appreciate your concerns but find it difficult to see how the concept of "a guardian" can be reconciled with the concept of "handing over properties to be developed". The whole idea of having a Guardian is that he will act to protect the rights of the property owners, managing the properties on their behalf in the interim. The most a Guardian can do is rent or lease a property, but not sell it to be developed.