Cyprus-Forum.com

[halil]

Politis publishes in full the texts of both the Greek Cypriot and Turkish Cypriot proposals on the property issue, "so that those directly concerned can decide for themselves" .

“The issue concerns many people, is delicate and technical, society cannot be left to make up its mind through being influenced by the distorting lenses of the TV channels and the press”, the paper says.

Analysing the Turkish proposals Makarios Droushiotis says that it is an extremely interesting document, which despite having been demonised by the media, also contains positive elements the likes of which have never appeared before in any negotiation of the Cyprus problem, and what’s more they are starting points.

These positive points are:

- recognition of the right of property ownership as it existed before 1974

- the financial responsibility to give compensation will be undertaken by the Turkish Cypriot constituent state.

- compensation will be guaranteed by the Turkish state

- the creative idea of development of Turkish Cypriot property in the south and its exchange.

Negative elements constitute their insistence of strict bizonality that limits restitution or the acquisition of property by Greek Cypriots in the northern part of the island

Droushiotis says that clearly this is not a final document, it is up for negotiation, and it certainly isn’t monstrous as the media and certain politicians would have us think.

Specifically, the T/C side proposes the setting up of three committees on property – the Property Commission that will have the overall responsibility and two sub-committees, one in each constituent state, which will be charged with settling the property issues within their jurisdiction.

The three well-known options are put forward – restitution, exchange or compensation. While restitution remains an option, it is subject to many limitations. Exchange will come under a broader plan of mass development. The greatest emphasis is laid on compensation, but it clearly ensures that the claimant will be compensated, his money will be guaranteed, he will get the money quickly and will be calculated at today’s prices.

The right of restitution will be given to displaced people willing to live under Turkish Cypriot rule. But there will be agreed quotas, both on the total population numbers as well as by community or municipality. The ceiling is negotiable and will be part of the overall agreement. If, for example, the quota is 10% in Kyrenia which has a population today of 50,000 Turkish Cypriots, then 5000 people will be able to return. Whoever chooses to return will be allowed his/her property back provided it was a home and was used before 1974; he/she has full ownership; if it cannot be returned then he will be given land and compensation to build a house of similar value in the same municipality or community. Similar arrangements are proposed for property housing small businesses. As for a person’s remaining property, a part of it will be returned except if it is essential for the survival of the present day user, in which case alternative property of equal value in the same community or municipality will be offered in return.

The document contains a new element entitled “alternative property” for displaced people whose property cannot be returned. This alternative property will come either from another displaced person who prefers compensation, from government land, church or Evkaf land, or from unclaimed property.


Priority for restitution will be given to those who choose to move back into their property, displaced people whose permanent home was in the same region, displaced owners who were heads of families, the elderly, people born in the property and who lived there an x amount of time.

The document proposes the exchange of T/C property in the south with G/C property in the north which cannot be returned. However, it also proposes that such T/C property be developed in order to increase its value. It proposes that Varosha be developed along these lines. It describes this as a “huge solution that can bring vast financial and social benefits”, and gives examples where this has been done elsewhere in the world such as in the Lebanon, Turkey, Brazil, etc. Specifically it proposes setting up a Property Development Organisation that will function under the auspices of the Property Commission. It would be responsible for buildings and infrastructure in the regions under development. The organisation will obtain most of the property left by the Turkish Cypriots in the south and who were given property in the north. About 98-99 % of Turkish Cypriots have exchanged their property.

Property owners who will not be able to return may apply for compensation. Property which cannot be restituted or exchanged will be eligible for compensation. If the property has been developed it will be compensated with the value of the property minus the development. Church or Evkaf property will be compensated and transferred to the property sub-committees in order to be given to displaced people. As regards houses, current owners will have priority and the owner will be compensated. Property that has been used for public benefit will be compensated. The Church and Evkaf will be allowed full restitution without exception of all the property that was used before 1963 and 1974 as places of worship. If they so wish, they can apply for compensation. Property where the present user has a “lawful interest”, a term that the Turkish side is willing to discuss, will be compensated.

Guaranteed Bonds will be issued in exchange for the title deeds of a property. These bonds will be bought by the constituent state and will be guaranteed. Until these bonds are cashed in, the owner will have ownership of his property. These bonds will be able to be bought and sold or transferred. In order to buy these bonds, each constituent state will set up a fund and will impose a special tax. Part of the profits of the Organisation of Urban Development will end up in this fund. The owner of a bond will be paid from the proceeds of the sale of the property. Any shortfalls will be guaranteed by the Turkish Cypriot constituent state or if necessary by Turkey. The property up for sale can only be bought by citizens of the T/C constituent state. Compensation will be according to today’s prices. Provision is also made for appeals in the event that owners are not satisfied.

[halil]

Property talks end early

The Cyprus Mail reports that the UN was upbeat yesterday that the two all-day talks on property completed between the two sides were “very useful” despite the fact that they ended early.

The two leaders called it a day after lunch yesterday, authorising their respective aides to pick up where they left off next week as both prepare for trips to Brussels and New York.

The Australian diplomat said there was nothing to read into the fact that the talks ended earlier yesterday than they did on Tuesday, saying the leaders simply decided “this was the best way of handling it”, a view shared by the UN. “There is no point in the meeting going on just for the sake of going on,” he added.

The UN team in Cyprus placed a lot of weight on the all-day talks showing some signs of progress on the property talks, which until now had got stuck on both sides simply repeating their positions of principle.


As a result of the all-day talks, the two sides had to submit lengthy documents containing their proposals on how to overcome the property obstacle.


According to one diplomatic source, momentum has been maintained and the two sides have reached a stage where they are ready to take it to a technical level between the two representatives.


The two aides will be able to work in greater detail and in franker tone, to put some flesh on the bones of a number of proposals raised during the all-day sessions, including the Turkish Cypriot proposal on “urban development”. This reportedly involves developing Turkish Cypriot land in the government-controlled areas to raise compensation funds for those displaced Greek Cypriots who will not return to their properties.


“They are definitely inching closer,” said the source, despite the rather negative spin put on alleged leaks of the proposals in the press. He warned however that it was still early days as a lot of work had yet to be done. On the plus side, the potential was there as neither side put up any red flags.


Asked whether he thought the two leaders could actually make progress, Downer said: “We will tell you at the United Nations when we, from our perspective, are unhappy with the way the process is going and we will tell you when we are satisfied with the way the process is going. And my answer to that question today is that we are satisfied with the way the process is going.”


Probed further, the UN diplomat said he did not wish to expand on this because “it starts the hares running”.


On his return from the talks, Christofias said it was “the right decision” to authorise their respective aides to discuss the proposals in greater detail so that they may reach some convergence which they will present to the leaders who will meet again in October.


For his part, Eroglu said that nothing is agreed until everything is agreed. He noted that property was the most important chapter in the negotiations but that the other five would also be discussed.


According to one source, the dinner diplomacy at the homes of Christofias and Eroglu in recent months paid off in the sense that it contributed to creating a more familiar relationship between the two leaders who decided yesterday to stop talking in general terms and let their aides get into the nitty gritty.

[Nikitas]

"The document proposes the exchange of T/C property in the south with G/C property in the north which cannot be returned. However, it also proposes that such T/C property be developed in order to increase its value. It proposes that Varosha be developed along these lines. "

CAN ANYONE EXPLAIN WHY VAROSHA IS CLASSIFIED AS EQUIVALENT TO PROPERTY WHICH CANNOT BE RETURNED???????

My take is that the TCs realise the magnitute of the Varosha project and want to force their parcitipation in the project. This is clearly contrary to EU rules of freedom of movement of services as well as the competition rules. They cannot keep out EU companies from bidding in such a project.

Inserting this into the property settlement, which will form a temporary deviation from EU rules is a nice try. But it will simply not fly. EU capitalists are not as dumb as some might think.

And where is the mutuality principle that TCs and Turks are right now applying to the Varosha issue, insisting that its return should be exchanged for sweeping favors like flights and ports opening? Will the GCs participate in urban development projects in the north through similar PDCs? Rhetorical question when there is not even a GC kiosk up there!

[Acikgoz]

Tks Halil, interesting reading the actual proposals rather than all the hearsay...

Nikitas, your comments on Varosha surely fall into the area yet to be discussed on territory adjustments.

Note: "sweeping favours" of opening ports and flights? Therefore Varosha return is a sweeping favour to GCs! Niki please.

[Tony-4497]

The property problem can only be resolved using 2 ways: Restitution and Exchange with equivalent property. This means that the TC state cannot be more than 15-20% of Cyprus.

ANY land that we accept to give away in return for so called "Compensation" is effectively a DONATION to the Turks.

This is because the TC "state" does not have any money to pay for this land which it wants to acquire (effectively for free). Any "debt" the TC "state" takes on in order to pay for such land will be paid by the federal state (i.e. GCs). This means that "compensation" CANNOT be at today's market values - in such a case even the federal state would go bankrupt (we are talking hundreds of billions, whilst international donations will be around half a billion max - on the basis of what happened in 2004).

Apparently GC leaders don't care about the above and are happy to accept compensation. GC property owners, however, are not. If Christofias is stupid enough to take a solution with such property provisions (not to mention rotational presidency) to referenum, he will find this out (at our peril)

[Nikitas]

Interesting observations by Tony, as always.

Personally speaking I see the proposal re the Property Development Corporation, not Commission as I wrote earlier, as:

a- admission that the south has looked after TC properties in a lawful manner as opposed to the north where possession was granted to all and sundry.

b- as a punisment of the south for its lawful behavior. Note that no such PDC is proposed for the north, precisely because the land there was shared out and possession is now so diffuse that it cannot be effectively centralised.

c- an attempt to limit the autonomy of the south in regard to property by the direct interference of the PDC in what happens to this property.

If, for instance, and this is a real situation and not at all hypothetical, all TC properties in Larnaca can be lumped together and passed for development to the PDC, the same cannot be said of GC properties in Kyrenia, because the TCs have handed them out, complete with "title" to diverse people- TC refugees, Turkish mainlanders, foreign buyers, "investors" etc.

Even within the parameters of BBF the PDC proposal is nonsense. Either we have TWO autonomous regions that manage their internal affairs or we do not. We cannot be Biregional in some respects but not those that are likely to yield a profit for one side only, at the expense of the other. If the TCs want to share in the rebuiolding of Famagusta then they must let the GCs share in the development of Kyrenia and other areas of the north.

If this PDC bullshit is included in any guise in the final draft I am voting against it.

[halil]

GREEK CYPRIOT OMBUDSMAN “END DISCRIMINATION AGAINST TURKISH CYPRIOTS”

Greek Cypriot Ombudsman Iliana Nikolau has called on the Greek Cypriot Administration to put an end to its ethnic discrimination against the Turkish Cypriots over their property-related demands in South Cyprus. According to the Greek Cypriot press, the Ombudsman reached the conclusion that the constitutional rights of property is being restricted for Turkish Cypriots after evaluating the complaints brought by two TC's about their properties in the South.
The Greek Cypriot Ombudsman Iliana Nikolau called for the removal of the legislation that was introduced in South Cyprus after 1963, which brought restrictions on property rights of Turkish Cypriots on the grounds of public safety.

[Tony-4497]

Indeed, Nikita - our leaders just don't get it and they are playing Turkey's game, as they are driving us straight to a second NO at referendum...

[B25]

GREEK CYPRIOT OMBUDSMAN “END DISCRIMINATION AGAINST TURKISH CYPRIOTS”

Greek Cypriot Ombudsman Iliana Nikolau has called on the Greek Cypriot Administration to put an end to its ethnic discrimination against the Turkish Cypriots over their property-related demands in South Cyprus. According to the Greek Cypriot press, the Ombudsman reached the conclusion that the constitutional rights of property is being restricted for Turkish Cypriots after evaluating the complaints brought by two TC's about their properties in the South.
The Greek Cypriot Ombudsman Iliana Nikolau called for the removal of the legislation that was introduced in South Cyprus after 1963, which brought restrictions on property rights of Turkish Cypriots on the grounds of public safety.

OK, so we have to lift the resrictions because two TCs are grumbling, someone need to tell this pathetic creature of an ombudsman there are also 200,000 GCs grumbling and I don't see anyone calling on the Turkey administration to sort that. Makes you wonder.

[ttoli]

GREEK CYPRIOT OMBUDSMAN “END DISCRIMINATION AGAINST TURKISH CYPRIOTS”

Greek Cypriot Ombudsman Iliana Nikolau has called on the Greek Cypriot Administration to put an end to its ethnic discrimination against the Turkish Cypriots over their property-related demands in South Cyprus. According to the Greek Cypriot press, the Ombudsman reached the conclusion that the constitutional rights of property is being restricted for Turkish Cypriots after evaluating the complaints brought by two TC's about their properties in the South.
The Greek Cypriot Ombudsman Iliana Nikolau called for the removal of the legislation that was introduced in South Cyprus after 1963, which brought restrictions on property rights of Turkish Cypriots on the grounds of public safety.

OK, so we have to lift the resrictions because two TCs are grumbling, someone need to tell this pathetic creature of an ombudsman there are also 200,000 GCs grumbling and I don't see anyone calling on the Turkey administration to sort that. Makes you wonder.

Ain't E.U membership great