Cyprus-Forum.com

[boulio]

were we go again seems certain circles is the EU will never learn:

http://www.cyprus-mail.com/cyprus/spoke ... t/20101020

[boulio]

After all, the matter is not completely closed, despite it being set on the correct base with the decision,” Stefanou said.

The Commission is trying to pass the regulation under an article in the Lisbon Treaty that governs EU trade with third countries thus depriving Cyprus of the right to veto.

Cyprus has always argued that the direct trade regulation should not be examined as a matter of international trade with third countries since the north is considered part of the Republic of Cyprus – according to the accession treaty -- despite the suspension of the acquis.

so now the north is not part of cyprus ?

[humanist]

the occupied area of Cyprus is part of Cyprus which is now under Turkish occupation At the request and support of the Turkish speaking Cypriots Community. To this end it is not under effective control of the government of the RoC. The occupied territory of Cyprus is like the rest of Cyprus part of EU territory. This means that the EU can only trade with this part of Cyprus under the auspice of the Cypriot government or as otherwise agreed upon by the government of Cyprus. Returning of Varosha and opening the Port of Famagusta is a proposal put forth by the government of Cyprus in order to enable trade between the EU and the Turkish speaking Cypriot community currently living in the occupied area of Cyprus.

[insan]

EUROPOLITICS / External relationsPrint this article | Print this article
EU/Turkish Cypriot community
Direct trade regulation: JURI committee sides with Nicosia
By Joanna Sopinska | Wednesday 20 October 2010

After much deliberation, the European Parliament's Committee on Legal Affairs (JURI) has rejected the legal basis proposed by the European Commission for a regulation facilitating direct trade with the Turkish Cypriot community. In a report by Kurt Lechner (EPP, Germany), adopted on 18 October, the committee concluded that direct trade with the North of Cyprus - known as the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus (TRNC) - is not a question of commercial policy but rather an internal matter that should be governed directly by the Union's single market and customs union rules.

The committee recalled that the whole territory of Cyprus, including the Northern part of the island, is part and parcel of EU customs territory and therefore the movement of goods there should not be regulated on the basis of trade policy, as proposed in 2004 by the Commission. According to the committee, this would “imply that de facto the line separating the territory of Cyprus would be tantamount to an external border of the Union”. "We need to keep things simple. It is difficult to draft a regulation on the basis of external action and trade policy because Cyprus as a whole is already a member of the EU," commented Lechner.

The JURI committee’s opinion was welcomed by the Cypriot government, which described it as “a positive development”. Nicosia has long questioned the legal basis of the regulation proposed by the European Commission. Due to its opposition, the proposal has never been adopted, as its approval required the unanimous support of all EU member states. After six years, the Commission re-launched, in early March, the adoption procedure of the regulation, but under different rules of procedure.

The Commission decided that following the entry into force of the Lisbon Treaty, in December 2009, the proposal for the direct trade regulation should fall - as all other trade agreements with third countries - under the co-decision procedure, which implies participation of the European Parliament in the process on equal footing with the Council. Under this procedure, the ultimate approval of the proposal by the Council would not any more require unanimity but rather qualified majority. The Commission’s move has irked Cyprus, which feared that under the new rules the proposal had a chance to be adopted. Nicosia has launched an intensive lobbying campaign against the proposal, with Cypriot Foreign Minister Markos Kyprianou threatening to take the Commission to the EU Court of Justice.

Following the vote, the JURI committee sent, on 19 October, a letter to the Conference of Presidents stating its position. If the Conference of Presidents endorses it (no date has yet been set), the draft regulation will remain solely in the hands of the member states, which have already rejected it in the past.

http://www.europolitics.info/external-p ... 73-44.html

Wow! Let's see where will the threats, lobbying and blackmails of the so-called RoC lead this issue and GC people...

[CBBB]

EUROPOLITICS / External relationsPrint this article | Print this article
EU/Turkish Cypriot community
Direct trade regulation: JURI committee sides with Nicosia
By Joanna Sopinska | Wednesday 20 October 2010

After much deliberation, the European Parliament's Committee on Legal Affairs (JURI) has rejected the legal basis proposed by the European Commission for a regulation facilitating direct trade with the Turkish Cypriot community. In a report by Kurt Lechner (EPP, Germany), adopted on 18 October, the committee concluded that direct trade with the North of Cyprus - known as the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus (TRNC) - is not a question of commercial policy but rather an internal matter that should be governed directly by the Union's single market and customs union rules.

The committee recalled that the whole territory of Cyprus, including the Northern part of the island, is part and parcel of EU customs territory and therefore the movement of goods there should not be regulated on the basis of trade policy, as proposed in 2004 by the Commission. According to the committee, this would “imply that de facto the line separating the territory of Cyprus would be tantamount to an external border of the Union”. "We need to keep things simple. It is difficult to draft a regulation on the basis of external action and trade policy because Cyprus as a whole is already a member of the EU," commented Lechner.

The JURI committee’s opinion was welcomed by the Cypriot government, which described it as “a positive development”. Nicosia has long questioned the legal basis of the regulation proposed by the European Commission. Due to its opposition, the proposal has never been adopted, as its approval required the unanimous support of all EU member states. After six years, the Commission re-launched, in early March, the adoption procedure of the regulation, but under different rules of procedure.

The Commission decided that following the entry into force of the Lisbon Treaty, in December 2009, the proposal for the direct trade regulation should fall - as all other trade agreements with third countries - under the co-decision procedure, which implies participation of the European Parliament in the process on equal footing with the Council. Under this procedure, the ultimate approval of the proposal by the Council would not any more require unanimity but rather qualified majority. The Commission’s move has irked Cyprus, which feared that under the new rules the proposal had a chance to be adopted. Nicosia has launched an intensive lobbying campaign against the proposal, with Cypriot Foreign Minister Markos Kyprianou threatening to take the Commission to the EU Court of Justice.

Following the vote, the JURI committee sent, on 19 October, a letter to the Conference of Presidents stating its position. If the Conference of Presidents endorses it (no date has yet been set), the draft regulation will remain solely in the hands of the member states, which have already rejected it in the past.

http://www.europolitics.info/external-p ... 73-44.html

Wow! Let's see where will the threats, lobbying and blackmails of the so-called RoC lead this issue and GC people...

We are not the "so called", that would be somebody else!

[insan]

The head of the Socialists group in the European Parliament, Martin SCHULZ, has said that the implementation of the regulation will increase the competitiveness of the North Cyprus economy,narrow the prosperity gap between the two communities in Cyprus and “make the solution of the
Cyprus problem easier” by integrating the North Cyprus economy into the EU.7 The adoption of the Regulation would also enable Turkey to open its ports and airports to Cyprus as has been declared several times by Turkish officials. This would not only put Turkey’s accession negotiations back on
track to a great extent, but also facilitate the mutual trade and hence the establishment of an environment of mutual trust for all the parties involved. This would also remove the great disillusionment of Turkish Cypriots vis-a-vis the EU.

http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/s ... l=tr&gl=tr

Shulz is full aware of the essence of the "direct trade" issue...

[insan]

EUROPOLITICS / External relationsPrint this article | Print this article
EU/Turkish Cypriot community
Direct trade regulation: JURI committee sides with Nicosia
By Joanna Sopinska | Wednesday 20 October 2010

After much deliberation, the European Parliament's Committee on Legal Affairs (JURI) has rejected the legal basis proposed by the European Commission for a regulation facilitating direct trade with the Turkish Cypriot community. In a report by Kurt Lechner (EPP, Germany), adopted on 18 October, the committee concluded that direct trade with the North of Cyprus - known as the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus (TRNC) - is not a question of commercial policy but rather an internal matter that should be governed directly by the Union's single market and customs union rules.

The committee recalled that the whole territory of Cyprus, including the Northern part of the island, is part and parcel of EU customs territory and therefore the movement of goods there should not be regulated on the basis of trade policy, as proposed in 2004 by the Commission. According to the committee, this would “imply that de facto the line separating the territory of Cyprus would be tantamount to an external border of the Union”. "We need to keep things simple. It is difficult to draft a regulation on the basis of external action and trade policy because Cyprus as a whole is already a member of the EU," commented Lechner.

The JURI committee’s opinion was welcomed by the Cypriot government, which described it as “a positive development”. Nicosia has long questioned the legal basis of the regulation proposed by the European Commission. Due to its opposition, the proposal has never been adopted, as its approval required the unanimous support of all EU member states. After six years, the Commission re-launched, in early March, the adoption procedure of the regulation, but under different rules of procedure.

The Commission decided that following the entry into force of the Lisbon Treaty, in December 2009, the proposal for the direct trade regulation should fall - as all other trade agreements with third countries - under the co-decision procedure, which implies participation of the European Parliament in the process on equal footing with the Council. Under this procedure, the ultimate approval of the proposal by the Council would not any more require unanimity but rather qualified majority. The Commission’s move has irked Cyprus, which feared that under the new rules the proposal had a chance to be adopted. Nicosia has launched an intensive lobbying campaign against the proposal, with Cypriot Foreign Minister Markos Kyprianou threatening to take the Commission to the EU Court of Justice.

Following the vote, the JURI committee sent, on 19 October, a letter to the Conference of Presidents stating its position. If the Conference of Presidents endorses it (no date has yet been set), the draft regulation will remain solely in the hands of the member states, which have already rejected it in the past.

http://www.europolitics.info/external-p ... 73-44.html

Wow! Let's see where will the threats, lobbying and blackmails of the so-called RoC lead this issue and GC people...

We are not the "so called", that would be somebody else!

Soon you will see how so-called you are when all the cards put on the table...

[Oracle]

I think you'll find it's already decided and simply a matter of dotting the "i"s and crossing the "t"s to make the writ legal and binding.

The Mail's reporting is (deliberately?) slapdash; mixing the past, present and future tenses. The Lisbon Treaty argument has been thrown out since the whole of Cyprus is one EU country and not partly 'foreign'.

Does anyone really believe the EU is going to give away the northern half of Cyprus as foreign, and not EU territory, just so that TCs can trade some "Helim"?

[boulio]

yeah oracle read a rticle today in the polits that basically stated the same thing.They claim that this tactic was implemented so the talks would continue fear of turkey and or the t/c imfuriated by the desicion walk away and to sustain pressure on the ROC TO CONTIUNUE talks in good faith.

[insan]

I think you'll find it's already decided and simply a matter of dotting the "i"s and crossing the "t"s to make the writ legal and binding.

The Mail's reporting is (deliberately?) slapdash; mixing the past, present and future tenses. The Lisbon Treaty argument has been thrown out since the whole of Cyprus is one EU country and not partly 'foreign'.

Does anyone really believe the EU is going to give away the northern half of Cyprus as foreign, and not EU territory, just so that TCs can trade some "Helim"?

So why are your pathetic, Hellenic lobbyist threatening to take the Commission to the EU Court of Justice.