Cyprus-Forum.com

[erolz3]

What are you talking about reh Erolz3? Obviously you haven't read it yourself.
IT IS RACIST TO THE ULTIMATE DEGREE. IT IS RACIST AGAINST THE GCs. IT LEGALISES STEALING THEIR PROPERTIES.

You want me to read the relevant clauses for you?

Tsk tsk tsk

I have read it. (btw have you read the 'namibia exception' post yet , not seen any comment from you)

Firstly I would say the context it was labeled as racist in the original thread was racist against british expats. However that is neither here nor there.

Now as for the claim that it is not racist, I still stand by that. I know the section of it you reffer too and I understand totaly why you see things the way you do, but hear me out and remeber lets try and keep some 'space' open.

It is discriminatory in the extreme to GC (and others) in regard to how it treats their property. That is undeniable.

However the section I think you refer to is this one

"All immovable properties, buildings and installations which were found abandoned on l3th February, 1975 when the Turkish Federated State of Cyprus was proclaimed or which were considered by law as abandoned or ownerless after the abovementionad date, or which should have been in the possesion or control of the public even though their ownership had not yet been determined ; "

This section does not reffer to any race. I know and accept that in practice those affect were overwhealmingly GC, but the consitution itself does reffer to race in any way. Others who were not GC could be and were affected equally badly as GC by the clause. This is the basis on which I would claim that the consitution is of itself not racist.

Now I KNOW how sensative and painful this section is to you are a cypriot and as a GC. I understand that. I understand why you consider it racist. I do not expect you to change that view. I do however hope you can at least see the basis on which I make my claim even though you do not share that view.

Please lets not lets this destroy what 'space' we have found in the last 24 hours. I accept that the clause is a gross violation of your rights. BUt the point I am arguing here is the very narrow and specific one of 'is there any basis on which I can claim the TRNC consitution is not in and of itself racist in a strict defenition of the word racist.

I fear despite all I have said above this will shut down what little space we have I will say in advance that on this subject , having put forward my opinion I will say no more.

[Pyrpolizer]

The "trnc" constitution and its "laws"may or may not be racists but a "state" that does not permit (I'm not sure how it can do this other than through laws an its "constitution") certain persons to reside there because of of their race certainly is racist.

There is a clue as to the preferred race in the "trnc" in the "states" title. Arguing as to which component of the "trnc" is racist is little more than nit picking.

Jerry i still remember that there was a long dispute in the occupied that the IPC was on bridge of their constitution and that they should change basic articles of it. After of course 30+ years that the "constitution" was on effect and has stolen and distributed the GC properties around...

I don't know if they ever changed those articles or just let the IPC be an internal remedy of Turkey as it is in reality.

On the other hand how could it ever be possible for an internal legal remedy of Turkey like the IPC ever tell the "trnc" what to do?


But then again who cares? Turkey itself knows that "trnc" is nothing so who cares of it's "constitution" or anything. Turkey tells them what to do, and they must shut up.....

[erolz3]

The "trnc" constitution and its "laws"may or may not be racists but a "state" that does not permit (I'm not sure how it can do this other than through laws an its "constitution") certain persons to reside there because of of their race certainly is racist.

There is a clue as to the preferred race in the "trnc" in the "states" title. Arguing as to which component of the "trnc" is racist is little more than nit picking.

Jerry I dont know if you saw my post about why I am here and the need for space but I hope yuou have.

The context of this discussion is very very specific, why the issue if the "TRNC" constitution is racist is relevant is NOT part of some pushing of 'propaganda' - you can see why this question came up. The issue is not is the "TRNC" itself racist but is its constitution in and off itself racist. I have said my single piece on on what basis I think it can be argued that it not complete with as many disclaimers as I can pack in and will say no more about that.

We must not let ourselves get locked into the same old circular arguments that we have a hundred times on here over the years, if we collectively have any desire to truely make any 'progress'. I realise that may be impossible now and that I am largley to blame should it prove so but I always have a glimmer of hope.

[Pyrpolizer]

What are you talking about reh Erolz3? Obviously you haven't read it yourself.
IT IS RACIST TO THE ULTIMATE DEGREE. IT IS RACIST AGAINST THE GCs. IT LEGALISES STEALING THEIR PROPERTIES.

You want me to read the relevant clauses for you?

Tsk tsk tsk

I have read it. (btw have you read the 'namibia exception' post yet , not seen any comment from you)

Firstly I would say the context it was labeled as racist in the original thread was racist against british expats. However that is neither here nor there.

Now as for the claim that it is not racist, I still stand by that. I know the section of it you reffer too and I understand totaly why you see things the way you do, but hear me out and remeber lets try and keep some 'space' open.

It is discriminatory in the extreme to GC (and others) in regard to how it treats their property. That is undeniable.

However the section I think you refer to is this one

"All immovable properties, buildings and installations which were found abandoned on l3th February, 1975 when the Turkish Federated State of Cyprus was proclaimed or which were considered by law as abandoned or ownerless after the abovementionad date, or which should have been in the possesion or control of the public even though their ownership had not yet been determined ; "

This section does not reffer to any race. I know and accept that in practice those affect were overwhealmingly GC, but the consitution itself does reffer to race in any way. Others who were not GC could be and were affected equally badly as GC by the clause. This is the basis on which I would claim that the consitution is of itself not racist.

Now I KNOW how sensative and painful this section is to you are a cypriot and as a GC. I understand that. I understand why you consider it racist. I do not expect you to change that view. I do however hope you can at least see the basis on which I make my claim even though you do not share that view.

Please lets not lets this destroy what 'space' we have found in the last 24 hours. I accept that the clause is a gross violation of your rights. BUt the point I am arguing here is the very narrow and specific one of 'is there any basis on which I can claim the TRNC consitution is not in and of itself racist in a strict defenition of the word racist.

I fear despite all I have said above this will shut down what little space we have I will say in advance that on this subject , having put forward my opinion I will say no more.

And the heirs of GC living enclaved in Karpaz, cannot inherit his property after he dies, and and, and...

Sorry Erolz3 but it's like telling me "my dad is very nice and democratic to his family.He takes good care of us. Regardless that he raped 3 other women so far and killed another person". In this respect he might be a very good father I agree.

I hope my reply does not shut the space you are referring to

[erolz3]

I don't know if they ever changed those articles or just let the IPC be an internal remedy of Turkey as it is in reality.

Actualy we 'fudged it' and found a way to incorporate the changes via laws that was achievable much more easily than changin the consitution directly that requires a much greater level of votes than law change'

On the other hand how could it ever be possible for an internal legal remedy of Turkey like the IPC ever tell the "trnc" what to do?


But then again who cares? Turkey itself knows that "trnc" is nothing so who cares of it's "constitution" or anything. Turkey tells them what to do, and they must shut up.....

Actulay Pyrpolizer I would suggest that the idea that TC have no power at all in relation to Turkey and her wants and demands is not the case, as shown by the current Ankara driven austerity meansures. The prospect of a large scale revolt of TC directly and consistenly aimed not at the austerity meansures themselves but soley at Turkeys control of TC is a nightmanre senario for Turkey that could eclipse the 'kurdish issue'. This actualy gives TC some very real 'power' in the relationship despite the massive disporprtionality in every other regard.

What is more I urge to not just dimiss this idea out of hand in favour of dogma but give it some real careful consideration, for if it is true that TC have some effective power in their relations to Turkey, this is ultimately better for ALL cypriots and the chances that e can as Cypriots sort out the mess we are in today than if they have no such power.

[erolz3]

I hope my reply does not shut the space you are referring to

Like I say I am aware of how deeply sensistive this whole issue is to you and I will stick by my 'pledge to say no more. I understand your response. I am by nature twitching to respond to the Karpaz bit but will not.

And pelase do rember that I did not come here and start a thread saying 'hey all you GC the TRNC constiution is not racist - suck on that'. How this came up was very different to that extrem charicture I paint.

[Pyrpolizer]

I don't know if they ever changed those articles or just let the IPC be an internal remedy of Turkey as it is in reality.

Actualy we 'fudged it' and found a way to incorporate the changes via laws that was achievable much more easily than changin the consitution directly that requires a much greater level of votes than law change'

On the other hand how could it ever be possible for an internal legal remedy of Turkey like the IPC ever tell the "trnc" what to do?


But then again who cares? Turkey itself knows that "trnc" is nothing so who cares of it's "constitution" or anything. Turkey tells them what to do, and they must shut up.....

Actulay Pyrpolizer I would suggest that the idea that TC have no power at all in relation to Turkey and her wants and demands is not the case, as shown by the current Ankara driven austerity meansures. The prospect of a large scale revolt of TC directly and consistenly aimed not at the austerity meansures themselves but soley at Turkeys control of TC is a nightmanre senario for Turkey that could eclipse the 'kurdish issue'. This actualy gives TC some very real 'power' in the relationship despite the massive disporprtionality in every other regard.

What is more I urge to not just dimiss this idea out of hand in favour of dogma but give it some real careful consideration, for if it is true that TC have some effective power in their relations to Turkey, this is ultimately better for ALL cypriots and the chances that e can as Cypriots sort out the mess we are in today than if they have no such power.

Yes that's my hope too.

[Jerry]

The "trnc" constitution and its "laws"may or may not be racists but a "state" that does not permit (I'm not sure how it can do this other than through laws an its "constitution") certain persons to reside there because of of their race certainly is racist.

There is a clue as to the preferred race in the "trnc" in the "states" title. Arguing as to which component of the "trnc" is racist is little more than nit picking.

Jerry I dont know if you saw my post about why I am here and the need for space but I hope yuou have.

The context of this discussion is very very specific, why the issue if the "TRNC" constitution is racist is relevant is NOT part of some pushing of 'propaganda' - you can see why this question came up. The issue is not is the "TRNC" itself racist but is its constitution in and off itself racist. I have said my single piece on on what basis I think it can be argued that it not complete with as many disclaimers as I can pack in and will say no more about that.

We must not let ourselves get locked into the same old circular arguments that we have a hundred times on here over the years, if we collectively have any desire to truely make any 'progress'. I realise that may be impossible now and that I am largley to blame should it prove so but I always have a glimmer of hope.

I'm not sure what you feel you are to blame for. I'm pleased to see your and Copperline's return to CF, whether CFers agree or disagree with you I'd rather see your contributions than the ya boo jibes that have infected the forum for far too long.

A bit off topic but I came across this a few days ago, the little that I've had time to read is quite interesting.

http://www.internal-displacement.org/80 ... pDocuments)/52D0482BF09AC104C12575460053EA71/$file/Deniz+Sert+Dissertation.pdf
(copy & paste whole link)

PROPERTY RIGHTS IN RETURN AND RESETTLEMENT OF INTERNALLY
DISPLACED PERSONS (IDPS)
A QUANTITATIVE AND COMPARATIVE CASE STUDY
by
Deniz Sert
Adviser: Professor Susan L. Woodward
This dissertation argues that solving the internal displacement problem is crucial for
building peace, and any solution to the problem of internal displacement must include
institutionalized property rights for internally displaced persons (IDPs). Granting
property rights to IDPs is not only important for creating incentives for them to return
home, but also for generating the means to re-establish their lives elsewhere, i.e., to
resettle and reintegrate. The methodology followed in this dissertation is both
quantitative and qualitative. In the quantitative part, I test the existing hypotheses on IDP
return in the literature with a dataset, which I compiled, that comprises all the countries
with conflict-induced, internally displaced people. The results of the quantitative
analysis show that property rights are an important determinant of IDP return and
resettlement. In the qualitative part, a more detailed analysis of individual cases of
Bosnia and Cyprus elucidate and confirm the theory proven by quantitative analysis with
qualitative data, and uncover the endogenous variables affecting the settlement of the
problem of internal displacement that are overlooked by aggregate data.

[erolz3]

I'm not sure what you feel you are to blame for. I'm pleased to see your and Copperline's return to CF, whether CFers agree or disagree with you I'd rather see your contributions than the ya boo jibes that have infected the forum for far too long.

Thanks

A bit off topic but I came across this a few days ago, the little that I've had time to read is quite interesting.

I havent time to read it now other than the excerpt you quote from opneing but first thing that strikes me is that REpulsewarrior is the man for this. From what I have understood from his documents for way forward, which is patchy at best, it would seem to have synergy with this report.

RW get stuck in mate.

I will read it poperly when I get time.

[Sotos]

We know that the ECHR protects the right of citizens in the "TRNC" (as a group of people not as an entity recognised by the ECHR). Anyone the "TRNC" considersa citizen IS protected by the ECHR - I accept this protection is provided via Turkey as the putable party and the protection those living in the "TRNC" and consider as citizens by the "TRNC" the ECHR gives them does nothing in terms of legitimsiing the TRNC.

But it is just NOT TRUE to say the ECHR provides protection to those people that the "TRNC" considers citizens, but NOT to those it does not. And 'zoots' when he posted the claim KNEW it was not true.

I believe every human being is supposed to be protected by the ECHR. So "trnc citizenship" is really irrelevant. Are you saying that a Turkish Settler who was given "trnc citizenship" will be seen in a different way from a Turkish settler who did not?

But to be honest Sotos I am feeling that 'space' that is necessary for there to be any chance of achieving any 'breakthroughs' though participation in this forum is rapidly closing down. It is starting to feel (note the use of the word feel - subjective emotional reaction) that your objective is not to seek breakthroughs but to try and get me to say as many times as possible over and over that the TRNC is illegal / non recognised . whatever the subject is. I have made an effort I think in using the " that are so important to you, to try and help 'make space' and yet now feel this effort on my part is not being reciprocated, and thus the point of being here for me dimishes and reduces.

But to have a real breakthrough that means we agree on something and then we can move on something else. If you revert to your earlier position after just one paragraph then we are back on square one! You should permanently stop implying that there is some separate state in the north where we are foreigners. It is offensive and it is not true. The equivalent of you saying such thing is me saying that TCs are not real Cypriots and they are foreigners in Cyprus etc etc. I can do that and I did that with those who were asking for it! But I thought you wanted something different!!!