Cyprus-Forum.com

[bill cobbett]

As all will know Article 1 of Protocol 1 of the ECHR recognises the right to peaceful enjoyment of possessions (PROPERTY), and that Article 8 of the Convention recognises the right to respect for private and family life (HOME).

All will also be aware that there may be a conflict in these two articles.

The right to PROPERTY being used by those CYs ethnically cleansed in '74 wishing for restitution, whereas the Illegal Regime, the Illegal Settlers and some of the CarpetBaggers rely on the HOME argument to thwart evictions.

It's a conflict which is recognised by the UN's Commission On Human Rights in its report of 2005.

Chapter 17 is the salient chapter, the one entitled Secondary Occupants. so have put in in bold.

Below is the report...



16. The rights of tenants and other non-owners

16.1 States should ensure that the rights of tenants, social-occupancy rights holders and other legitimate occupants or users of housing, land and property are recognized within restitution programmes. To the maximum extent possible, States should ensure that such persons are able to return to and repossess and use their housing, land and property in a similar manner to those possessing formal ownership rights.

17. Secondary occupants

17.1 States should ensure that secondary occupants are protected against arbitrary or unlawful forced eviction. States shall ensure, in cases where evictions of such occupants are deemed justifiable and unavoidable for the purposes of housing, land and property restitution, that evictions are carried out in a manner that is compatible with international human rights law and standards, such that secondary occupants are afforded safeguards of due process, including an opportunity for genuine consultation, adequate and reasonable notice, and the provision of legal remedies, including opportunities for legal redress.
17.2 States should ensure that the safeguards of due process extended to secondary occupants do not prejudice the rights of legitimate owners, tenants and other rights holders to repossess the housing, land and property in question in a just and timely manner.

17.3 In cases where evictions of secondary occupants are justifiable and unavoidable, States should take positive measures to protect those who do not have the means to access any other adequate housing other than that which they are currently occupying from homelessness and other violations of their right to adequate housing. States should undertake to identify and provide alternative housing and/or land for such occupants, including on a temporary basis, as a means of facilitating the timely restitution of refugee and displaced persons’ housing, land and property. Lack of such alternatives, however, should not unnecessarily delay the implementation and enforcement of decisions by relevant bodies regarding housing, land and property restitution.

17.4 In cases where housing, land and property has been sold by secondary occupants to third parties acting in good faith, States may consider establishing mechanisms to provide compensation to injured third parties. The egregiousness of the underlying displacement, however, may arguably give rise to constructive notice of the illegality of purchasing abandoned property, pre-empting the formation of bona fide property interests in such cases.


18. Legislative measures

18.1 States should ensure that the right of refugees and displaced persons to housing, land and property restitution is recognized as an essential component of the rule of law. States should ensure the right to housing, land and property restitution through all necessary legislative means, including through the adoption, amendment, reform, or repeal of relevant laws, regulations and/or practices. States should develop a legal framework for protecting the right to housing, land and property restitution which is clear, consistent and, where necessary, consolidated in a single law.
18.2 States should ensure that all relevant laws clearly delineate every person and/or affected group that is legally entitled to the restitution of their housing, land and property, most notably refugees and displaced persons. Subsidiary claimants should similarly be recognized, including resident family members at the time of displacement, spouses, domestic partners, dependents, legal heirs and others who should be entitled to claim on the same basis as primary claimants.

18.3 States should ensure that national legislation related to housing, land and property restitution is internally consistent, as well as compatible with pre-existing relevant agreements, such as peace agreements and voluntary repatriation agreements, so long as these agreements are themselves compatible with international human rights, refugee and humanitarian law and related standards.

http://unispal.un.org/UNISPAL.NSF/0/577 ... 75006698E6

[denizaksulu]

As all will know Article 1 of Protocol 1 of the ECHR recognises the right to peaceful enjoyment of possessions (PROPERTY), and that Article 8 of the Convention recognises the right to respect for private and family life (HOME).

All will also be aware that there may be a conflict in these two articles.

The right to PROPERTY being used by those CYs ethnically cleansed in '74 wishing for restitution, whereas the Illegal Regime, the Illegal Settlers and some of the CarpetBaggers rely on the HOME argument to thwart evictions.

It's a conflict which is recognised by the UN's Commission On Human Rights in its report of 2005.

Chapter 17 is the salient chapter, the one entitled Secondary Occupants. so have put in in bold.

Below is the report...



16. The rights of tenants and other non-owners

16.1 States should ensure that the rights of tenants, social-occupancy rights holders and other legitimate occupants or users of housing, land and property are recognized within restitution programmes. To the maximum extent possible, States should ensure that such persons are able to return to and repossess and use their housing, land and property in a similar manner to those possessing formal ownership rights.

17. Secondary occupants

17.1 States should ensure that secondary occupants are protected against arbitrary or unlawful forced eviction. States shall ensure, in cases where evictions of such occupants are deemed justifiable and unavoidable for the purposes of housing, land and property restitution, that evictions are carried out in a manner that is compatible with international human rights law and standards, such that secondary occupants are afforded safeguards of due process, including an opportunity for genuine consultation, adequate and reasonable notice, and the provision of legal remedies, including opportunities for legal redress.
17.2 States should ensure that the safeguards of due process extended to secondary occupants do not prejudice the rights of legitimate owners, tenants and other rights holders to repossess the housing, land and property in question in a just and timely manner.

17.3 In cases where evictions of secondary occupants are justifiable and unavoidable, States should take positive measures to protect those who do not have the means to access any other adequate housing other than that which they are currently occupying from homelessness and other violations of their right to adequate housing. States should undertake to identify and provide alternative housing and/or land for such occupants, including on a temporary basis, as a means of facilitating the timely restitution of refugee and displaced persons’ housing, land and property. Lack of such alternatives, however, should not unnecessarily delay the implementation and enforcement of decisions by relevant bodies regarding housing, land and property restitution.

17.4 In cases where housing, land and property has been sold by secondary occupants to third parties acting in good faith, States may consider establishing mechanisms to provide compensation to injured third parties. The egregiousness of the underlying displacement, however, may arguably give rise to constructive notice of the illegality of purchasing abandoned property, pre-empting the formation of bona fide property interests in such cases.


18. Legislative measures

18.1 States should ensure that the right of refugees and displaced persons to housing, land and property restitution is recognized as an essential component of the rule of law. States should ensure the right to housing, land and property restitution through all necessary legislative means, including through the adoption, amendment, reform, or repeal of relevant laws, regulations and/or practices. States should develop a legal framework for protecting the right to housing, land and property restitution which is clear, consistent and, where necessary, consolidated in a single law.
18.2 States should ensure that all relevant laws clearly delineate every person and/or affected group that is legally entitled to the restitution of their housing, land and property, most notably refugees and displaced persons. Subsidiary claimants should similarly be recognized, including resident family members at the time of displacement, spouses, domestic partners, dependents, legal heirs and others who should be entitled to claim on the same basis as primary claimants.

18.3 States should ensure that national legislation related to housing, land and property restitution is internally consistent, as well as compatible with pre-existing relevant agreements, such as peace agreements and voluntary repatriation agreements, so long as these agreements are themselves compatible with international human rights, refugee and humanitarian law and related standards.

http://unispal.un.org/UNISPAL.NSF/0/577 ... 75006698E6

How do you unravel this Gordions' Knot. Who wields Alexanders Sword?

[bill cobbett]

As all will know Article 1 of Protocol 1 of the ECHR recognises the right to peaceful enjoyment of possessions (PROPERTY), and that Article 8 of the Convention recognises the right to respect for private and family life (HOME).

All will also be aware that there may be a conflict in these two articles.

The right to PROPERTY being used by those CYs ethnically cleansed in '74 wishing for restitution, whereas the Illegal Regime, the Illegal Settlers and some of the CarpetBaggers rely on the HOME argument to thwart evictions.

It's a conflict which is recognised by the UN's Commission On Human Rights in its report of 2005.

Chapter 17 is the salient chapter, the one entitled Secondary Occupants. so have put in in bold.

Below is the report...



16. The rights of tenants and other non-owners

16.1 States should ensure that the rights of tenants, social-occupancy rights holders and other legitimate occupants or users of housing, land and property are recognized within restitution programmes. To the maximum extent possible, States should ensure that such persons are able to return to and repossess and use their housing, land and property in a similar manner to those possessing formal ownership rights.

17. Secondary occupants

17.1 States should ensure that secondary occupants are protected against arbitrary or unlawful forced eviction. States shall ensure, in cases where evictions of such occupants are deemed justifiable and unavoidable for the purposes of housing, land and property restitution, that evictions are carried out in a manner that is compatible with international human rights law and standards, such that secondary occupants are afforded safeguards of due process, including an opportunity for genuine consultation, adequate and reasonable notice, and the provision of legal remedies, including opportunities for legal redress.
17.2 States should ensure that the safeguards of due process extended to secondary occupants do not prejudice the rights of legitimate owners, tenants and other rights holders to repossess the housing, land and property in question in a just and timely manner.

17.3 In cases where evictions of secondary occupants are justifiable and unavoidable, States should take positive measures to protect those who do not have the means to access any other adequate housing other than that which they are currently occupying from homelessness and other violations of their right to adequate housing. States should undertake to identify and provide alternative housing and/or land for such occupants, including on a temporary basis, as a means of facilitating the timely restitution of refugee and displaced persons’ housing, land and property. Lack of such alternatives, however, should not unnecessarily delay the implementation and enforcement of decisions by relevant bodies regarding housing, land and property restitution.

17.4 In cases where housing, land and property has been sold by secondary occupants to third parties acting in good faith, States may consider establishing mechanisms to provide compensation to injured third parties. The egregiousness of the underlying displacement, however, may arguably give rise to constructive notice of the illegality of purchasing abandoned property, pre-empting the formation of bona fide property interests in such cases.


18. Legislative measures

18.1 States should ensure that the right of refugees and displaced persons to housing, land and property restitution is recognized as an essential component of the rule of law. States should ensure the right to housing, land and property restitution through all necessary legislative means, including through the adoption, amendment, reform, or repeal of relevant laws, regulations and/or practices. States should develop a legal framework for protecting the right to housing, land and property restitution which is clear, consistent and, where necessary, consolidated in a single law.
18.2 States should ensure that all relevant laws clearly delineate every person and/or affected group that is legally entitled to the restitution of their housing, land and property, most notably refugees and displaced persons. Subsidiary claimants should similarly be recognized, including resident family members at the time of displacement, spouses, domestic partners, dependents, legal heirs and others who should be entitled to claim on the same basis as primary claimants.

18.3 States should ensure that national legislation related to housing, land and property restitution is internally consistent, as well as compatible with pre-existing relevant agreements, such as peace agreements and voluntary repatriation agreements, so long as these agreements are themselves compatible with international human rights, refugee and humanitarian law and related standards.

http://unispal.un.org/UNISPAL.NSF/0/577 ... 75006698E6

How do you unravel this Gordions' Knot. Who wields Alexanders Sword?

Look for case law, where it has been tested at the ECHR... but as the Settlers and CarpetShaggers are deemed, in the above, to be Secondary Occupants, it doesn't look at all good for them.

[Jerry]

As all will know Article 1 of Protocol 1 of the ECHR recognises the right to peaceful enjoyment of possessions (PROPERTY), and that Article 8 of the Convention recognises the right to respect for private and family life (HOME).

All will also be aware that there may be a conflict in these two articles.

The right to PROPERTY being used by those CYs ethnically cleansed in '74 wishing for restitution, whereas the Illegal Regime, the Illegal Settlers and some of the CarpetBaggers rely on the HOME argument to thwart evictions.

It's a conflict which is recognised by the UN's Commission On Human Rights in its report of 2005.

Chapter 17 is the salient chapter, the one entitled Secondary Occupants. so have put in in bold.

Below is the report...



16. The rights of tenants and other non-owners

16.1 States should ensure that the rights of tenants, social-occupancy rights holders and other legitimate occupants or users of housing, land and property are recognized within restitution programmes. To the maximum extent possible, States should ensure that such persons are able to return to and repossess and use their housing, land and property in a similar manner to those possessing formal ownership rights.

17. Secondary occupants

17.1 States should ensure that secondary occupants are protected against arbitrary or unlawful forced eviction. States shall ensure, in cases where evictions of such occupants are deemed justifiable and unavoidable for the purposes of housing, land and property restitution, that evictions are carried out in a manner that is compatible with international human rights law and standards, such that secondary occupants are afforded safeguards of due process, including an opportunity for genuine consultation, adequate and reasonable notice, and the provision of legal remedies, including opportunities for legal redress.
17.2 States should ensure that the safeguards of due process extended to secondary occupants do not prejudice the rights of legitimate owners, tenants and other rights holders to repossess the housing, land and property in question in a just and timely manner.

17.3 In cases where evictions of secondary occupants are justifiable and unavoidable, States should take positive measures to protect those who do not have the means to access any other adequate housing other than that which they are currently occupying from homelessness and other violations of their right to adequate housing. States should undertake to identify and provide alternative housing and/or land for such occupants, including on a temporary basis, as a means of facilitating the timely restitution of refugee and displaced persons’ housing, land and property. Lack of such alternatives, however, should not unnecessarily delay the implementation and enforcement of decisions by relevant bodies regarding housing, land and property restitution.

17.4 In cases where housing, land and property has been sold by secondary occupants to third parties acting in good faith, States may consider establishing mechanisms to provide compensation to injured third parties. The egregiousness of the underlying displacement, however, may arguably give rise to constructive notice of the illegality of purchasing abandoned property, pre-empting the formation of bona fide property interests in such cases.


18. Legislative measures

18.1 States should ensure that the right of refugees and displaced persons to housing, land and property restitution is recognized as an essential component of the rule of law. States should ensure the right to housing, land and property restitution through all necessary legislative means, including through the adoption, amendment, reform, or repeal of relevant laws, regulations and/or practices. States should develop a legal framework for protecting the right to housing, land and property restitution which is clear, consistent and, where necessary, consolidated in a single law.
18.2 States should ensure that all relevant laws clearly delineate every person and/or affected group that is legally entitled to the restitution of their housing, land and property, most notably refugees and displaced persons. Subsidiary claimants should similarly be recognized, including resident family members at the time of displacement, spouses, domestic partners, dependents, legal heirs and others who should be entitled to claim on the same basis as primary claimants.

18.3 States should ensure that national legislation related to housing, land and property restitution is internally consistent, as well as compatible with pre-existing relevant agreements, such as peace agreements and voluntary repatriation agreements, so long as these agreements are themselves compatible with international human rights, refugee and humanitarian law and related standards.

http://unispal.un.org/UNISPAL.NSF/0/577 ... 75006698E6

Nice work Bill. I needs a bit of time to digest the implications of this but it looks as if the pendulum has swung back in our favour.

It would seem that the ECHR interpreted this law in Turkey's favour in Demopoulos and Others v. Turkey last year because it wanted to rid itself of the growing number of Cypriots applying to the Court for justice. The Court only accepted the IPC as a legitimate body when restitution was offered as a remedy but as we know that's a bloody joke since so few properties have been been returned to their legal owners. I read in another place that the IPC is not accepting any more cases - I don't know if it's true though.

If and when the IPC (it was scheduled for December this year) does close its doors the ECHR will have to face another deluge of claims from Cypriots. As far as I am aware the ECHR did not give Turkey a bollocking for continuing to usurp our rights nor did it suggest that Turkey refrains from doing so in the future, it didn't do itself any favours did it.

[bill cobbett]

Jerry, on the matter of restitution. Bodies like the Scammission are not unusual, there are others elsewhere eg in Bosnia,... and earlier today, came across a ref, that their primary settlement plan is expected by the ECHR and the UN Commission on HR should be to offer Restitution, with compensation being a rarer secondary option... think the Scammission could soon be in trouble.

[bill cobbett]

Below is section 17 which tells us that the Illegal Settlers and the CarpetBaggers can be evicted from Stolen Lands, providing such matters as providing alternative accommodation are considered and included ... but it comes with a warning, a warning that applies to a lot of other issues and this is that in some situations compensation may have to be paid by the State. We should be careful to ensure that the State concerned, the state paying to sort out this mess, is Turkey, and that any actions at the ECHR are directed at Turkey, and take place whilst Turkey is still deemed to be the Occupying Power.

Timing is critical, the sums involved may be huge and indeed big enough to bankrupt the Republic. Best if Turkey pays the bill.

.....................

17. Secondary occupants

17.1 States should ensure that secondary occupants are protected against arbitrary or unlawful forced eviction. States shall ensure, in cases where evictions of such occupants are deemed justifiable and unavoidable for the purposes of housing, land and property restitution, that evictions are carried out in a manner that is compatible with international human rights law and standards, such that secondary occupants are afforded safeguards of due process, including an opportunity for genuine consultation, adequate and reasonable notice, and the provision of legal remedies, including opportunities for legal redress.
17.2 States should ensure that the safeguards of due process extended to secondary occupants do not prejudice the rights of legitimate owners, tenants and other rights holders to repossess the housing, land and property in question in a just and timely manner.

17.3 In cases where evictions of secondary occupants are justifiable and unavoidable, States should take positive measures to protect those who do not have the means to access any other adequate housing other than that which they are currently occupying from homelessness and other violations of their right to adequate housing. States should undertake to identify and provide alternative housing and/or land for such occupants, including on a temporary basis, as a means of facilitating the timely restitution of refugee and displaced persons’ housing, land and property. Lack of such alternatives, however, should not unnecessarily delay the implementation and enforcement of decisions by relevant bodies regarding housing, land and property restitution.

17.4 In cases where housing, land and property has been sold by secondary occupants to third parties acting in good faith, States may consider establishing mechanisms to provide compensation to injured third parties. The egregiousness of the underlying displacement, however, may arguably give rise to constructive notice of the illegality of purchasing abandoned property, pre-empting the formation of bona fide property interests in such cases.


................
.. and don't you just love the last para, 17.4 ? Makes it clear, once again, to even the most thick-headed and optimistic of the CarpetBaggers that they have no "bone fide property interests" .........

[ttoli]

As all will know Article 1 of Protocol 1 of the ECHR recognises the right to peaceful enjoyment of possessions (PROPERTY), and that Article 8 of the Convention recognises the right to respect for private and family life (HOME).

All will also be aware that there may be a conflict in these two articles.

The right to PROPERTY being used by those CYs ethnically cleansed in '74 wishing for restitution, whereas the Illegal Regime, the Illegal Settlers and some of the CarpetBaggers rely on the HOME argument to thwart evictions.

It's a conflict which is recognised by the UN's Commission On Human Rights in its report of 2005.

Chapter 17 is the salient chapter, the one entitled Secondary Occupants. so have put in in bold.

Below is the report...



16. The rights of tenants and other non-owners

16.1 States should ensure that the rights of tenants, social-occupancy rights holders and other legitimate occupants or users of housing, land and property are recognized within restitution programmes. To the maximum extent possible, States should ensure that such persons are able to return to and repossess and use their housing, land and property in a similar manner to those possessing formal ownership rights.

17. Secondary occupants

17.1 States should ensure that secondary occupants are protected against arbitrary or unlawful forced eviction. States shall ensure, in cases where evictions of such occupants are deemed justifiable and unavoidable for the purposes of housing, land and property restitution, that evictions are carried out in a manner that is compatible with international human rights law and standards, such that secondary occupants are afforded safeguards of due process, including an opportunity for genuine consultation, adequate and reasonable notice, and the provision of legal remedies, including opportunities for legal redress.
17.2 States should ensure that the safeguards of due process extended to secondary occupants do not prejudice the rights of legitimate owners, tenants and other rights holders to repossess the housing, land and property in question in a just and timely manner.

17.3 In cases where evictions of secondary occupants are justifiable and unavoidable, States should take positive measures to protect those who do not have the means to access any other adequate housing other than that which they are currently occupying from homelessness and other violations of their right to adequate housing. States should undertake to identify and provide alternative housing and/or land for such occupants, including on a temporary basis, as a means of facilitating the timely restitution of refugee and displaced persons’ housing, land and property. Lack of such alternatives, however, should not unnecessarily delay the implementation and enforcement of decisions by relevant bodies regarding housing, land and property restitution.

17.4 In cases where housing, land and property has been sold by secondary occupants to third parties acting in good faith, States may consider establishing mechanisms to provide compensation to injured third parties. The egregiousness of the underlying displacement, however, may arguably give rise to constructive notice of the illegality of purchasing abandoned property, pre-empting the formation of bona fide property interests in such cases.


18. Legislative measures

18.1 States should ensure that the right of refugees and displaced persons to housing, land and property restitution is recognized as an essential component of the rule of law. States should ensure the right to housing, land and property restitution through all necessary legislative means, including through the adoption, amendment, reform, or repeal of relevant laws, regulations and/or practices. States should develop a legal framework for protecting the right to housing, land and property restitution which is clear, consistent and, where necessary, consolidated in a single law.
18.2 States should ensure that all relevant laws clearly delineate every person and/or affected group that is legally entitled to the restitution of their housing, land and property, most notably refugees and displaced persons. Subsidiary claimants should similarly be recognized, including resident family members at the time of displacement, spouses, domestic partners, dependents, legal heirs and others who should be entitled to claim on the same basis as primary claimants.

18.3 States should ensure that national legislation related to housing, land and property restitution is internally consistent, as well as compatible with pre-existing relevant agreements, such as peace agreements and voluntary repatriation agreements, so long as these agreements are themselves compatible with international human rights, refugee and humanitarian law and related standards.

http://unispal.un.org/UNISPAL.NSF/0/577 ... 75006698E6

How do you unravel this Gordions' Knot. Who wields Alexanders Sword?

Look for case law, where it has been tested at the ECHR... but as the Settlers and CarpetShaggers are deemed, in the above, to be Secondary Occupants, it doesn't look at all good for them.

So You've been saying for the past 5 years,so an example has been made of the Orams, have the promised arrests been made at the border?, No , why not

[ttoli]

Timing is critical, the sums involved may be huge and indeed big enough to bankrupt the Republic. Best if Turkey pays the bill.

Sure as shit, the south aint got the dosh, I'm thinking that they'll just wait till the souths on its Knees(Nothing unusual for u Bill ), then strike

[bill cobbett]

Timing is critical, the sums involved may be huge and indeed big enough to bankrupt the Republic. Best if Turkey pays the bill.

Sure as shit, the south aint got the dosh, I'm thinking that they'll just wait till the souths on its Knees(Nothing unusual for u Bill ), then strike

Do us a favour mate... any chance of crawling back down the U-bend?

[repulsewarrior]

...sure as shit, the south (as you say) has bigger balls; it's far harder to show tolerance and to act accordingly.

...if Turkey (the deep state) does not want to respect the Rule of Law, it too will become isolated without important global partners, it is not Turco-Cypriots who will suffer from this Intolerance, it may even free them at last from an Ottoman Imperialism based on Language.