Cyprus-Forum.com

[Pyrpolizer]

Here is the extract from the complete ruling

Thanks

I am still struggling to see how you go from that to your 'condtition 1' ?

As for your condition 2 I can see where you derive that from. However I read the bit "the effects (of not recognising an act) of which can be ignored only to the detriment of the inhabitants of the Territory" as meaning if the effects (of not recognising an act) were ignored in a specific instance it could only lead to the detriment of the inhabitants of the terrirotry.

You seem to read as saying, if the effect of not recognising an act is to the detriment of the inhabitants of the terrirtory, but it also AFFECTS (has an impact on) any other person, positively or negatviely, then the exception does not apply.

I am not trying to be difficult here for the sake of it, or because I think one reading is better for TC than the other, I genuinely do not think it is saying what I think you think it is saying. Sorry.

I translated that as meaning it applies to ALL the people as well as to each one individually.
As for condition No1 that was from the heading "having legal consequences". But it can also be derived from the word ONLY in the second condition.

In any case I am not a legal expert, and if you read the RoC document that deals with it it seems the RoC explains the Namibia exception in a totally different way.

The fact is that in practice they don't accept any "legal" document of the "trnc" that might have legal consequences and that's obvious to anyone living here. From what I understood perhaps they might very exceptionally look at cases concerning humanitarian issues.

Like I said before if an individual presents a "trnc" document to the RoC, this means he wants something from the RoC. And I don't think the Namibia exception automatically gives him the right to take what he is asking for.

[Pyrpolizer]

Erolz3, here's a full legal explanation of the Namibia Exception published in RoC's web site.

You may need to copy paste the full link to your browser again.

http://www.law.gov.cy/Law/lawoffice.nsf ... medies.doc

Good document find, thanks for that. Struggled to get the link to work but found it via google and got there in the end.

What do you think reading it? I think it supports pretty much what I think I have been suggesting all along ?

Not every 'act' (including issuing certain documents) by the "TRNC" is automaticaly invalid in the eyes of iternational law, simply because the "TRNC" is non recongnised. Some 'acts' (documents) do have validity under international law DESPITE having been issued by "TRNC". The principal that determins what 'acts' do or do not fall under this exeption is, would ignoring the act of an unrecognised state unduly punish or penalise an indivdual just because they happen to live in such a territory. The reason why this is the case is that the intent of non recognition is not to punish indivduals who happen to live in such a territory, but to isolate and punish the non recongised state by not allowing its acts to have legal force under international law or to allow states to confer any legitmacy on it by recognising any such acts or do anything that might confer legitimacy.

Anyway I welcome and look forward to your thoughts.

Could you provide the exact quote? I haven't seen anything like that in there

[Pyrpolizer]

Btw isn't it already a fact that other countries do accept "trnc" documents according to Namibia exception like birth certificates, marriage certificates etc for the mere reason that those documents have no legal implications for them?
For me the question is whether the RoC should also accept them. And in my opinion no she shouldn't as long as they might have legal implications on her.

[erolz3]

Could you provide the exact quote? I haven't seen anything like that in there

Sorry it was not a quote. It was a summary of what I have been saying all along which I felt was pretty much in line with the document you gave the link to.

Anyway whatever, I feel I have learnt from this discussion so thanks. No doubt we will still have differing opinions as to what exactly the 'namibia excpetion' means for actual people living in Cyprus but regardless I do feel we jointly made some 'progress' and I thank you for your part in that.

[erolz3]

Btw isn't it already a fact that other countries do accept "trnc" documents according to Namibia exception like birth certificates, marriage certificates etc for the mere reason that those documents have no legal implications for them?

Ok we are still quite different in our views but thats ok

I think other countries accept them because if they did not it would be to the detriment of the indivdual concerned, and its not his fault he or she lives in an unrecognised state and thus are obliges to accept them because of the 'namibia exception'. Nor do I think them recognising such documents has no legal implications for them. If they do or don't recognised my divorce decree issued by "TRNC" then it does have a legal implication for them as I see it. The legal implication for them is am I breaking a law in the UK or not if I remarry in the UK.

For me the question is whether the RoC should also accept them. And in my opinion no she shouldn't as long as they might have legal implications on her.

I think the RoC has no choice to recognise them without risking being in breach of international law. I think you are confusing something having a legal implication for the RoC and it having a political one. Politicaly it does not want to regard any act of the "TRNC" as having validity, ever and in any circumstance, but legaly in certain specfic cases it has to despite not wanting to.

[Pyrpolizer]

Btw isn't it already a fact that other countries do accept "trnc" documents according to Namibia exception like birth certificates, marriage certificates etc for the mere reason that those documents have no legal implications for them?

Ok we are still quite different in our views but thats ok

I think other countries accept them because if they did not it would be to the detriment of the indivdual concerned, and its not his fault he or she lives in an unrecognised state and thus are obliges to accept them because of the 'namibia exception'. Nor do I think them recognising such documents has no legal implications for them. If they do or don't recognised my divorce decree issued by "TRNC" then it does have a legal implication for them as I see it. The legal implication for them is am I breaking a law in the UK or not if I remarry in the UK.

For me the question is whether the RoC should also accept them. And in my opinion no she shouldn't as long as they might have legal implications on her.

I think the RoC has no choice to recognise them without risking being in breach of international law. I think you are confusing something having a legal implication for the RoC and it having a political one. Politicaly it does not want to regard any act of the "TRNC" as having validity, ever and in any circumstance, but legaly in certain specfic cases it has to despite not wanting to.

The legal implications are actually on you my friend not on them.By the minute you submit any document and their accepting it as true, you bear all responsibility about it. And if another wife comes there saying you married her after you divorced your first one you will be in big trouble.

For the RoC birth,marriage,death etc certificates have implications on citizenship, and properties. They are not a one shot and it's over action. Imagine accepting you as the son of someone by just presenting her a "trnc" certificate and transfering you his property as a legal heir. Imagine you selling it and disappear. Who would she ever prosecute, if the document was faque on the first place, the "trnc", you?
Who would she ever prosecute if you were not the only heir? How could she ever check how many heirs are there living in the "trnc"?

[Pyrpolizer]

Could you provide the exact quote? I haven't seen anything like that in there

Sorry it was not a quote. It was a summary of what I have been saying all along which I felt was pretty much in line with the document you gave the link to.

Anyway whatever, I feel I have learnt from this discussion so thanks. No doubt we will still have differing opinions as to what exactly the 'namibia excpetion' means for actual people living in Cyprus but regardless I do feel we jointly made some 'progress' and I thank you for your part in that.

Thank you too my friend.
Please bear in mind that the RoC might be acting quite differently from what I said.

Here's an example:
TC called Ahmet and his wife Ayshe both holding RoC IDs appear to the RoC and say this our son, here's the "trnc" birth certificate we want to issue him an RoC ID. The RoC says the "trnc" paper is not necessary puts them under oath at the district court and issues an ID to the son.
One week later Ahmet and Ayshe do the same for their 2nd son.
Then for their daughter. Then for another, and another and another... who in reality are not their children.

So I could be wrong in what I said that the RoC totally disregards the "trnc" papers... By-passing them yes, but disregard them completely that would be very surprising.

I think unless we have a TC here to tell us the exact procedure under which he got his/her RoC card , that we shouldn't be hasty to draw any conclusions.