Cyprus-Forum.com

[bill cobbett]

This is from today's opinion piece in the Snail...

( http://www.cyprus-mail.com/opinions/our ... e/20110612 )

..."Meanwhile, at the end of this year there is another deadline which Greek Cypriots should be made aware of. The Immovable Property Commission in the north will not accept applications for compensation after December 21. Those who do not apply before then will lose their properties in the occupied area for good, without getting a cent for them, a point forcefully made on a TV show by several respected lawyers..."

... those who do not apply to the Scammy IPC before the 21st December of this year will lose their properties... Pretty clear eh?

Well to whoever writes these scaremongering pieces of Turkish appeasing propaganda, rather than relying on opinions from a TV show, go back to the source and see for yourself what the ECHR had to say about deadlines for claims. It's called good journalism.

So shall we do just that and go back and see what the ECHR itself had to say on your alleged deadline?

...and here is what the blessed ECHR had to say about property claim deadlines... (this is from the press release associated with the Demopoulos v Turkey judgment)

From http://cmiskp.echr.coe.int/tkp197/view. ... udoc-pr-en

..."The Court also stressed that this decision was not to be interpreted as an obligation to make use of the IPC; the claimants could choose to await a political solution. However, if applicants wished to lodge an application before the European Court of Human Rights, its admissibility would be decided in line with the present principles..".

Well would you believe it boys and girls, from the horse's mouth... THERE IS NO DEADLINE AND IT'S LEFT TO PROPERTY OWNERS TO USE OR NOT USE THE SCAMMY IPC.

[Hermes]

Thanks for clarifying that, Bill. The Cyprus Mail is an appalling and duplicitous rag. On the one hand it identifies correctly what the Turkish strategy is:

The Turks have been showing a greater sense of urgency and calling for deadlines, not because they are particularly keen on a deal, but because they believe that a make-or-break process would lead to the collapse of the talks and end of the UN initiative. This reasoning is based on the calculation that if Christofias were pressured into making a decision he would reject a deal and be blamed for the failure.

Then it criticizes President Christofias for not agreeing to play Turkey's game and urges the G/C side to speed up talks and agree to a time-frame! Exactly what the Turks want so as to collapse the talks! Incredible!

To cap it all, it then decides to scare refugees into incorrectly believing they will lose all rights to their properties if they ignore the Turkish/IPC deadline.

A really poorly-argued, terrible and grovelling piece - even by the Mail's low standards. Anyone would think the Cyprus Mail has an agenda to undermine the G/C side and to promote Turkey and Britain's agenda on the ongoing talks. Who the bloody hell funds this rotten excuse for a newspaper?

[Jerry]

Not sure our friend Candounas would agre with you chaps.

Also from the Mail, http://www.cyprus-mail.com/cyprus/lawye ... 2#comments

My belief is that Turkey will extend the deadline to show "goodwill". Crafty buggers probably intended it to operate for much longer but by putting a time limit on it and then extending it they will be seen in a good light by the "arbitrators of Cyprus"

If Erodguts wins the election today convincingly he may be tempted to get serious about solving the Cyprus Problem, he may feel that he is in a position to "give" on Cyprus. Hugh Pope (yes I know he is a c..t) thinks that the EU and solving Cyprus are Erdo's first two priorities. This is what he says about EU, "half of Turkey’s trade is with Europe, most tourists to Turkey come from Europe, NATO is the cornerstone of Turkish defense and two-thirds of Turkey’s foreign investment comes from EU states" He said this about Cyprus, "The new government would also do well to start a real, structured dialogue with Greek Cypriot officials to give a new impetus to ongoing talks to solve the Cyprus problem. Failure to achieve a compromise settlement will cause real damage, as set out in our 2009 report Reunification or Partition"
http://www.todayszaman.com/news-246917- ... pope*.html

[Hermes]

Not sure our friend Candounas would agre with you chaps.

Also from the Mail, http://www.cyprus-mail.com/cyprus/lawye ... 2#comments

Demetriades makes some interesting points about (presumably) a collective action to take Turkey to the IPC to "maximise the cost of the occupation", as he puts it. Such a collective application to pressurise Turkey is likely to be more effective than a few individuals selling family plots, at less than market value, to Turkey - for fear of losing their rights for good. It would certainly be an interesting move...

“My plan of action is to call the Turkish bluff. First, you go for the whole property of the fenced off area of Famagusta. Turkey cannot claim any public interest in keeping this since there are no Turkish Cypriots, settlers or foreigners there.
“Second, the military zones. Turkey says it’s a peacekeeping force. Let’s say they’re right, does that mean they can have our properties rent-free? And at some point they’ll withdraw and the houses will have to be given back. Third, economic units, hotels, factories, the valuable within them and, fourth, everybody else.”

“People forget a very fundamental point, that Turkey is enjoying the occupied part of Cyprus for 37 years rent-free. The starting point is that the army must pay for the use of the land it enjoys. One can argue that they cannot afford it. Then they have to move in to something smaller.
“If they refuse to do that, then you have to file more cases to the IPC so that more judgements by the ECHR are generated so that they are forced to pay for the use of the land they are enjoying.
And if they cannot afford it, they should simply go home,” he added.

[bill cobbett]

Yes, we must have some respect for the views of both Mr Demetriades (who led the successful Loizidou case at the ECHR by the way) and of course of our old friend Mr Candounas (for his work in the Apostolides v Orams matter) and both seem to be promoting mass applications to the IPC Scam to expose Turkey to massive compensation awards for loss of use, and to expose its unwillingness to award restitution.

...and yes, would be astonished if the "deadline" wasn't extended for the reasons J states above.

... and the facts remain though that the ECHR has set no deadline and respects whether Property Owners apply or await developments.

[Viewpoint]

Not sure our friend Candounas would agre with you chaps.

Also from the Mail, http://www.cyprus-mail.com/cyprus/lawye ... 2#comments

Demetriades makes some interesting points about (presumably) a collective action to take Turkey to the IPC to "maximise the cost of the occupation", as he puts it. Such a collective application to pressurise Turkey is likely to be more effective than a few individuals selling family plots, at less than market value, to Turkey - for fear of losing their rights for good. It would certainly be an interesting move...

“My plan of action is to call the Turkish bluff. First, you go for the whole property of the fenced off area of Famagusta. Turkey cannot claim any public interest in keeping this since there are no Turkish Cypriots, settlers or foreigners there.
“Second, the military zones. Turkey says it’s a peacekeeping force. Let’s say they’re right, does that mean they can have our properties rent-free? And at some point they’ll withdraw and the houses will have to be given back. Third, economic units, hotels, factories, the valuable within them and, fourth, everybody else.”

“People forget a very fundamental point, that Turkey is enjoying the occupied part of Cyprus for 37 years rent-free. The starting point is that the army must pay for the use of the land it enjoys. One can argue that they cannot afford it. Then they have to move in to something smaller.
“If they refuse to do that, then you have to file more cases to the IPC so that more judgements by the ECHR are generated so that they are forced to pay for the use of the land they are enjoying.
And if they cannot afford it, they should simply go home,” he added.

Why dont you people do this???? and can we do the same in the south???

[CBBB]

Not sure our friend Candounas would agre with you chaps.

Also from the Mail, http://www.cyprus-mail.com/cyprus/lawye ... 2#comments

Demetriades makes some interesting points about (presumably) a collective action to take Turkey to the IPC to "maximise the cost of the occupation", as he puts it. Such a collective application to pressurise Turkey is likely to be more effective than a few individuals selling family plots, at less than market value, to Turkey - for fear of losing their rights for good. It would certainly be an interesting move...

“My plan of action is to call the Turkish bluff. First, you go for the whole property of the fenced off area of Famagusta. Turkey cannot claim any public interest in keeping this since there are no Turkish Cypriots, settlers or foreigners there.
“Second, the military zones. Turkey says it’s a peacekeeping force. Let’s say they’re right, does that mean they can have our properties rent-free? And at some point they’ll withdraw and the houses will have to be given back. Third, economic units, hotels, factories, the valuable within them and, fourth, everybody else.”

“People forget a very fundamental point, that Turkey is enjoying the occupied part of Cyprus for 37 years rent-free. The starting point is that the army must pay for the use of the land it enjoys. One can argue that they cannot afford it. Then they have to move in to something smaller.
“If they refuse to do that, then you have to file more cases to the IPC so that more judgements by the ECHR are generated so that they are forced to pay for the use of the land they are enjoying.
And if they cannot afford it, they should simply go home,” he added.

Why dont you people do this???? and can we do the same in the south???

You know that you can.