Cyprus-Forum.com

by **Pyrpolizer** » Mon Oct 10, 2011 12:15 am

Settlement and colonization of the occupied is Turkey's illegal act but the settlers themselves cannot be charged for an illegal act.
On one hand the EU aquis and UN human rights are on the side of settlers in the sense that you cannot send anyone away just like that.
In fact there will be a number of settlers who will be entitled to stay and get citizenship just because they were born here and are over 18.

Turkey on the other hand cannot escape her obligations to settlers and the consequences of her illegal action.
This can be included in detail in a solution agreement or be done later (after a solution by dragging Turkey to international courts).In general Turkey should pay all costs for the relocation back to Turkey of those who must leave as well as the re-housing of those who will stay.

The 3rd and most important matter regarding the settlers issue is this: the change of the demographics because of the number of settlers.Suppose that all settlers would have the right to stay and get citizenship because they were born here and are over 18. That would make the percentage of Kibrislis about 30% of the total which is way above the demographics on which the Republic was formed(18%-82%). Therefore because of this some many thousand settlers should be compensated BY TURKEY for whatever it takes to be housed in Turkey.
Because in this case their whatever rights are in conflict with the rights of shariing this place of the Kypreoi and Kibrislis on an 82-18% basis.

by **Nikitas** » Mon Oct 10, 2011 4:41 am

Pyro,

I beg to differ on the rights of settlers. True they bear no criminal liability, but they cannot benefit from the initial illegal act, that of forcible exclusion of the rightful inhabitants of the north, and the subsequent colonisation.

Additioncally Cyprus has legal duties to its citizens who were forced to emigrate and stay overseas due to the invasion. Any settlement and post settlement arrangement must take those people into account. It might be impossible to accomodate both the settlers and the emigrant Cypriots with the available resources. It would be ironic to have a judicial dispute between a native born Cypriot (of either ethnic group) and a settler over the property of the former, and a decision in favor of the latter.

by **CBBB** » Tue Oct 11, 2011 1:26 pm

We're buggered, the President is apparently scheduled to visit the rig, so that will probably go up in smoke as well!

by **bill cobbett** » Tue Oct 11, 2011 1:54 pm

Nikitas wrote:Pyro,

I beg to differ on the rights of settlers. True they bear no criminal liability, but they cannot benefit from the initial illegal act, that of forcible exclusion of the rightful inhabitants of the north, and the subsequent colonisation.

Additioncally Cyprus has legal duties to its citizens who were forced to emigrate and stay overseas due to the invasion. Any settlement and post settlement arrangement must take those people into account. It might be impossible to accomodate both the settlers and the emigrant Cypriots with the available resources. It would be ironic to have a judicial dispute between a native born Cypriot (of either ethnic group) and a settler over the property of the former, and a decision in favor of the latter.

There's no need to re-invent the wheel on the matter of the situation of the Illegal Settlers and the CarpetSquatters as they are covered by the housing and property restitution in the context of the return of refugees and internally displaced persons report of the Special Rapporteur, Paulo Sérgio Pinheiro...
Principles on Housing and Property Restitution for Refugees and Displaced Persons.

The Illegal Settlers and Carpetshaggers are deemed to be "secondary occupants"

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

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.

--------

So they can all bugger off, as from the above they don't have a legal leg to stand on... unless of course silly politicians give them a legal right to stay in a settlement and if we read some of the provisions at the back end of the Anan Scam, such a right would have been given to many at the expense of rightful owners.