sadik wrote:Hi Kifeas,
I'm familiar with your personal case from your previous postings and I, of course, am not going to advise you on how to use your property.
As far as I know, the reason that the ECHR did not accept the compensation committee as an internal remedy was because it did not have the power to offer restitution for the property and only a financial compensation. Not because the TRNC did not exist. It seems that there are some preparations directed by Turkey on the property issue and they are playing on the ECHR accepting this as an internal remedy. I don't think they will go ahead if, somehow, they are not signalled that this will be accepted.
If the properties start to be returned, I don't think the Court can dismiss this saying that property is returned by a nonexistent entity.
I don't know what they are planning for complex cases where considerable development has taken place on properties, though I can speculate. We'll soon see what they are cooking.
Merhaba Sadik,
It is true that the ECHR rejected the compensation committee as an internal remedy primarily because it did not have the power to reinstate properties, but the issue of "TRNC" existence had already been examined and ruled out during the Loizidou case. The ECHR will only accept a property comity as an internal remedy, only if Turkey accepts that such a committee fells directly within its own jurisdiction and that any property owner who might not be satisfied with the outcome, can still take the case further up to the ECHR against Turkey. I see it impossible that the ECHR will give Turkey the chance to claim that since the court accepted a committee formed under the TRNC (a non-existent for the ECHR court entity,) Turkey ceased to have any further responsibility, should a GC is not satisfied with the results of it. If this would have been the case, then we will be talking about an indirect recognition of the TRNC from the back door, but even in such a case and since TRNC -besides not been recognised, is not a member of the Council of Europe either, any of its deeds and acts cannot be brought and tried in front of the ECHR either. A case can be brought in front of the ECHR only if it involves countries who are members of the Council of Europe and who had also ratified the relevant protocols, something which is not the case with the TRNC.
That is why I said earlier that all it seems to me is another "alchemic" experiment that Turkey (and the "TRNC") are preparing, with the sole aim of winning a bit of more time and thus also delaying the examination of the already pending cases in the ECHR.
Furthermore, I see such an act on behalf of the “TRNC,” namely to change article 159 of its constitution -something which in essence cancels all the issued “TRNC” title deeds against GC properties, while at the same time allowing the continuation of construction and development on these properties -which is essentially based on the to-be-cancelled title deeds, as one of the most oxymoron things one can ever come across. I certainly wouldn’t like to be in Talat’s & Co’s place …not even for one second.
The best thing I believe he can do for the sake of the Turkish Cypriots (and the Greek Cypriots,) is to empower himself with enough courage to tell the “deep-state” in Turkey to “FO” and lift up the phone and tell C. Annan that he is ready to discuss and negotiate the positions and concerns of the GC side so that we find a solution as soon as possible. And in case we discover that Papadopoullos is indeed changing line and becomes a hard liner -as some portray him to be, or that he tries to avoid negotiating and drag his feet further, hoping for the ideal solution in the unspecified future, then we the GCs will take care of him very soon. The only one that can prove to the GCs that Papadopoullos indeed doesn’t want a solution …is Talat himself. So far ...he consistently fails to prove it.
