Cyprus-Forum.com

[Socrates]

You are very funny.

I’ve search the whole net and I didn’t find a zip.

I’m just want to be informed.

Why you (generally) barging about the foreign judges when you call the ex district attorney a fraud?

Maybe he is, I’m just want to cross the information and I’m not trusting any of them as the TC probably they have right to not trust us if we are so cheaters

You are very funny because you obviously think what Papadopoulos is an angel probably you haven’t read about his integrity in this:

http://www.cyprusnet.gr/CyprusnetPages/ ... rkides.htm

also read this about Tsielepis:

http://www.cyprusnet.gr/CyprusnetPages/ ... ioAnan.htm

[Socrates]

And why the Anan plan is dead?

And why you disagree with that:

And there is the previous example of the 50% what they prefer partition from a solution based on BBF.

Can you count your fingers or you are so fanatical that you just used words for fan?

[Pyrpolizer]

The game of the TCs together with Turkey was always for partition. And of course we don’t mean the standard split that happened between Czech and Slovakia but the grabbing of the best and most productive part of almost half the country by the 18% minority.

As long as this game continues there will be no solution. The Anan Plan provided Turkey and the TCs+settlers the stepping stone to almost achieving their goal. They were presumably to give back some tiny part of what they now occupy, and in return they would get all the tools to enforce their partition based on the current Attila line. without returning anything and without letting a single GC return.

Even for Varoshia which according to the Anan Plan would be returned in 100 days, they managed to make it crystal clear to us they claim all of it to belong to Evkaf. Is it really very difficult to guess what would happen the 99th day if the AP was accepted?

Like I said for almost 50 years we had Denktash playing the game of partition with clear terms. At least he was honest. Now we have Talat who thinks he can achieve his partition theft through recognition. We offer him direct trade with Europe via return of Varoshia, no he does not accept. He wants to trade directly like a ‘trnc pseudo" without returning anything. All his aim and the aim of Turkey behind him is for partition theft through recognition.

Nothing has changed. The TCs + Settlers + Turkey want a solution , which will guarantee them the way for final partition and theft. And if in the meantime some GC refugees return they will kick them out later within a flash.

[Socrates]

The game of the TCs together with Turkey was always for partition. And of course we don’t mean the standard split that happened between Czech and Slovakia but the grabbing of the best and most productive part of almost half the country by the 18% minority.

Yes this was the target of Ntektash and the military system of Turkey but the Anan plan was not giving them one in a million to achieve something like that.

No one could partially make changes on the constitution with out the agreement of the three guarantee powers. And this is one of the reason what many lawyers was not accepted the plan because our laws in that matter is above the vested interest of Europe and to make a unify constitution and drop the federation we had to take the ok of the three powers. So this fear is just a fear with out any reality and there is no one lawyer who knows a zip about the plan who doesn’t know that.

My opinion is what the guarantee powers issue should be our demand.

The plan was totally secured and balance but we can have something better in the philosophy of the plan, out of it we get a cucumber.

[Alexis]

No one could partially make changes on the constitution with out the agreement of the three guarantee powers. And this is one of the reason what many lawyers was not accepted the plan because our laws in that matter is above the vested interest of Europe and to make a unify constitution and drop the federation we had to take the ok of the three powers. So this fear is just a fear with out any reality and there is no one lawyer who knows a zip about the plan he knows that.

My opinion is what the guarantee powers issue should be our demand.

Hi Socrates,

Was this provision really in the plan? Having three guarantor powers who are not accountable to the Cypriot people be given powers to ratify/veto changes to the Cypriot constitution agreed by the Cypriot people? Is this what you are saying? If so, isn't that something we absolutely do not want?

[Socrates]

Alexis

This is the answer to the above threat and should be our demand except if we have something else to propose.

I’m not trusting Europe more than Greece in this issue because they have their own laws and may eventually agree to a legal partition.

Is the more secure way to at least guarantee to united Cyprus as long Greece existing

If there is a better way to achieve this then the scientists must answer. I’m not the know all person.

If the constitution is not workable there is methods to over pass them like the issue of the foreign judges, the only problem is if eventually some day we will be one community by the mixing of population and want a new constitution, if such case appears then by our voting we can force a European Turkey to agreed in our will, with the UK it can't be a problem since the democratic rights of all the parts will be accepted with out discussion as long as Europe exist.




Tsielepis about the foreign judges:

Mια ερώτηση για το Aνώτατο Δικαστήριο και τον ρόλο που θα παίζουν οι τρεις ξένοι δικαστές. Kατά πόσον αυτοί θα παίρνουν τις αποφάσεις και αν είναι έτσι γιατί δεν μας το λέτε ξεκάθαρα;-

Όχι, θα απαντήσω ξεκάθαρα, βεβαίως. Θα υπάρχουν 3 Eλληνοκύπριοι, 3 Tουρκοκύπριοι, 3 ξένοι. Έχει εισαχθεί ένας ανορθόδοξος μηχανισμός κύριε Παυλίδη, ο οποίος είναι έξω από την λογική της επιστήμης του λογικού δικαίου, είναι έξω από τη διάκριση των εξουσιών, είναι ανορθόδοξος και ακριβώς είναι το σημείο που λέει ότι πέραν το ότι θα υπάρχουν οι ξένοι εντάξει, ήρθε και το '60 είναι δυσάρεστο αλλά θα υπάρχουν, δεν είναι αυτό που εννοώ μόνο. Eίναι ότι το δικαστήριο θα λειτουργεί και για ξεπέρασμα αδιεξόδων. Aυτό δεν είναι σωστό να γίνεται. Γιατί γίνεται. Γίνεται διότι έχοντας δύο κοινότητες και δύο περιφέρειες ό,τι και να κάνεις έχεις πρόβλημα αδιεξόδων. Συνήθως τα αδιέξοδα επιλύονται με δημιουργίες διαφόρων επιτροπών σε ομοσπονδίες αλλά και εκεί η εκπροσώπηση θα θέλουν να είναι ίση και θα γίνεται ένας φαύλος κύκλος. Λοιπόν, μπήκε η ανορθόδοξη ρύθμιση ότι αν φτάνεις σε αδιέξοδο θα αντιμετωπίζεται από το δικαστήριο. Aυτή επαναλαμβάνω η επαχθής και ανορθόδοξη ρύθμιση σημαίνει όμως ότι δεν μπορεί να υπάρξει αδιέξοδο. Kαι το ότι δεν μπορεί να υπάρξει αδιέξοδο δεν μπορείς να έχεις πρόσχημα για να πεις εντάξει είναι αδιάλυτος ο λεγόμενος συνεταιρισμός ή ομοσπονδία. Eντάξει, απαγορεύεται η απόσχιση, αλλά έχω αδιέξοδο και εκ των πραγμάτων έχει καταρρεύσει η ομοσπονδία. Kαι μετά να δοθούν επιχειρήματα τύπου Γιουγκοσλαβίας, αφού κατέρρευσε, ας τους αναγνωρίσουμε. Eδώ σου λέει δεν υπάρχει πιθανότητα να καταρρεύσει διότι αν έχεις αδιέξοδο θα το λύσει το δικαστήριο. Aπ' εκεί και πέρα εύχομαι και ελπίζω, αυτή η ανορθόδοξη ρύθμιση να είναι έτσι. Προσωρινή, γιατί όταν το θελήσουμε και εμείς και οι Tουρκοκύπριοι θα φύγουν οι ξένοι. Aς ελπίσουμε ότι θα λειτουργεί σαν κίνητρο για να μάθουμε να συμβιβαζόμαστε και να λύνουμε τις διαφορές μας, να μην τους αφήνουμε να τις λύνουν εκείνοι και είχαμε ζητήσει και έχει εισαχθεί ότι οι τρεις ξένοι θα είναι στο δικαστήριο μόνο όταν υπάρχει αδιέξοδο με δικαίωμα ψήφου. Eάν δηλαδή, η πλειοψηφία Eλληνοκυπρίων και Tουρκοκυπρίων καταλήγει σε μια απόφαση οι ξένοι δεν θα ψηφίζουν καν. Aυτό είναι το ένα. H ψήφος τους θα είναι μόνο όταν υπάρχει αδιέξοδο, μόνο μέχρι να ξεπεραστεί το αδιέξοδο και θα έχουν μια ψήφο οι τρεις. Όχι τρεις. Θα ψηφίζουν πρώτα μεταξύ τους και θα φέρνουν μια ψήφο, η οποία βεβαίως σε περίπτωση αδιεξόδων, θα είναι δυστυχώς, καθοριστική.

[Tony-4497]

In fact they could retreat to just 18% and then in fact force us to accept partition. Who would tell them they are wrong? What arguments could anyone present to prove them wrong?
18% is their "fair" share.
Now think why they did not and will never do it?
Because my friend they want us to propose it. They want US to start thinking of it.
By the minute we do the cucumber is there waiting for us.

I agree it would be wrong for us to propose it. I believe that there is an intelligent way of achieving this through a re-negotiation of the Annan plan.

I believe that our government should re-commence a negotiation of the Annan plan, with the only pre-condition that the area of the TC component state cannot exceed 18% in any case.

If Turks agree to this, then they can have some gains in terms of a higher degree of sovereignty etc (i.e. closer to confederation). If they do not agree, then THEY will be held responsible for the non-solution.

[Socrates]

I think you should be in the negotiate team but not for the Cyprus problem you can be great in negotiations about soccer or something like that because you scientific analysis remembers me the fans of Apollo and Omonoia but I think what Ael is more suitable.

AEL LAOS Protathlima REEEE.

[Pyrpolizer]

Socrates,

Re your links:
For your information I watched the interview of Mr Tsielepis live 2 years ago. The man is honest, and as you know he was the top technocrat at the negotiations. If you watch carefully he does not either support or reject the Anan Plan. He simply states facts and lets everyone decide by himself.

Regarding Markides comments to the Presidents speach may I remind you that every night Markides was present in lengthy 2-3 hour TV discussion shows and all his thesises were repeateadly discussed and were all proven wrong. Pick up anyone you like and present it for discussion here. Even a TC can tear appart this nonsense for example:

"Τα εγγυητικά δικαιώματα δεν είναι διευρυμένα. Είναι ακριβώς τα ίδια με αυτά του 1960.
Οι Εγγυήτριες δυνάμεις, ομού ή χωριστά, δεν είχαν ποτέ επεμβατικά δικαιώματα."

Translation:The intervention rights (in the AP) are not extended.They are exactly the same as of those of 1960.The Guarantor powers, together or separately, never had intervention rights"

All in all the general conclussion from Markides comments is that the Anan Plan was legally susceptible to multiple explanations. Are you in a position to realise what would that mean in practice?

[Pyrpolizer]

Socrates,
First:
Why do you avoid stating to whom your reply refers?
Is your comment for "soccer team" screemers addressed to everyone here?
Second:
Stop the insulting, and labelling adjectives on people here.