stuballstu wrote: In my opinion the property issue is a political one not one for the legal courts as the only winners, as has just been proved is the lawyers who gain huge fees, and at who's expense?
gosh!
Stuball, why do you say this? Why is the property issue a political one? What makes it a political issue? Who has the right to regulate my property rights (a fundamental human right) through a political agreement? Based on what principle such a thing is assumed?
What is my fault as an individual ordinary citizen if the political leaderships of the two communities, for whatever reason(s,) cannot reach an agreement on the constitutional framework of Cyprus, to have my properties and home deprived from me for 32 years, and some other people to come and without my consent built vacation houses in them? No political dispute can be assumed to be the cause for the violation of individual citizens' fundamental human rights! If this is done, it is not a political problem but a violation of human rights by the perpetrator, and an illegality. The property issue by itself, and taken isolated as an issue, is not a political problem but a problem of illegality, a problem of violation of foundamental human rights and an illegality under the UN charter and the CoE conventions! It is a violation! This is not my invention, but it is the position of international law and the CoE human rights protocols. It is for this very reason that the ECHR ruled in the case of Loizidou, and in the Cyprus vs Turkey one. If the property issue was a mere political problem, the cases would have been dismissed by the court, for being political ones, or politicaly motivated.
The issue of GC properties in the north is not a political issue. It is a legal issue, and one of violation of international human right's laws by Turkey.