Cyprus-Forum.com

[MicAtCyp]

Alexandre,

I downloaded the Vasiliou study from
http://www.kema.com.cy
I hope it is still there. If not tell me and I will E-mail to to you

Heres an extract of an old post of mine after reading that study:

The Common state will collect all indirect taxes plus all the VAT.It will return back to the constituent states 1/3 of their OWN VAT contribution plus 1/3 of the indirect taxes.According to Vasilious Economic study, both Constituent States will get back less than what the contribute.The Common State will always have a surplus and the Constituent states will always suffer from deficit.

What I meant in my previous post is that there was a spread of lies both from the fanatics of the yes camp and from the fanatics of the no camp.The 90% would be valid only if the economics of the Anan Plan were correct in the sense they would provide for an economically functional Federation (Which WERE NOT), and ONLY for the first year. Actually the contribution would be based on the standard of living because the Common state would collect all the indirect taxes and all the VAT of the constituent states both of which are directly linked with the Standard of living and thus the spending of the people. As the standard of living of the TCs would increase, slowly slowly they would pay the fair share. What I meant in my previous post is that this question should not be included in your poll because, it is a misconception. (Or if you like, derives from the lies of those who fanatically promoted the NO). Ok you know I voted NO, but I beleive i did so after as careful as possible judgement, and with so much disapointement and bitterness in the end....

Note: Vasilious study concluded the total cost of the solution would be 16 billion.There was another study by the Grafeio Programmatismou of the Government who found the cost to be about the same BUT... as I read in Politis they hide it in their drawers refusing to publish it. DESY made another study that concluded the cost to be only 3.5 billion, but I admit I never read that or knew where to find it. Anyway I scrutinised a lot on Vasilious study, double crossed many of his data and I admit I found it a very reliable and I didn’t manage to prove wrong any of his findings!

Regarding your question about the sea shell rights of the British Bases you can find the relevant parts in pages 150 onwards. ( I am referring to the Plan of 31 March 2004 of course)

Here are some small extracts

ANNEX II: ADDITIONAL PROTOCOL TO THE TREATY OF
ESTABLISHMENT
Article 5
1. Section 3 of Annex A to the Treaty of Establishment shall be replaced by
the following:
"Section 3
Cyprus shall not claim, as part of its territorial sea, waters lying
between the lines described in the report referred to in the Additional
Protocol to this Treaty."
2. The lines referred to in Section 3, as amended, of Annex A to the Treaty
of Establishment, which delimit the waters adjacent to the Sovereign
Base Areas that the United Cyprus Republic shall not claim as part of its
territorial sea,...............

c. Derogations from acquis. How exactly does being
inside the EU change things, in the matter of
derogations? Last thing I heard, the EU assured the UN
that it would accomodate the terms of any Cyprus
settlement, even if that meant derogations. How is it
different now?

That's a very interesting question.
Two facts: a) after one Country becomes full member there cannot be any derrogations.Derrogations are discussed, scrutinised, and agreed before a Country gets in. Don't you see the whole mess we are in now from the fact that they "forgot" to ask derrogations for so many important sectors of our economy? You name it, for the potatoes, for the grapes, for the transporters....
You said the EU promised to accomodate the derrogations. That's true but ONLY if we voted yes at the referendum which as you know was 7 days before the deadline.
Now we are a member of the EU. Absolutely no derrogations are possible anymore... Even when Germany got rejoined they did not manage to get any derrogations either.

Despite of that I think I commented many times in this Forum on the 11 th Demand of the Turkish Generals that the sooo neutral Mr Anan put in the Plan the last minute i.e the demand that the Anan Plan becomes primary law of EU. And I said that would be an action of the 2 Co-presidents after the 1st of May that would either end up to our kick out of Europe, or the Generals of Turkey would refuse to abide to the Aggreement..... Remember the No 1 aim of Turkey in 2003-4 was to derail Cyprus EU road...

An issue that we certainly need to resolve, is how much
interest there is to return under TC administration, and
what other amendments people would like to see before
they feel secure enough to relocate to the north. I
think Clerides made a crucial error in assuming that
there would be no such interest, therefore falling into
the "compenstation only, no restitution" trap during the
negotiations.

You are absolutely right. I ve seen a poll in Politis in the past talking for only 16% but I really don't trust this newspaper on such matters. I beleive a serious independent study is required.

Heres an extract from my Politis files:

Se o,ti afora tin epistrofi ton prosfugon polu endiaferon parousiazei o pinakas 5, sto erotima tou opoiou apantoun oloi ekeinoi oi prosfuges pou prin to 1974 katoikousan se perioxes oi opoies me vasi to sxedio Anan tha parameinoun upo T/K dioikisi. Apo tous prosfuges autous mono to 16% tha ithele na epistrepsei stis poleis i ta xoria tous, eno to 72% katigorimatika tonizei oti den tha epestrefe

Kod. arthrou: 432362

Notice you cannot find old articles on Politis web site but if you send them an E-mail at
[email protected]
they are very helpful to send you a copy.

[turkcyp]

That's a very interesting question.
Two facts: a) after one Country becomes full member there cannot be any derrogations.Derrogations are discussed, scrutinised, and agreed before a Country gets in. Don't you see the whole mess we are in now from the fact that they "forgot" to ask derrogations for so many important sectors of our economy? You name it, for the potatoes, for the grapes, for the transporters....
You said the EU promised to accomodate the derrogations. That's true but ONLY if we voted yes at the referendum which as you know was 7 days before the deadline.
Now we are a member of the EU. Absolutely no derrogations are possible anymore... Even when Germany got rejoined they did not manage to get any derrogations either.

Ooooh again derogationa issue.

I like this issue to be raised more and more by the TCs not by the GCs because after RoC became a member of EU then its constitution and its agreement before it joined to EU becomes primary law, and derogations should have been achieved by then.

This is why TCs liked to settle the Cyrpus issue before EU membership. Because literally RoC during EU negotiations did not negotiate any deraogations that TCs liked. (This also provves that thay are not representatibe of TCs on the island but who is listening?).

So after this, the above statement is very close to truth but not entirely. After a country becomes a EU memeber there are still ways to get new derogations. First of all in order to do that. Any agreement achieved in Cyprus has to be approved by EU Councuil and by individual states so it becomes the primary law, replacing the old derogations as the primary law of EU. (so in short a Cyprus solution has to be ratified by every country in EU, and by the EU council as well so that it becomes a primary law, otherwise every exception given under Annan Plan [or whatever plan you want to call it] worth nothing when a GC goes to EU courts.)

Another way is to legally claim that RoC seized to exits with the agreement so that a new agreement can be done with EU and the new Federal Cyprus Republic.

What RoC is trying to achieve with what their so called "European Solution" is to impose even a worse agreement that happened between West Germany and East Germany. In that case East Germany completly abolished itself and accepted all West Germany's laws, and relationship with EU.

But in Cyprus case, even this can not be done, because according to GCs there is no TRNC that exist to abolish itself to begin with. What they want simlply is to give us minority rights because other derogations are not negotiated on our behalf, and just exert their control all over the island under the weird constitutional structure achieved after 1963. This simply is not acceptable to TCs.

As I have said so many times. We did not try to change the 1960 constitution. You did. And as far as I am concerned, I am more than willing to turn back to 1960 constitution. But what GCs are offering is not 1960 constitution. What they are offering is minortiy rights. I rather have partition instead of such unification.

Have a great day everybody,

[boulio]

But in Cyprus case, even this can not be done, because according to GCs there is no TRNC that exist to abolish itself to begin with. What they want simlply is to give us minority rights because other derogations are not negotiated on our behalf, and just exert their control all over the island under the weird constitutional structure achieved after 1963. This simply is not acceptable to TCs.

actually the EU Said this,if you read THE document with which cyprus ascedded into the EU it clerly states,the ROC is the sole representing govt. of the entire island with only the european laws suspended in the North.

[turkcyp]

actually the EU Said this,if you read THE document with which cyprus ascedded into the EU it clerly states,the ROC is the sole representing govt. of the entire island with only the european laws suspended in the North.

I am aware of that. My point was that supposedly RoC was representing us as well during the accesion negotiations, but none of the derogrations were the kind of derogations we would ask for.

I mean the whole RoC accesion to EU is unconstitutional anyway according to RoC constitution. What actually acceded to EU is not the RoC of 1960 but RoC of 1964.

I do not understand how this is achieved without changing the RoC constitution anyway. But as it is always the case in international law, supremacy of law has very limited meaning, and everything is done by power strugles between the countries. Because sovereign entity is the states itself not the international body. (Unless some sovereignty is relinguished by the state to the international body, like in the case of EU).

So I am asking again one more time to my fellow GC countrymen. Let's say tomorrow Turkish Army decided to leave Cyprus and 'occupation' as you name it cease to exist. Will you then start applying 1960 constitution or not? This is a crucial questions in the minds of many many TCs.

Take care,

[brother]

No gc will agree to that.

[-mikkie2-]

I would not be so sure brother!

Would the TC's accept to return to the 1960 set up, including returning of all refugees to their former homes?

[erolz]

I would not be so sure brother!

Would the TC's accept to return to the 1960 set up, including returning of all refugees to their former homes?

I would be happy with the original 1960 agreements (as I believe the TC side was in general back then). However any return to these agreements would have to take into account that they failed and led to disaster for Cypriots on both sides. Thus for me any return to them would have to look at why that happened and why it would not happen again.

[brother]

mikkie you still did not answer the question, but my answer is 'yes'.

[MicAtCyp]

My point was that supposedly RoC was representing us as well during the accesion negotiations, but none of the derogrations were the kind of derogations we would ask for.

Because you refused to participate despite the hundreds of calls both from us and the EU itself!!
Anyway I am happy you know the issue of the derrogations so very well.

Another way is to legally claim that RoC seized to exits with the agreement so that a new agreement can be done with EU and the new Federal Cyprus Republic.

Ha, ha, ha.Not in a million years!

So I am asking again one more time to my fellow GC countrymen. Let's say tomorrow Turkish Army decided to leave Cyprus and 'occupation' as you name it cease to exist
Will you then start applying 1960 constitution or not? This is a crucial questions in the minds of many many TCs.

Definetely yes for 2 reasons: Because thats what 99.99% of the GCs want, and second if the rulers of RoC show reluctancy, you will sue RoCs ass out in the EU courts. Can’t you see that? Be sure the ones who will help you do that -in case the rulers are relactant- are the GCs lawyers and specialists themselves.... (Note:Why don't you post a poll for this asking the GCs to vote?)

Finally I am glad you confirmed that there is no way to ask for derrogations after the RoC entered the EU, unless the RoC disolves itself and re-applies for membership under a new status. After it commits suicide that is.

[Saint Jimmy]

My point was that supposedly RoC was representing us as well during the accesion negotiations, but none of the derogrations were the kind of derogations we would ask for.

Dude, I'm not really sure, but I think I read an interview Clerides gave a few years back, in which he said that the RoC asked TCs to send representatives in the accession talks and Denktash refused... But I can't remember the reason he gave... Have you heard anything about that?