Cyprus-Forum.com

[Piratis]

Lets take what you say as standard for the sake of moving forward.

So that means you agree with what I said?

Because "moving forward" without agreeing on the direction and the framework within which we should move is totally useless.

You could be moving "forward" going "east", while I could also move forward" but going "west". As you understand there is no point in moving "forward" unless we move in the same direction and we understand "forward" in the same way.

Therefore I believe it is very import to agree on the most fundamental things before moving to the particulars.

(1)I believe that the number one thing that needs to be done that will allow us to move ahead is to declare clearly and with no hesitation our respect for the human rights of all of our country men and women regardless of what their background is.

Do we all agree that the human rights of both Greek and Turkish Cypriots should be respected and that the solution can not be one based on disrespect and violation of the human rights of any Cypriot?

[andri_cy]

Right. I actually thought clean slate was clean slate but clean slate must mean something totelly different in Cypriot.

[zan]

Right. I actually thought clean slate was clean slate but clean slate must mean something totelly different in Cypriot.

It was just a typo andri. "Cleans Late", is a new brand of Cholesterol free coffee.

[Viewpoint]

Lets take what you say as standard for the sake of moving forward.

So that means you agree with what I said?

Because "moving forward" without agreeing on the direction and the framework within which we should move is totally useless.

You could be moving "forward" going "east", while I could also move forward" but going "west". As you understand there is no point in moving "forward" unless we move in the same direction and we understand "forward" in the same way.

Therefore I believe it is very import to agree on the most fundamental things before moving to the particulars.

(1)I believe that the number one thing that needs to be done that will allow us to move ahead is to declare clearly and with no hesitation our respect for the human rights of all of our country men and women regardless of what their background is.

Do we all agree that the human rights of both Greek and Turkish Cypriots should be respected and that the solution can not be one based on disrespect and violation of the human rights of any Cypriot?

OK Piratis thats what I meant we agree on what you have put forward and try and apply these principles to our particular problem.

Go ahead on property I have put some proposals forward in an earlier post.

[andri_cy]

Right. I actually thought clean slate was clean slate but clean slate must mean something totelly different in Cypriot.

It was just a typo andri. "Cleans Late", is a new brand of Cholesterol free coffee.

LOL Zan...

[Piratis]

Ok, so about property:

The rights of the properties belong to the legal owners. I would classify the properties under some different categories:

1) Properties that have not been utilized should be returned immediately (so we agree for this)

2) Property that has been utilized by Settlers or foreigners should be returned to the legal owner within a short time frame. (e.g. 1-3 years). Turkey will be responsible to pay to rehouse those settlers back to Turkey (or Cyprus, if some of them will stay). The foreigners that illegally occupy Greek Cypriot land should leave as well. If TCs or Turkey want to compensate them thats something they should decide by themselves.

3) Properties that are utilized by Turkish Cypriots. If a property is utilized by a Turkish Cypriot in a way that it would be difficult for him to return it (e.g. he has his house in it, or he build a factory) then the Turkish Cypriot should be responsible to compensate the owner of the property at a fair value that will satisfy both. If the TC can not pay by himself, then Turkey should cover the remaining cost. If a property is utilized in a way that can be easily exchanged for something else (e.g. farming land) then the property should be returned. (and then maybe the TC could buy it back if the GC wants to sell it)

Overall, some property redistribution might be required, however everybody should get either all their land back, or at least land of equivalent value. In the end of this procedure nobody should be better of or worst off than from what it existed before 1974. (unless of course he meanwhile gained more property in legal ways not related to the Cyprus problem)

[Viewpoint]

Piratis

1) Properties that have not been utilized should be returned immediately (so we agree for this)

We agree here.

3) Properties that are utilized by Turkish Cypriots. If a property is utilized by a Turkish Cypriot in a way that it would be difficult for him to return it (e.g. he has his house in it, or he build a factory) then the Turkish Cypriot should be responsible to compensate the owner of the property at a fair value that will satisfy both. If the TC can not pay by himself, then Turkey should cover the remaining cost. If a property is utilized in a way that can be easily exchanged for something else (e.g. farming land) then the property should be returned. (and then maybe the TC could buy it back if the GC wants to sell it)

We can agree here as well. Just to clarify a point can the TC/GC get compensation for his land in the south and who will pay? or exchange his land with GC if they both agree?
Do the TCs who have built second homes, holiday homes, or flats or used part of the land or started to build something on the exchanged land come into this catagory?

2) Property that has been utilized by Settlers or foreigners should be returned to the legal owner within a short time frame. (e.g. 1-3 years). Turkey will be responsible to pay to rehouse those settlers back to Turkey (or Cyprus, if some of them will stay). The foreigners that illegally occupy Greek Cypriot land should leave as well. If TCs or Turkey want to compensate them thats something they should decide by themselves.

This is where we become unstuck. So if the current occupier is a settler or Foreigner that have to go? What if these people have built hotels, farms,factories on this land? Would it not be easier to compensate the GC? or offer alternative exchanged land which the TRNC has in its possesion given up by TC in the south? We have to be praticle, do we give a 5million pound investment to the GC for free or does he now have to pay the current user the market value?

What do other people think here? help solve this problem.

[andri_cy]

This is where we become unstuck. So if the current occupier is a settler or Foreigner that have to go? What if these people have built hotels, farms,factories on this land? Would it not be easier to compensate the GC? or offer alternative exchanged land which the TRNC has in its possesion given up by TC in the south? We have to be praticle, do we give a 5million pound investment to the GC for free or does he now have to pay the current user the market value?

What do other people think here? help solve this problem.

What about if they built a hotel or business they can share the profits or something with the legal owner. Become partners of some sort?

[Kikapu]

This is where we become unstuck. So if the current occupier is a settler or Foreigner that have to go? What if these people have built hotels, farms,factories on this land? Would it not be easier to compensate the GC? or offer alternative exchanged land which the TRNC has in its possesion given up by TC in the south? We have to be praticle, do we give a 5million pound investment to the GC for free or does he now have to pay the current user the market value?

What do other people think here? help solve this problem.

What about if they built a hotel or business they can share the profits or something with the legal owner. Become partners of some sort?

I think a partnership with the land owner and land developer (property built on GC land) is not a very practical way to go about it. If I invested £50,000 or £200,000 or £2,000,000 and built something on the GC land, this investment will not be an equal partner with the land owner. However, the land owner, for many reasons, may choose to sell the land that has been developed, or for many reasons, he will also choose not to sell, but instead rent it to the person who's property sits on the GC land. The property owner will not have a choice but to pay rent at market value, for the use of the land, or what ever the parties agree on.

As far as the foreigners are concerned, the same will go for them. They would not be expected to knock down the building on the GC land, but they will never own the land. They will be leasing it , much like they do in the UK. Even though the land owner cannot get to his land if it is built on, he still owns the land, that he can pass it on to his children, unless he sells it. Look, nothing lasts for ever. Most of these buildings are sitting on "borrowed time". There will come a time, most of these buildings will be knocked down, and new ones will take their place, with the permission of the original GC land owner, if it is kept in the family.

Lets not do what the Israelis did in the Gaza. After they pulled out, they destroyed thousands of homes and factories, and the place looks like aftermath of WW III. You cannot change history overnight, but you can correct mistakes made, gradually, which will find it's own level, sometime in the future. But if we wait for everything to be perfect in the future before start to resolve today's problems, we may lose another generation that would not have had a chance to make their own decision, as to what should happen to their land.

[Piratis]

The legal owner has a priority over his own property. Somebody keeping against the will of the legal owner the property that he currently occupies should be an exception to the rule and not the rule, and even in that case the legal owner should be fairly compensated.

The exception to the rule (that the legal owner has priority) is when a Turkish Cypriot is using the property as his home or his main source of income and it would be very difficult to be moved (e.g. it is a factory, unlike just using the property as a farm land in which case he can easily move elsewhere)

However this exception can not be made to the Settlers or foreigners. The settlers who were brought in Cyprus by Turkey will be a responsibility of Turkey to compensate and rehouse them. Other foreigners that came to Cyprus just to exploit our lands should immidietly leave from our properties. If Turkish Cypriots or Turkey want to compensate them good for them.

Of course a foreigner (or a Settler, for those that will remain) could buy the property from the legal owner if they offer to the legal owner a price that it will be acceptable to the legal owner. At that point they should also pay the rent for the time they were illegally using the property of the legal owner.