Viewpoint wrote: Firstly take a deep breath and come to your senses, any agreements where the responsible parties will be liable to pay compensation will not disappear after the TRNC and "RoC" have been dissolved to form a BBF united Cyprus, international agreements/provisions will be in place to ensure continuity of funding availability.
Lets try and get this mental stumbling block you have out of the way illegal or not you still have to deal with the TRNC which represent the TC community on this island, so get over it.
We have not made any agreements with "trnc" nor we will in eternity.
No country on this planet, bar Turkey has done any agreements with a pseudo state.
So what will actually desolve is the "trnc". RoC will not be disolved, it will simply transform, all its international commitments will still be there.
wrote: Those areas that will remain in the TC state will be judged on what they have exchanged in the south and what they have gotten in the north, they will pay or receive the difference if they intend to keep the property.
In the two separate states solution you have in your dreams i.e.
Global exhange of properties +compensation was Denktashes dream too.
wrote: Answer the specific question who gets the land and hotel if both parties cannot agree to share or sell?
For the last time:
If the investor has enough property to exchange then he gets it.He even gets it if he has 75% equivalent property plus 25% cash.
If these conditions are not met then he is only entitled to use his investment for 70 years after which he must demolish it and return a clear land back to the owner. For that 70 year period he will be paying annual rent. And for the loss of use for 32+ years Turkey must pay compensation to the GC land owner.
wrote: Are you saying the GC keeps the land and the TC the investment? what if the TC doesn't pay rent
Garnishee.
wrote: This i am afraid is a lie that has been fed GCs for over 32 years, that all GCs will have the right to return, the sooner they come to terms with the fact that they will not the sooner one part of the solution will be more flexible.
Right to return does not mean he will return. You cannot limit this right anyway under EU laws.
wrote: I personally feel all GCs will return to Maras, if it were returned to the "RoC" if it remained under the control of the TRNC is would be questionable.
Your personal opinion of course.As if you know the Gcs better than me.
wrote: Any agreement for a solution will allow for these differences which do not come into line with EU norms those rules were made by humans and can be adapted to special cases they are called derogation's many new members have them.
It WAS called derrogations before Cyprus entered the EU.Now they are called dreams in your head.
wrote: It would be near to impossible for Turkey to back out of an international agreement where she gives here guarantee to finance rehousing and settler return projects. I am certain there are enough donors that would provide the finance necessary on the guarantee of Turkey and other nations involved and international donors would also contribute.
So are you telling me Turkey will pay, and will not even object having a clause in the agreement for her payments, or are you saying she will ask the donors to pay. If it is the former then where are the amounts she accepted to pay in the Anan Plan.Show me the relevant page.
And who told you the donors money should be spent specifically for re-housing the settlers???