Cyprus-Forum.com

[paaul12]

U can dig around as much as u want to try and find some crumbs of comfort, u can make believe that it is all big bad Turkey’s fault.

Let’s just stick to the facts:

The ECHR has ruled that the Property Commission is an acceptable remedy for solving the disputed land.

If you find solace in saying that it all goes through Turkey, then fine, it f that’s what helps u 2 sleep at night. But let me remind u of where the Property Commission is situated, its NOT in Turkey its in the TRNC

[DT.]

according to the echr there is no such thing as trnc.

[Pyrpolizer]

Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 and in line with its admissibility decision of 14 March 2005. Such a remedy should be available within three months from the date on which the present judgment is delivered and redress should be afforded three months thereafter"

Read it fully wise guy and if you need translation specially made for IDIOTS I am here to provide you one.What is says and what you quoted and jumped up from joy like a monkey, concerns the previous suggestion of the ECHR to Turkey to establish an acceptable internal remedy. READ:

6. The Court, in the principal judgment, further held that "the respondent State must introduce a remedy which secures genuinely effective redress for the Convention violations identified in the instant judgment in relation to the present applicant as well as in respect of all similar applications pending before it, in accordance with the principles for the protection of the rights laid down in Article 8 of the Convention and Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 and in line with its admissibility decision of 14 March 2005. Such a remedy should be available within three months from the date on which the present judgment is delivered and redress should be afforded three months thereafter" (§ 40). Furthermore, the parties were invited to submit, within three months, from the date on which the judgment became final in accordance with Article 44 § 2 of the Convention, their written observations on the issue of pecuniary and non-pecuniary damage and, in particular, to notify the Court of any agreement they might reach (ibid., § 50, and point 6 of the operative provisions). Pending the implementation of the relevant general measures by the Government, the Court adjourned its consideration of all applications deriving from the same general cause (ibid., § 50).

December 2005 and the "By-Law made under Sections 8 (2) (A) and 22 of the Law for the Compensation, Exchange and Restitution of Immovable Properties which are within the scope of sub-paragraph (b) of paragraph 1 of Article 159 of the Constitution" ("Law no. 67/2005") which entered into force on 20 March 2006

10. Subsequent to the adoption of the principal judgment in the instant case, the authorities of the "Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus" ("TRNC") enacted the new compensation law, the "Law for the Compensation, Exchange and Restitution of Immovable Properties" ("Law no. 67/2005") which entered into force on 22 December 2005 and the "By-Law made under Sections 8 (2) (A) and 22 of the Law for the Compensation, Exchange and Restitution of Immovable Properties which are within the scope of sub-paragraph (b) of paragraph 1 of Article 159 of the Constitution" ("Law no. 67/2005") which entered into force on 20 March 2006.


Ditto monkey. Here the Court just describes the events that followed, and then continues with the positions of Roc, Turkey and all parties involved. It does not decide.It just describes the events and what each one said.

We won u lost FACT

So far you won 2 bananas. FACT

37. The Court welcomes the steps taken by the Government in an effort to provide redress for the violations of the applicant’s Convention rights as well in respect of all similar applications pending before it. The Court notes that the new compensation and restitution mechanism, in principle, has taken care of the requirements of the decision of the Court on admissibility of 14 March 2005 and the judgment on the merits of 22 December 2005

So is this what excited you so much? Once again READ the whole thing:

37. The Court welcomes the steps taken by the Government (* By the term Government it refers to Turkey!!!) in an effort to provide redress for the violations of the applicant’s Convention rights as well in respect of all similar applications pending before it. The Court notes that the new compensation and restitution mechanism, in principle, has taken care of the requirements of the decision of the Court on admissibility of 14 March 2005 and the judgment on the merits of 22 December 2005. The Court points out that the parties failed to reach an agreement on the issue of just satisfaction where, like in the case of Broniowski v. Poland (friendly settlement and just satisfaction) ([GC], no. 31443/96, ECHR 2005-…), it would have been possible for the Court to address all the relevant issues of the effectiveness of this remedy in detail. The Court cannot accept the Government’s argument that the applicant should now be required at this stage of the proceedings where the Court has already decided on the merits to apply to the new Commission in order to seek reparation for her damages (Dogan and Others v. Turkey (just satisfaction), nos. 8803-8811/02, 8813/02 and 8815-8819/02, § 50, 13 July 2006).


What is says is that it a) NOTES that b) IN PRINCIPLE the compensation committee etc etc.

The ECHR does not deal in depth with this issue because as it explains later it WILL NOT CHECK whether it would send Xenides to that Court but rather it would immediately decide by itself. As in fact it did awarding her 800,000 Euros.

In plain language what the Court says, is: OK Turkey you did something according with my previous advice, in principle it seems OK, but I am not going to examine if it is really acceptable or not, because for the moment I will decide myself for the case of Mrs Xenides.

Have a monkey jump.

I am weeping now. Look: ---- >







How about you?

[paaul12]

Just remind me the 1400 other cases, the ones pending on this decision, where will they be going:

A] The Property Commission in the TRNC

B] The ECHR


Answer:

A. The Property Commission in the TRNC

Now go to the top of the class for actually engaging your brain before you speak.

[raymanuva]

Svetlana, are you Cypriot or Russian?

[BigDutch]

I can't see the satisfaction for the Turkish side here ?

The ECHR has awarded a sum of dosh to a Greek Cypriot land owner.

The reason the dosh was handed over is because Turkey has found to be guilty of restricting the human rights of the individual concerned.

Turkey has been confirmed as the bad guy here - what is there to celebrate ?

The court has said that Turkey needed to implement a routine for new applicants that want compensation for the proven wrong doing of Turkey ?

This doesn't mean existing applications will go through the "Property Commission" ... just new ones will be urged to try the Turkish run commission first, and if unsatisfactory will then go to ECHR, an additional hurdle that has been put in place by ECHR to allow Turkey to deal with its naughtiness "in house".

The physical location of the commission is convenient to GC's as they can travel to it by car ! Any documents presented by the Property Commission that mention TRNC will invalidate said documents as far as the ECHR is concerned as it only recognises Turkey - not the TRNC.

The reason for celebration is what ?

[paaul12]

This doesn't mean existing applications will go through the "Property Commission" ... just new ones will be urged to try the Turkish run commission first, and if unsatisfactory will then go to ECHR, an additional hurdle that has been put in place by ECHR to allow Turkey to deal with its naughtiness "in house".

What the f**k are you talking about, the 1400 pending applications before the ECHR were suspended until this decision was announced.

The rules are quite simple if you had taken the time to actually read them, all these 1400 cases will now be referred to The Property Commission in the TRNC, they of course have a right of appeal to the ECHR but only AFTER they have been through The Property Commission in the TRNC.

Don’t you understand that if the ECHR had not accepted The Property Commission in the TRNC, then this would have caused problems both for Turkey and the TRNC. However as it is seen by the ECHR as a local remedy, we have plenty to celebrate, any one fancy a party tonight?

http://img394.imageshack.us/img394/6849/pic07276rt.gif

[Pyrpolizer]

Just remind me the 1400 other cases, the ones pending on this decision, where will they be going:

A] The Property Commission in the TRNC

B] The ECHR

Oh! I thought your jumping up was for this case for it presumably recognised the so called compensation committee that the Government=Turkey has established in the so called "trnc" occupied part of Cyprus.

Let me remind you then, thus responding to your pledge:

FACT 1) each and every case at the ECHR has to be judged separately. No case concerning human rights establishes a precedent as a whole. If it were like that then the case of Xenides would simply automatically decided as per previous case of Loizidou
FACT 2)Precedents can only be called for identical matters in each case
FACT 3) During the next case at the ECHR the matter of the so called property committee wil be raised once again. THEN and only THEN the court will have to examine if it constitutes an effective internal court of TURKEY and be definite on its decision, without vague comments like "in principle" etc etc.

he rules are quite simple if you had taken the time to actually read them, all these 1400 cases will now be referred to The Property Commission in the TRNC, they of course have a right of appeal to the ECHR but only AFTER they have been through The Property Commission in the TRNC.

What a load of crap. Man do you have the brains to understand that this case HAS NOT DECIDED for the property commission at the occupied established by Turkey? Do you understand that the court simply commented on the matter and avoided to judge based on it?
Do you understand what the legal term "In principle" means? It means initially, on first glance, it seems…. In other words they are not sure. It has to be judged separately. Open a legal dictionary.

[Piratis]

I can't see the satisfaction for the Turkish side here ?

The ECHR has awarded a sum of dosh to a Greek Cypriot land owner.

The reason the dosh was handed over is because Turkey has found to be guilty of restricting the human rights of the individual concerned.

Turkey has been confirmed as the bad guy here - what is there to celebrate ?

BigDutch, finding them guilty of atrocities and crimes is not a problem for them. Committing crimes is what this blood thirsty war mongers do, and they enjoy it. In fact what they celebrate is that they believe they will be able to get rid of the ECHR and be allowed to commit yet more crimes and illegalities.


However this will not happen, and sooner or later justice will be served. Meanwhile they can be sure that they can gain nothing on our loss and that they will continue to face the consequences of their crimes and illegalities.

[paaul12]

Piratis wrote:

they can gain nothing on our loss

4 the record would u mind explaining fully what your loss has been since the ECHR gave its judgement?