Cyprus-Forum.com

[Alexandros Lordos]

Why are the gc so paranoid i ask, a tc veto is only there to stop unfairness not for anything else. If gc doing something good for all then there is no veto.

Brother, I am not sure it is all so simple ...

Don't forget that there are occasions where "the collective good" and "one side's good" sometimes contradict each other.

One issue that comes to mind, concerns fixing up the economy in the north after the solution. This normalisation will inevitably be painful to certain segments of TC society who are now very comfortable with the current situation, and these interest groups might then push for a veto in the Federal Government ... thus endangering the long-term economic stability of the whole island.

Veto-ing was in fact one of the reasons why the 1960 arrangement broke down (although your history books probably choose to focus exclusively on GC arrogance and desire for enosis). If I am not mistaken, the last set of deadlocks before the breakdown of the bicommunal government were related to economic affairs, trade unions, that sort of thing ...

Even the UN has recognised the dangers of absolute Veto in a future solution, and this is why the Annan Plan contains checks and balances to limit this veto power ... it is certainly nothing like the 1960 situation, which in my opinion was a recipe for disaster even assuming the best of intentions.

The EU itself, of which we all wish to be a part, does not allow veto in all instances, but only in the most essential matters such as accepting a new member and so on. In other cases, simple majority or enhanced majority applies.

[-mikkie2-]

The TC's in 1963 vetoed the passing of tax laws in order to get what they wanted regarding the Municipalities issue, so by wanting something more on one issue they blocked a fundamental aspect of governance (tax collection)!

Exactly why having veto power is such a bad and dangerous thing.

[erolz]

The TC's in 1963 vetoed the passing of tax laws in order to get what they wanted regarding the Municipalities issue, so by wanting something more on one issue they blocked a fundamental aspect of governance (tax collection)!

Exactly why having veto power is such a bad and dangerous thing.

They used their _rights_ to block some issues regarding tax laws etc to get what wqs AGREED they should get - but was then refused to them by the GC. It was not a case of given me what I want or I will veto this and that. It was a case of give me what you AGREED to give me in the 1960 agreements but are now refusing to honour. Not quite the same senario. If GC had HONOURED the AGREEMENTS they made then there would have been no need for TC to block the tax laws etc.

[insan]

If GC had HONOURED the AGREEMENTS they made then there would have been no need for TC to block the tax laws etc.

Yes, I too believe that this was the case. TCs were aware of that the 60s agreements not satisfactory for Hellen's ruling elite; not just because the agreements were unbalanced(with some aspects) against GC community but also were an obstacle in front of Enosis; so called self-determination right of people of Cyprus(GCs). So why should TCs pay their taxes to a state which at the moment was preparing the ground for Enosis and feeding the terrorist underground organization EOKA.

[turkcyp]

They used their _rights_ to block some issues regarding tax laws etc to get what wqs AGREED they should get - but was then refused to them by the GC. It was not a case of given me what I want or I will veto this and that. It was a case of give me what you AGREED to give me in the 1960 agreements but are now refusing to honour. Not quite the same senario. If GC had HONOURED the AGREEMENTS they made then there would have been no need for TC to block the tax laws etc.

Thank you...

For some reason people keep on forgetting why TCs vetoed the tax bill. The 1960 agreements involves seperate municipalities. But GCs never intended to keep their promise. How long it takes to form seperate municipalities.

In 3 years, 1960-63, I could have formed 5 seperate countries let alone 5 seperate municipalities. The municipality issue was not so hard to implement. It's just that GCs have never intended to do that.

I agree why stopping the tax bill may seem like a karsh measure to many GCs, but the examples of same behavious exist in every political structure. I think it was late 1990s where American congress failed to ratify the budget just for the same pork-barrel politics.

So the constitutional crises in 1963 can not be solely balmed on TCs just becased they have used their power to block the budget legislation, to get what was their right to begin with.

And no matter what everybody says, 1960 agreements did not break because of that veto. The veto could have been witdrawn if both sides GC and TC sat down and agreed on a time period for the implementation of teh municiplaity issues. But this never happened. What happened immediately was the 'Akrtias Plan'. Now you are going to make me belive that the the events of 1963 X-mas was not planned from before by the EOKA. They were hoping from way before that TCs would veto teh budget so that they can start putting 'Akritas Plan' into motion.

And if you ask me that is why GCs have never intended to uphold the TCs seperate municipality rights. Because they were trying to create reasons for the veto.

Please start taking some portion of the blame for the breaking up of the 1960 agreements.

Have a great day,

[Alexandros Lordos]

This sort of disagreement is bound to come up again after a solution ... if we had a Supreme Court in 1963, with tie-breaking capability as per the Annan Plan, then both the municipalities issue and the tax collection issue would have been overcome ...

Whether we like it or not, the only way to balance the demands for effective functioning and protection from majority domination, is through something like the Supreme Court of the UN Plan (so long as its mandate is clearly defined, that it should decide according to the constitution and according to Federal laws) ... I challenge anyone in this forum to offer a counter-argument, and say that we can do without such a Supreme Court.

[erolz]

This sort of disagreement is bound to come up again after a solution ... if we had a Supreme Court in 1963, with tie-breaking capability as per the Annan Plan, then both the municipalities issue and the tax collection issue would have been overcome ...

We had that in 1960 complete with an 'idependent' head of the supreme court and the municipalites issue WAS ultimately refered to the court and Makarios just refused to accept the courts ruling (leading to the resignation of the 'independent' judge as well). What would stop this happening again ?

[Alexandros Lordos]

So the constitutional crises in 1963 can not be solely blamed on TCs just because they have used their power to block the budget legislation, to get what was their right to begin with.

OK, point conceded ...

[Alexandros Lordos]

This sort of disagreement is bound to come up again after a solution ... if we had a Supreme Court in 1963, with tie-breaking capability as per the Annan Plan, then both the municipalities issue and the tax collection issue would have been overcome ...

We had that in 1960 complete with an 'idependent' head of the supreme court and the municipalites issue WAS ultimately refered to the court and Makarios just refused to accept the courts ruling (leading to the resignation of the 'independent' judge as well). What would stop this happening again ?

Erol,

I must admit I wasn't aware of that ... the 1960's are not exactly top priority in Greek Cypriot educational curricula ...

I don't think it would happen again, the fact that the Presidential Council would be collective, and the fact that it is would be jointly elected by GCs and TCs, protects us from any one individual who would be doing his own mad nationalistic thing ...

[Saint Jimmy]

They used their _rights_ to block some issues regarding tax laws etc to get what wqs AGREED they should get - but was then refused to them by the GC. It was not a case of given me what I want or I will veto this and that. It was a case of give me what you AGREED to give me in the 1960 agreements but are now refusing to honour. Not quite the same senario. If GC had HONOURED the AGREEMENTS they made then there would have been no need for TC to block the tax laws etc.

True, true...