Cyprus-Forum.com

[-mikkie2-]

3) Thirdly do you really thing that if TCs apply to ECHR about their constitutional rights they would not win. You can not claim that we have occupy your land and apply to ECHR and at the same time refuse to give TCs land back when they decide to turn back to south as in the last case in RoC. Even your own courts decided that it is against human rights RoC stopping TC get their land back in south.

I beg to differ on this one. The property in the south is still owned by the TC's concerned and is recognised as such by the RoC. In the north GC property has been given away with title deeds of the pseudo/illegal state.

The Arif case is proof that a TC can exercise their rights in Cyprus courts as long as they reside in the south and wish to live there. In the meantime, the government has offered Arif alternative accomodation. The court case is still pending, but if Arif is not satisfied with the result he is entitled to take the case to the ECHR. Until such time that happens ( a big IF) the TC's have very little grounds to complain about the status of their property.

[turkcyp]

Dear mikkie2,

I do not know whay you beg to differ. We have the same opinion.

I was tryingto tell Piratis that if TCs start suing RoC they will win their cases, adn RoC can not arbitrarily stop TCs obtain thier property back. The Arif court case proved this, that even RoC courts will say that not giving TCs their property back (if RoC choose to do so, as they are currently dragging their feet) is illegal.

The whole point of those points in that post was to say that if and when TC decide to turn back to RoC and exercise their rights, RoC ahve to give those rights back. Of course RoC at the same time has right to catch and prosecute any TC that holds GC land in the north as well. I am not denying their right to do that. And if tehy do so they most probably win in the courts. But this still does not entail RoC to prevent us getting our land back.

This is of course the wrost case scenario for TCs. Nobody is trying to do like Arif because everybody is waiting fro a political solution. Because if tehy turn back and try to get their property back in the south, they will be in a huge financial loss. So everybody in the north is hoping for a political solution.

But my point was, if RoC keeps on taking the Cyprus issue on legal grounds and try to achieve its aims by court orders, and basically tries to get its maximalist position by virtue of law, then there is no other avenue for TCs to try to do what Arif did.

And after they did what Arif did and got thier property back, the next thing TCs will ask for is our electoral rights from 1960 constitution.

Because if these property law suits keeps on mounting like this, nobody in the north keep on investing on the land, and try to salvage as much as they can from their investments.

Take care,

[brother]

In reality all in the north should have known this was coming as turkey had not annexed the north means that the gc rights to their lands would stand.

[-mikkie2-]

In reality all in the north should have known this was coming as turkey had not annexed the north means that the gc rights to their lands would stand.

What are you talking about brother? The GC rights to their own property and land would still stand even if Turkey 'annexed' the north. It is Turkey that is being convicted at the ECHR regarding property claims of Greek Cypriots, not the TC administration!

[brother]

mikkie hang me for stating that incorrectly but i guess you got the jist of the matter.

[-mikkie2-]

mikkie hang me for stating that incorrectly but i guess you got the jist of the matter.

I think hanging is a bit too much punishment for such a mionor transgression. A slap on the wrist would do!

[turkcyp]

looking over that thread you had started at the end you show the constituion of the ROC,IS IT THE SAME as the 1960 constition and did the ROC ascede to the EU with it?

The constitution is not changed on paper. That is true.

But what happened is that after 1964 GCs start making laws that are completly against the constitution, and basically ignoring the existing conditions.

When they are asked how this can be? They give excuse of necessity. They say that TCs do not participate in the process so they can not make laws in compliance with the constitution.

Then when TCs say that, ( as I have asked if we turn back to under RoC) we want to participate the process lets make these old laws right and so that they are suitable to the constitution, they say us you can not participate the political process.

Actually they do not say you can not participate in the political process. They say participate in the political process together with GCs which in itself against the constitution. So in essence they are saying to us that if you refuse that you are TC and register yourself as GC you can participate in the process. and they are wondering why we refuse....

Hypothetical question that I have put outside always stays in the minds of TCs. And the answer to this hypothetical question is very important to them because they want to make sure that if they turn back to RoC then they will be given back their rights.

So basically from TCs point of view, there is no winning in the game which RoC puts in front of TCs, so they refuse to play it. If RoC had convinced us that our rights would be guaranteed in the 1960 constitution with examples of more than words, then the percentages of support for Turkish troops in the north would not be this high.

We simply still have a lot of trust issues with you guys, and for many of TCs Turkish army in the north is simply the only thing they trust. Just look at the recent survey conducted by Alex.

Take care everybody,

[boulio]

The constitution is not changed on paper. That is true.

But what happened is that after 1964 GCs start making laws that are completly against the constitution, and basically ignoring the existing conditions

i dont know how true this is turkcyp,when a eu canidate is given a date to start ascesion talks there is a screening process that goes on between the eu and the candidate countries govt.the eu with a fine pick comb runs througn the constituion,laws on fed,munic. level and economic policies of the candidate state.they do this to to ensure that the country is up to at least eu standards to start ascesion talks.this screening process is also conducted i believe at the end of ascesion talks right before a candidate country ascedes.Also the constition of a candidate country is i believe voted on for approval by each member state right before ascesion.Turkey will start her screening very soon also as it is protocol for every eu candidate.

im not 100% of the above statement so if someone can please verify i would appreciate.

PS this is why i believe that if there was a agreement in april the new united cyprus constition and annan plan as a whole would have to be voted upon by all the members again.

[turkcyp]

i dont know how true this is turkcyp,when a eu canidate is given a date to start ascesion talks there is a screening process that goes on between the eu and the candidate countries govt.the eu with a fine pick comb runs througn the constituion,laws on fed,munic. level and economic policies of the candidate state.they do this to to ensure that the country is up to at least eu standards to start ascesion talks.this screening process is also conducted i believe at the end of ascesion talks right before a candidate country ascedes.Also the constition of a candidate country is i believe voted on for approval by each member state right before ascesion.Turkey will start her screening very soon also as it is protocol for every eu candidate.

im not 100% of the above statement so if someone can please verify i would appreciate.

PS this is why i believe that if there was a agreement in april the new united cyprus constition and annan plan as a whole would have to be voted upon by all the members again.

Dear Boulio,

In 1964 GCs passed a law without TCs of course. The law was Administration of Justice (Miscellaneous Provisions) Law. When TCs appealed to this law, the Supreme Court (this time only members were GCs not TCs or international member) said the law was justified because of the “doctrine of necessity”, because there were abnormal situations in Cyprus.

So from TC point of view, GCs created the abnormal situation in Cyprus in 1963, and then passed a law against constitution saying that there were abnormal situations in Cyprus, and justified unconstitutionality of the laws with that.

And since then many laws that RoC passed is basically is based on the same "doctrine of necessity" because according to the constitution many laws has to have signature of VP and you do not have one.

But life is walking in the rose garden in RoC because you have the "doctrine of necessity"

Take care,

[Piratis]

GCs created the abnormal situation in Cyprus in 1963

The abnormal situation started when the colonialists didn't allow Cypriots to decide in a democratic way about their future and they forced us to sign something that was a result of the balance of power of some outsiders and not what the majority of Cypriots wanted. (They tried to do the exact same thing with the Annan plan)