Cyprus EU Association

It is not possible to satisfy the International Law on TRNC legal basis, Turkey can not proceed its EU process using this basis, early solution is the only alternative

Mr Ali Erel, president of the Cyprus EU Association, in his press bulletin expressed that the presentation of the legislation adopted by the TRNC authorities as a domestic remedy of Turkey confirms the ECHR’s conclusion that “TRNC is a subordinate local administration whose acts and omissions engaged the responsibility of Turkey”. In the statement made on behalf of the Board of Directors, it was reitetated that, it was impossible to introduce remedies based on TRNC Laws which would secure genuinely effective redress as demanded by the international law and the correct path was to find a way to the Cyprus problem based on the Annan Plan. The full text of the press bulletin where it was stressed that every efford should be exerted to achive a speedy comprehensive solution to the Cyprus problem is as follows:

Following the European Court of Human Rights conviction and its requirement of an equitable redress by Turkey, a “Property Law” has been enacted by the “TRNC Parlament” as Turkeys’ remedy. This law is at the “Supreme Constitutional Court” and is debated by our people.

All court cases at ECHR are against Turkey. TRNC has never been accepted as the respondent government.
ECHR’s view on the matter is as follows:

Greek Cypriots are still the legal owners of their property abandoned by them on the North of the Island.

The Court notes that the applicant, Mrs Myra Xenides-Arestis has provided the Court with official certificates of ownership from the Department of Lands and Surveys of the Republic of Cyprus proving that she is indeed the owner of the relevant property and rejects the respondent governments claim that property allegedly owned by the applicant is listed in the books of the Turkish Moslem religious trust (vakf).

The fact that the Cyprus problem has not been solved does not wave aside displaced, Greek-Cypriots property rights.

Turkey continues to exercise overall military control over northern Cyprus and has effective control over events in the occupied areas and is responsible for the right to respect for private and family life.

Turkey is trying to impose the policies and actions of “TRNC”.

“TRNC” is not a recognised state. The fact that the “TRNC” regime de facto exists and exercises de facto authority under the overall control of Turkey the effects of which can be ignored only to the detriment of the inhabitants of the “TRNC” territory.

The prevailing situation on Cyprus does not justify the deprivation of every natural or legal persons right to peaceful enjoyment of his/her possessions.

Turkey must introduce a remedy which secures, genuinely effective redress for the applicant as well as in relation to all similar 1400 applications pending before the Court.

Such a remedy should be available by 22 March 2006, and redress should occur three months thereafter as well as in respect of all similar applications pending before the Court.

It is up to the ECHR to decide whether the “TRNC property law” shall be accepted “as a respondent states’ ” remedy.

However, the attitude that ”l am responsible, thus l shall provide remedies” confirm the ECHR’s conclusions that, “TRNC is a subordinate local administration whose acts and omissions engaged is under the responsibility of Turkey”.

The right to confront any law within the constitution, is an imperative part of a state ruled by “rule of law”. When “property regime” was first brought to the agenda of the TRNC parlament, Constitutional amendments could have been put to referendum at the forth coming elections, but this was not contemplated.

In a state, ruled by “rule of law”, political parties at power, should accept the confrantation of a law at Supreme Constitutional Court. Supreme Constitutional Courts should be capable to safeguard the legal order of the land.

On the other hand, while the argument about “this law was enacted as the result of pressure exerted by the Turkish government” was going on, turkish vice-prime minister Mr. Abdüllatif Şener’s statement that the prime minister Mr. Erdoğan intervined and asked the opposition leaders not to object this law, is again a confirmation of the ECHR view that “TRNC is a subordinate local administration of Turkey.

ECHR reiterated that by virtue of Article 46, Turkey must abide by the final judgments of the Court and ordered the Turkish Government to submit, within three months from the date on which the judgment was delivered, details of the remedy and its availability and to submit information concerning the redress three months thereafter, as well as in respect of all 1400 similar applications pending before the Court.

Statements by TRNC authorities that: ”property rights, is part of the inter communal negotiations and no Greek cypriot will repossess his/her property until the Cyprus problem is solved” is indicative. If this is the real intention, then the ECHR will perceive this and will not be satisfied. It is not easy to say that the ECHR will be satisfied with this law when it maintains that the ” The prevailing situation on Cyprus does not justify the deprivation of every natural or legal persons right to peaceful enjoyment of his/her possessions”.

Turkey is compelled to make a move. Turkey undertook to abide by the rulings of the ECHR. She must come up with remedies, otherwise she will be expelled from the Council of Europe and consequently will face extreme difficulties during her EU process.

Should, ECHR be satisfied and all properties of the greek Cypriots were given back, Turkish and turkish Cypriot public opinion will resent this. Turkey is awere of this fact and that is way they need time and prefered the relevent law be acted by “TRNC” government. The phrase “Not to give an inch in Cyprus...” is part of the Turkish elelection propaganda, that is way ball was passed onto TRNC.

The real path is to find a quick, comprehensive solution to the problem based on the Annan Plan. It can be easily seen by looking at the property matter alone, how wrong it is not to persue a quick solution to the problem.

It is not possible to reach a, piece by piece solution within the TRNC constitution. Every attempt simmilar to the “Property law” will be rejected as been uncompatible with the TRNC Costitution. It is impossible to produce necessary remedies demanded by the international law within the TRNC basis. They are contradictory to each other.

Turkish Cypriots must claim their rights within the Republic of Cyprus, as well their rights approved at the referandum, all necessay prerequisite steps must be taken and we should press for a comprehensive solution of the problem. It is obvious that any delay is continuing to be detrimental to all concerned.

Türkçe

Home \| Welcome \| About Us \| Executive Bodies \| Forum \| Activities \| Photo Album \| Press Statements \| Documents \| Links \| Contact Us
It is not possible to satisfy the International Law on TRNC legal basis, Turkey can not proceed its EU process using this basis, early solution is the only alternative Mr Ali Erel, president of the Cyprus EU Association, in his press bulletin expressed that the presentation of the legislation adopted by the TRNC authorities as a domestic remedy of Turkey confirms the ECHR’s conclusion that “TRNC is a subordinate local administration whose acts and omissions engaged the responsibility of Turkey”. In the statement made on behalf of the Board of Directors, it was reitetated that, it was impossible to introduce remedies based on TRNC Laws which would secure genuinely effective redress as demanded by the international law and the correct path was to find a way to the Cyprus problem based on the Annan Plan. The full text of the press bulletin where it was stressed that every efford should be exerted to achive a speedy comprehensive solution to the Cyprus problem is as follows: Following the European Court of Human Rights conviction and its requirement of an equitable redress by Turkey, a “Property Law” has been enacted by the “TRNC Parlament” as Turkeys’ remedy. This law is at the “Supreme Constitutional Court” and is debated by our people. All court cases at ECHR are against Turkey. TRNC has never been accepted as the respondent government. ECHR’s view on the matter is as follows: Greek Cypriots are still the legal owners of their property abandoned by them on the North of the Island. The Court notes that the applicant, Mrs Myra Xenides-Arestis has provided the Court with official certificates of ownership from the Department of Lands and Surveys of the Republic of Cyprus proving that she is indeed the owner of the relevant property and rejects the respondent governments claim that property allegedly owned by the applicant is listed in the books of the Turkish Moslem religious trust (vakf). The fact that the Cyprus problem has not been solved does not wave aside displaced, Greek-Cypriots property rights. Turkey continues to exercise overall military control over northern Cyprus and has effective control over events in the occupied areas and is responsible for the right to respect for private and family life. Turkey is trying to impose the policies and actions of “TRNC”. “TRNC” is not a recognised state. The fact that the “TRNC” regime de facto exists and exercises de facto authority under the overall control of Turkey the effects of which can be ignored only to the detriment of the inhabitants of the “TRNC” territory. The prevailing situation on Cyprus does not justify the deprivation of every natural or legal persons right to peaceful enjoyment of his/her possessions. Turkey must introduce a remedy which secures, genuinely effective redress for the applicant as well as in relation to all similar 1400 applications pending before the Court. Such a remedy should be available by 22 March 2006, and redress should occur three months thereafter as well as in respect of all similar applications pending before the Court. It is up to the ECHR to decide whether the “TRNC property law” shall be accepted “as a respondent states’ ” remedy. However, the attitude that ”l am responsible, thus l shall provide remedies” confirm the ECHR’s conclusions that, “TRNC is a subordinate local administration whose acts and omissions engaged is under the responsibility of Turkey”. The right to confront any law within the constitution, is an imperative part of a state ruled by “rule of law”. When “property regime” was first brought to the agenda of the TRNC parlament, Constitutional amendments could have been put to referendum at the forth coming elections, but this was not contemplated. In a state, ruled by “rule of law”, political parties at power, should accept the confrantation of a law at Supreme Constitutional Court. Supreme Constitutional Courts should be capable to safeguard the legal order of the land. On the other hand, while the argument about “this law was enacted as the result of pressure exerted by the Turkish government” was going on, turkish vice-prime minister Mr. Abdüllatif Şener’s statement that the prime minister Mr. Erdoğan intervined and asked the opposition leaders not to object this law, is again a confirmation of the ECHR view that “TRNC is a subordinate local administration of Turkey. ECHR reiterated that by virtue of Article 46, Turkey must abide by the final judgments of the Court and ordered the Turkish Government to submit, within three months from the date on which the judgment was delivered, details of the remedy and its availability and to submit information concerning the redress three months thereafter, as well as in respect of all 1400 similar applications pending before the Court. Statements by TRNC authorities that: ”property rights, is part of the inter communal negotiations and no Greek cypriot will repossess his/her property until the Cyprus problem is solved” is indicative. If this is the real intention, then the ECHR will perceive this and will not be satisfied. It is not easy to say that the ECHR will be satisfied with this law when it maintains that the ” The prevailing situation on Cyprus does not justify the deprivation of every natural or legal persons right to peaceful enjoyment of his/her possessions”. Turkey is compelled to make a move. Turkey undertook to abide by the rulings of the ECHR. She must come up with remedies, otherwise she will be expelled from the Council of Europe and consequently will face extreme difficulties during her EU process. Should, ECHR be satisfied and all properties of the greek Cypriots were given back, Turkish and turkish Cypriot public opinion will resent this. Turkey is awere of this fact and that is way they need time and prefered the relevent law be acted by “TRNC” government. The phrase “Not to give an inch in Cyprus...” is part of the Turkish elelection propaganda, that is way ball was passed onto TRNC. The real path is to find a quick, comprehensive solution to the problem based on the Annan Plan. It can be easily seen by looking at the property matter alone, how wrong it is not to persue a quick solution to the problem. It is not possible to reach a, piece by piece solution within the TRNC constitution. Every attempt simmilar to the “Property law” will be rejected as been uncompatible with the TRNC Costitution. It is impossible to produce necessary remedies demanded by the international law within the TRNC basis. They are contradictory to each other. Turkish Cypriots must claim their rights within the Republic of Cyprus, as well their rights approved at the referandum, all necessay prerequisite steps must be taken and we should press for a comprehensive solution of the problem. It is obvious that any delay is continuing to be detrimental to all concerned. On behalf of KAB, Ali Erel – President.