www.talkcyprus.org Forum Index www.talkcyprus.org
"The pioneers of peace are the people who refuse to take up arms" - Albert Einstein
The bicommunal Cyprus chat and discussion forum
 

1963 Constitutional crisis
Click here to go to the original topic
Goto page 1, 2  Next
 
       www.talkcyprus.org Forum Index -> Cyprus problem discussion
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
cannedmoose



Joined: 12 Aug 2005
Posts: 5357
Location: National Forest, England

Posted: Tue Aug 23, 2005 5:58 pm    Post subject: 1963 Constitutional crisis  

Folks, since the Turkish Cypriot withdrawal from the Republic of Cyprus administration at the end of 1963, on what basis does the Republic of Cyprus government claim continued legal authority within the Republic of Cyprus framework. Does it claim that the Turkish Cypriot representatives are temporarily absent? Or that because their withdrawal was 'voluntary', the system simply continues to function as usual, yet without their input?

Any thoughts?
Back to top  
detailer



Joined: 15 Aug 2005
Posts: 473
Location: UK

Posted: Tue Aug 23, 2005 6:02 pm    Post subject:  

I think both of those arguments are suggested by Greek Cypriot, they can answer that better though.
Back to top  
brother



Joined: 15 Aug 2005
Posts: 8920
Location: London/Cyprus

Posted: Tue Aug 23, 2005 6:03 pm    Post subject:  

The first thought is that the Turkish Cypriot were forcibly removed from the Republic of Cyprus and did not withdraw, hence why many Turkish Cypriot say the Greek Cypriot stole the Republic of Cyprus and our rights.
Back to top  
magikthrill



Joined: 14 Aug 2005
Posts: 630
Location: NYC

Posted: Tue Aug 23, 2005 6:24 pm    Post subject:  

were the Turkish Cypriot MPs forced out of the parliament or did they get up and leave?
Back to top  
brother



Joined: 15 Aug 2005
Posts: 8920
Location: London/Cyprus

Posted: Tue Aug 23, 2005 6:30 pm    Post subject:  

They were forced out at gun point and not allowed back, anyone who wants to argue otherwise is welcome but these are facts and not propoganda.
Back to top  
cannedmoose



Joined: 12 Aug 2005
Posts: 5357
Location: National Forest, England

Posted: Tue Aug 23, 2005 6:37 pm    Post subject:  

I've never heard of them being forced out at gunpoint, but I've heard the argument that many were advised for their own safety not to attend the sessions of Parliament. Given that the Parliamentary building was in Greek Cypriot controlled-areas during the violence of 1963-4, their absence may initially have been through fear for their lives... whether it then ultimately became a political statement I'm not sure. Hence the question.
Back to top  
gabs



Joined: 15 Aug 2005
Posts: 98

Posted: Tue Aug 23, 2005 10:35 pm    Post subject:  

Ive always believed that any new law had to be signed by the President (Greek Cypriot) and Vice President (Turkish Cypriot). The Vice President’s withdrawal then throws open the question of legality pertaining to any laws passed without his (vp's) official approval and signature.

That’s what ive always thought, but obviously there must be some clause in the 60 constitution that bypasses the need for such consent to be given.
Back to top  
cannedmoose



Joined: 12 Aug 2005
Posts: 5357
Location: National Forest, England

Posted: Tue Aug 23, 2005 11:11 pm    Post subject:  

I believe the 1960 constitution permits the President or Vice-President of the House of Representatives to sign, in the absence of the Vice-President. Given that the House continues to retain seats for the Turkish Cypriot community, it's probably under Article 36 that the leader of the House exercises this right (given that there isn't a Turkish Cypriot deputy leader present). Slightly shaky ground, but isn't much of the Constitution. :roll:

Quote: Article 36
The President of the Republic is the Head of the State and takes precedence over all persons in the Republic. The Vice-President of the Republic is the Vice-Head of the State and takes precedence over all persons in the Republic next after the President of the Republic. Deputising for or replacing the President of the Republic in case of his temporary absence or temporary incapacity to perform his duties is made as provided in paragraph 2 of this Article.
In the event of a temporary absence or a temporary incapacity to perform the duties of the President or of the Vice-President of the Republic, the President or the Vice-President of the
House of Representatives and, in case of his absence or pending the filling of a vacancy in any such office, the Representative acting for him under Article 72 shall act for the President or the Vice-President of the Republic respectively during such temporary absence or temporary incapacity.
Back to top  
Crash Test Dummy



Joined: 25 Sep 2005
Posts: 4911
Location: London(ish)

Posted: Tue Aug 23, 2005 11:42 pm    Post subject:  

seems like an intresting topic but i know nothing of it. i suppose it must be a 'legal' state or it would not be recognised just like the illegal state of Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus
Back to top  
erolz



Joined: 11 Aug 2005
Posts: 4195
Location: Kyrenia / Girne

Posted: Wed Aug 24, 2005 1:32 am    Post subject:  

Giorgio wrote: seems like an intresting topic but i know nothing of it. i suppose it must be a 'legal' state or it would not be recognised just like the illegal state of Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus

If only such things were so simple :)

The basis of the all Greek Cypriot run Republic of Cyprus admin being 'recognised' as a legitimate government of all of cyprus dates back to the original 1963 UN resolution that paved the way for a UN peacekeeping force to come to Cyprus.

In short in oerder for a UN force to be sent to Cyprus there had to be a government that the UN recognised as legitimate that could invite such a force. At the time the only such government was the then all Greek Cypriot 'rump' of the original Republic of Cyprus government. Turkey was assured at the time that this was a 'technicality' and persuaded to not object or block this resolution because to do so would mean no UN troops at a time when the smaller and weaker Turkish Cypriot community was under considerable assult.

This resolution was not about recognition of the Greek Cypriot only Republic of Cyprus but was about ending the inter communal conflict. It is also worht noting imo that more countries actually abstained in this vote than voted for the resolution and the majority of those that voted for were members of the non alligned states movement. The resolution was not about recognition of the Greek Cypriot only Republic of Cyprus government and it's legitimacy, but it was to become the source of that anyway. In this regard it was an almost total victory for the Greek Cypriot admin of the time. It was not quite total because in part 7 of the resolution there was mention of the two 'communites' and the need to get them to agree a peacful settlement. It was however the source and basis for the 'legitimising' of the purely Greek Cypriot run Republic of Cyprus as the the sole government of all cyprus and all cypriots - or from Turkish Cypriot perspective the legitimising of the theft of the Republic of Cyprus and Turkish Cypriot communites rights under the agreed constituiton by Greek Cypriot.

PS - original UN 1963 resoloution can be found here in pdf format
http://daccessdds.un.org/doc/RESOLUTION/GEN/NR0/211/44/IMG/NR021144.pdf?OpenElement
Back to top  
magikthrill



Joined: 14 Aug 2005
Posts: 630
Location: NYC

Posted: Wed Aug 24, 2005 3:27 am    Post subject:  

i was under the impression that the UN forces came in 1964 non?
Back to top  
erolz



Joined: 11 Aug 2005
Posts: 4195
Location: Kyrenia / Girne

Posted: Wed Aug 24, 2005 4:04 am    Post subject:  

magikthrill wrote: i was under the impression that the UN forces came in 1964 non?

You are right - my bad. The resolution was passed in 1964 (and troops arrived in 1964)
Back to top  
magikthrill



Joined: 14 Aug 2005
Posts: 630
Location: NYC

Posted: Wed Aug 24, 2005 4:35 am    Post subject:  

seeing as the breakout began in x-mas 1963 id be quite surprised if they managed to get everything done within a week!

i know if cypriots were running the UN the resolution wouldnt have passed till 1965 probably :lol:
Back to top  
Dhavlos



Joined: 13 Aug 2005
Posts: 4697
Location: Birmingham

Posted: Wed Aug 24, 2005 12:38 pm    Post subject:  

what would the Greek Cypriot government do if all of a sudden, the Turkish Cypriots decided to come to the south and try to 'restart' the 1960 constitution? would they then have to hold elections for a vicepresident? Turkish Cypriot Deputies?

I know it is almost impossible, but if it did happen, do you think the Greek Cypriots would be willing to accept the Turkish Cypriots as inthe old constitution, and carry on as before?
Back to top  
gabs



Joined: 15 Aug 2005
Posts: 98

Posted: Wed Aug 24, 2005 12:50 pm    Post subject:  

hey

thats an idea-

how about a Turkish Cypriot stands for election in the south then with another Turkish Cypriot voting for him, (or whatever the minimum votes required are), he then becomes Vice President of Republic of Cyprus - the mind boggles at that one,

Anyone wanna be a Vice President?
Back to top  
 
       www.talkcyprus.org Forum Index -> Cyprus problem discussion Goto page 1, 2  Next
Page 1 of 2


phpBB Search Engine Indexer © phpRebel
Powered by phpBB 2.0.22 © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group