www.talkcyprus.org

[pg]

http://www.financialmirror.com/more_news.php?id=6324&nt=Politics

Quote: U.S. Congressman Frank Pallone and 16 other colleagues have introduced bipartisan legislation that would allow US citizens, who own property in the Turkish occupied part of Cyprus, to seek financial remedies with either the current inhabitants of their land or the Turkish government.

[depurple]

Great News:
Australia should do the same!
What do we want?
1: Our land back
OR
2: Compensation NOT peanuts!
OR
3:Both!
SO take your pick MR Turkey!
BUT it saddens me to think that some of this forum will say that the Turkish Cypriot want the same when they know that they can go this ANYTIME and claim their land and sell their land in the Republic of Cyprus without any problems what so ever: My Turkish Cypriot mate Zia is going in a few weeks to sell his land in Latchi for mega bucks and we in Kyrenia get all the promises BUT then NOTHING!
cheers
PS I just hope that Justice prevails and nothing more!
GOD BLESS AMERICA!
Thanks Chuck!

[turkcyp]

Very good news for Turkey.

Even though the legislation is introduced by the Congressmen supported by the Helenic Loby in USA.

[erolz]

depurple wrote: BUT it saddens me to think that some of this forum will say that the Turkish Cypriot want the same when they know that they can go this ANYTIME and claim their land and sell their land in the Republic of Cyprus without any problems what so ever: My Turkish Cypriot mate Zia is going in a few weeks to sell his land in Latchi for mega bucks and we in Kyrenia get all the promises BUT then NOTHING!

For a Turkish Cypriot to claim back their pre 74 land in the south they first have to live and be resident in the south for at least 6 months. Even if they meet this requirement it can take years and legal action, appeals, high court appeals before they get their land back. So I guess 'anytime' and 'without problems what so ever' are relative terms.
A Greek Cypriot can apply to the north's property commission for redress / return of their pre 74 land in the North without any requirement on them being resident in the North or Cyprus at all. The case will be heard in weeks or months not years. If return is possible the land will be returned , if that is not possible then compensation, based on ECHR 'guides' will be offered and if you are unhappy with this offer you may apply to the ECHR for a ruling (will will take years).

Have you applied to the Norths property commission DP? If not why not?

[-mikkie2-]

A Greek Cypriot can apply to the north's property Quote: commission for redress / return of their pre 74 land in the North without any requirement on them being resident in the North or Cyprus at all. The case will be heard in weeks or months not years. If return is possible the land will be returned , if that is not possible then compensation, based on ECHR 'guides' will be offered and if you are unhappy with this offer you may apply to the ECHR for a ruling (will will take years).

Yet more rubbish and wishful thinking.

This 'comission' is nothing but a stalling tactic. The ECHR has not accepted this comission as legal or providing proper redress. Contrary to what you may think, any ruling for the return of property is suspended until a solution to the Cyprus Problem. Any compensation being given is in DP's words, peanuts, compared to what the ECHR has offered for Xenides-Aresti or Loizidou.

Regarding Turkish Cypriot properties in the south, the reason why 6 months residency is required is to prove that the Turkish Cypriot's in question will reside in their properties and not just sell them and then bugger off to their 'stolen' land in the north. If you cannot see or understand or comprehend this then that is a real shame.

In addition, many cases of Turkish Cypriot's returning have had no problems getting their land back and to the contrary, have not had to wait years and years for their land or property to be returned. All you see is what the Turkish Cypriot media like to report. I believe that many cases of Turkish Cypriot's have been settled without any significant delays, especially if their land is empty in the first place. In addition, the government provides money to refurbish delapidated properties and some Turkish Cypriot's that have returned to abandoned villages are using this help to restore their buildings.

[depurple]

Erolz are you kidding me again?
How many Turkish Cypriot have gone to the south or the Republic of Cyprus as you call it and sold there land without any problems?
I know many have and many will:
How many Greek Cypriot can do this in the North?
Let me know?
And WHY sould the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus buy this land when they just take what they need and do anything they want with it and GIVE it away to there mates!
Are they so stupid to pay Greek Cypriot for it?
As for the property commission?
It is just BULL Dust in the wind: An old Turkish stalemate trick: A bit like when the EU asked Turkey to do something about freedom of speech for the Kurds they gave them one hour at 11.00pm on Tuesday night and said we DID IT!
NOW can we join the EU!
Yes Erolz to me it is a joke BUT for you it is real:
When Zia gets to Cyprus I will make sure he contacts you and invites you to Latchi for a coffee and see how a EU country democracy works:
BUT I don't blame you and you know that I blame Denktash and Clerides and ALL there corrupted mates for this property mess:
Erolz one last question?
Titina Loizou:
Has she really been paid?
Can she really go back to her land?
Let me know?
You see she had to PUT up a fight for what she got or didn't get!
Again I certain that only 1% of Turkish Cypriot properties in the Republic of Cyprus have been exploited BUT I am certain that 99% of Greek Cypriot properties in the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus have been exploited OR will be exploited given the opportunity!
BUT again I don't blame the Turkish Cypriot:
What could they do? They where fooled by Denktash that there land in the Republic of Cyprus was gone, taken, stolen, sold or whatever BULL and said this Greek Cypriot land is ALL YOUR NOW! FOR FREE!
Great Bloke!
I wish he was in the Republic of Cyprus and said the same!
cheers
PS Can anyone tell me village that corrupt bloke came From?
Because I can bet my left testicle that where he lives NOW is 1000 times better from where he lived pre 1974!
BUT can we say the same?
Most of us not but others can Erolz!

[erolz]

-mikkie2- wrote: This 'comission' is nothing but a stalling tactic.

The comission has been set up under the orders of the ECHR. If it is a stalling tactic then it is one ordered by the ECHR.

-mikkie2- wrote: The ECHR has not accepted this comission as legal or providing proper redress.

It has not decided that it offers proper redress but nor has it decided that ti does not. Weather it does or not has yet to be tested. What it HAS said is that any cases must now go first to the comission before the ECHR will look at them.

-mikkie2- wrote:
Contrary to what you may think, any ruling for the return of property is suspended until a solution to the Cyprus Problem.

I do not know what you mean by this. The ECHR made it clear that for the comission to be deemed a valid local remedy resitituion of property must be within it's power and the comission has already returned property to pre 74 Greek Cypriot ownerts that have applied to the comission.

-mikkie2- wrote:
Any compensation being given is in DP's words, peanuts, compared to what the ECHR has offered for Xenides-Aresti or Loizidou.

If anybody applying to the comission is unhappy with the ruling of the comission they can appeal it's decisions at the ECHR. The comission , where it offers compensation, will either have to offer amounts that satistfy the ECHR or have its rulings overturned by the ECHR itself.

-mikkie2- wrote:
Regarding Turkish Cypriot properties in the south, the reason why 6 months residency is required is to prove that the Turkish Cypriot's in question will reside in their properties and not just sell them and then bugger off to their 'stolen' land in the north. If you cannot see or understand or comprehend this then that is a real shame.

If this is the reason then it is neither legal or logical. To make it a condition of restitution that the Turkish Cypriot claimaint must show that they do not have property in the north that was awarded to them in 'exchange' for the property they claim in the south would be understandable and comprehensible. The 'six month' rule does nothing to stop a Turkish Cypriot claiming their pre 74 land in the south whilst also having recieved land in the north in exchange for it. All it does is place probably illegal restrictions on Turkish Cypriot from claiming their pre 74 property in the South.

-mikkie2- wrote:
In addition, many cases of Turkish Cypriot's returning have had no problems getting their land back and to the contrary, have not had to wait years and years for their land or property to be returned. All you see is what the Turkish Cypriot media like to report. I believe that many cases of Turkish Cypriot's have been settled without any significant delays, especially if their land is empty in the first place.

You may believe this but do you have any evidence? Can you name a single Turkish Cypriot that has had their pre 74 land returned without any significant delay , from the many cases you claim exist? It is a fact that SOME Turkish Cypriot have had many many problems and had to wait years and fight court cases in the south in order to secure the return of their pre 74 property, even when they have been resident in the south for more than 6 months - and some of these case have been reported in the press both north and south.

[erolz]

depurple wrote: How many Turkish Cypriot have gone to the south or the Republic of Cyprus as you call it and sold there land without any problems?

The law in the Republic of Cyprus is clear. Before a Turkish Cypriot can reclaim any pre 74 property they owned in the south they must first be resident in the Republic of Cyprus for at least 6 months.

depurple wrote: How many Greek Cypriot can do this in the North?
Let me know?

I believe that 80 odd cases have been referred to the commission to date and of these 60 ish have been settled to the claimants satisfaction.

depurple wrote:
And WHY sould the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus buy this land when they just take what they need and do anything they want with it and GIVE it away to there mates!
Are they so stupid to pay Greek Cypriot for it?

The Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus under pressure from the ECHR knows that it must provide a legal valid local remedy to property claims , with or without a comprehensive settlement and the commission was set up to meet this requirement.

depurple wrote:
As for the property commission?
It is just BULL Dust in the wind: An old Turkish stalemate trick:

The commission was set up because the ECHR told Turkey it must set it up and the consequences of defying the ECHR is greater to Turkey than that of setting up the commission. Either the commission will satisfy the ECHR or the ECHR will force Turkey to revise it until it does.

depurple wrote: Has she really been paid?

Yes

depurple wrote:
Can she really go back to her land?

Yes

[-mikkie2-]

erolz wrote:
-mikkie2- wrote: The ECHR has not accepted this comission as legal or providing proper redress.

It has not decided that it offers proper redress but nor has it decided that ti does not. Weather it does or not has yet to be tested. What it HAS said is that any cases must now go first to the comission before the ECHR will look at them.


Erol,

You are a very naive person in my opinion. The ECHR HAS NOT said that new cases must go to this 'commission' because IT HAS not deemed it sufficient.

erolz wrote:
-mikkie2- wrote:

Contrary to what you may think, any ruling for the return of property is suspended until a solution to the Cyprus Problem.


I do not know what you mean by this. The ECHR made it clear that for the comission to be deemed a valid local remedy resitituion of property must be within it's power and the comission has already returned property to pre 74 Greek Cypriot ownerts that have applied to the comission.

But thats the point Erol. The 'rulings' returning property are suspended until solution to the Cyprus problem and hence the ECHR has not approved it for anything. You simply take everything the Turkish press says as the absolute truth. Why don't you do your own research?

Regarding Turkish Cypriot properties in the south, I think DP has answered your question with his friend Zia. There are also several abandoned villages in the south that some Turkish Cypriot's have returned to - why dont you go and visit these villages yourself and see first hand?

[erolz]

-mikkie2- wrote: You are a very naive person in my opinion. The ECHR HAS NOT said that new cases must go to this 'commission' because IT HAS not deemed it sufficient.

It has deemed it a local remedy. It has not yet been tested if it is a sufficient local remedy. For that to happen a case must FIRST go to the commission then it's rulings must be tested by the ECHR if the plaintiff is unsatisfied by the commission's ruling. As things stand right now the ECHR will not hear any new property case until and unless it has been to the commission first. This is the reality weather you like it or not.


-mikkie2- wrote: But thats the point Erol. The 'rulings' returning property are suspended until solution to the Cyprus problem and hence the ECHR has not approved it for anything. You simply take everything the Turkish press says as the absolute truth. Why don't you do your own research?

Why do you not do your own research? Those Greek Cypriot that have gained restitution of their property via the commission and free today to come to the north and use and enjoy that property without any let or hindrance. They are also free to sell such property under Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus jurisdiction.

-mikkie2- wrote:
Regarding Turkish Cypriot properties in the south, I think DP has answered your question with his friend Zia.

Lol. There is the Republic of Cyprus law in plain black and white - that clearly states a Turkish Cypriot cannot apply for restitution of their pre 74 property in the south without being resident in the south for at least 6 months and there is DP's 'hersay' about his friend - and you serioulsy expect me to believe the Republic of Cyprus law is not real but DP's hearsy is ? This is the same DP that has made numerous ridiculous unproven claims about what he 'knows' - from pre Turkish Cypriot title land in the North selling for 10 times that of exchange title land (pure rubbish) , to Clerides coming to Australia and offering to pay for flights for Cypriots to return to the Republic of Cyprus to vote in the Annan plan but only if they vote yes, to countless other nonsese. This then is your idea of 'credible proof'? DP's fanatasies ?

-mikkie2- wrote:
There are also several abandoned villages in the south that some Turkish Cypriot's have returned to - why dont you go and visit these villages yourself and see first hand?

Mikkie I have travel extensively in the South. I have seen first hand derelict pre 74 Turkish Cypriot villages being used to house animals. This then is the 'care' of Turkish Cypriot property that the Republic of Cyprus exercises.

[pg]

erolz wrote:
-mikkie2- wrote:
Regarding Turkish Cypriot properties in the south, I think DP has answered your question with his friend Zia.

Lol. There is the Republic of Cyprus law in plain black and white - that clearly states a Turkish Cypriot cannot apply for restitution of their pre 74 property in the south without being resident in the south for at least 6 months and there is DP's 'hersay' about his friend - and you serioulsy expect me to believe the Republic of Cyprus law is not real but DP's hearsy is ?


I think the 6m rule is "only" for Turkish Cypriots that lived in Cyprus in 1974, while those who had moved abroad earlier can sell their property without first being residents for 6 months. I might have some of those details wrong, but it goes something like that.

[-mikkie2-]

Quote: Lol. There is the Republic of Cyprus law in plain black and white - that clearly states a Turkish Cypriot cannot apply for restitution of their pre 74 property in the south without being resident in the south for at least 6 months and there is DP's 'hersay' about his friend - and you serioulsy expect me to believe the Republic of Cyprus law is not real but DP's hearsy is ? This is the same DP that has made numerous ridiculous unproven claims about what he 'knows' - from pre Turkish Cypriot title land in the North selling for 10 times that of exchange title land (pure rubbish) , to Clerides coming to Australia and offering to pay for flights for Cypriots to return to the Republic of Cyprus to vote in the Annan plan but only if they vote yes, to countless other nonsese. This then is your idea of 'credible proof'? DP's fanatasies ?

Erol,

Quite frankly I don't really care what you think. You obviously don't want to understand and appreciate WHY it is there is a 6 month residency rule regarding Turkish Cypriot's getting their property back in the south.

You simply FAIL to appreciate that Turkish Cypriot's that have been 'give' property in the north can go and get their land in the south, sell it for a fortune, return back to their 'given' property in the north and live happily ever after.

And as for Turkish Cypriot properties in th south being used to house animals, that is very rich coming from you when Turks and Turkish Cypriot's use our churches and houses in the north to do exactly the same. Eye for an eye Erol? Is that your attitude?

You may mock the Republic of Cyprus Erol, but that Republic is an EU member state recognised by the whole world, whose laws and regulations adhere to EU norms and in large part are respected. What has your beloved 'Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus' got to show Erol? What about our beloved Cyprus Erol? Do you CARE about OUR Cyprus or YOUR 'Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus'? The Republic of Cyprus is open to the Turkish Cypriot's if they chose to take it. But they don't. Instead they want a seperatist state which YOU support wholeheartedly.

[Kifeas]

The 6 month residency rule applies only to those Turkish Cypriots that moved from the south to the north after 1974. Those that have left Cyprus and went abroad before 1974, may gain possession of their properties without the above requirement.

Of course Erol would have preferred the idea that the Turkish Cypriots -which all together amount to only the 18% of the Cypriot population that owned only the 17% of the private land in Cyprus, besides unfairly exploiting for the last 33 years and even illegally selling the usurped 27% of the total private land of Cyprus that also happens to correspont to more than 40% of the total value of private land; should also, in addition, have a completely free ride with exploiting the insignificant in comparison private properties they left behind them in the south, without the 6 month rule; even though at the same time at least 150,000 Greek Cypriots (a number of people even more that the size of the entire Turkish Cypriot community) remain completely propertyless for the same 33 long years.

Is there anything else you want from us Erol? Tell us what else you wish us to do for you. Should we pull our pants down and bend, waiting for you (plural) to come and “visit” us?

[erolz]

-mikkie2- wrote: Quite frankly I don't really care what you think. You obviously don't want to understand and appreciate WHY it is there is a 6 month residency rule regarding Turkish Cypriot's getting their property back in the south.

You simply FAIL to appreciate that Turkish Cypriot's that have been 'give' property in the north can go and get their land in the south, sell it for a fortune, return back to their 'given' property in the north and live happily ever after.

If requiring a Turkish Cypriot to first be resident in the South for at least 6 months before being able to start to try and claim back their pre 74 property would make ANY difference to their ability to claim back said land whilst also having received land in the north from the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus in 'exchange' then your argument would make some sense. However the thing you claim is there to stop this happening does NOTHING to stop it happening. However it DOES place a real (and almost certainly illegal as eventually will be determined probably by the ECHR) barrier to Turkish Cypriot who might wish to reclaim their pre 74 property in the south.

Please explain to me how the 6 months requirement stops a Turkish Cypriot with exchange land from also claiming return of their pre 74 land in the south.

-mikkie2- wrote: You may mock the Republic of Cyprus Erol, but that Republic is an EU member state recognised by the whole world, whose laws and regulations adhere to EU norms and in large part are respected. What has your beloved 'Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus' got to show Erol? What about our beloved Cyprus Erol? Do you CARE about OUR Cyprus or YOUR 'Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus'? The Republic of Cyprus is open to the Turkish Cypriot's if they chose to take it. But they don't. Instead they want a seperatist state which YOU support wholeheartedly.

The fact is the North now finally and long overdue has a mechanism from which Greek Cypriot can seek redress for their pre 74 property. I welcome this development and I welcome the involvement of the ECHR as an independent judicial body that can and will ensure that the actions of the commission are correct and proper. This is real progress that matters - to those that have sought and received redress either financial or return and it is real progress to the hope for reunification , as every property not in dispute makes reunification more possible.
Apparently you do not care about any of this reality, or for those Greek Cypriots that want a solution to their personal property issues and are fed up with politics nor do you seem to care for the progress the commission represents. You seem to prefer to stick to the old propaganda that 'Greek Cypriot and Republic of Cyprus have done and do nothing incorrect re Turkish Cypriot rights to pre 74 property and the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus and Turkish Cypriot have done and do nothing correct'. This is just not true and if there is a single greatest enemy of potential unification of Cyprus it is lies like these imo.

[erolz]

Kifeas wrote: The 6 month residency rule applies only to those Turkish Cypriots that moved from the south to the north after 1974. Those that have left Cyprus and went abroad before 1974, may gain possession of their properties without the above requirement.

Meaning that this rule 'only' affects the vast majority of Turkish Cypriot with pre 74 land in the south, those that have recvieved 'exchange' along with those that have not.

Kifeas wrote: Is there anything else you want from us Erol? Tell us what else you wish us to do for you. Should we pull our pants down and bend, waiting for you (plural) to come and “visit” us?

I WANT those Greek Cypriot that lost land in 74 to receive fair redress for their loss and where ever possible in whatever form they prefer. I welcome the commission as a mechanism to achieve this AND I welcome the fact that ultimately it will be the ECHR that determines if the behavior of this commission is 'correct' or not - and not down to either Turkish Cypriot or Greek Cypriot to make such a determination.

What I do not want and the reason why I entered this thread in the first place is for blatant BS to go unchallenged. Blatant BS along the lines of 'Greek Cypriot have no means or ability to get redress for their losses re property pre 74 and Turkish Cypriot can do so without any restriction or let or hindrance.' This is not true or accurate - it is just BS propaganda the regurgitating of which does nothing to further chances of unification.