ARIF Mustafa, the Turkish Cypriot who moved to the south of the island to reclaim his property in Episkopi, yesterday won the right to move into his old home after the government withdrew its appeal against the decision.
The development means two Greek Cypriot refugee families from Ayia Irini near Kyrenia, living on the property since the Turkish invasion, will have to move out.
In September 2004, Mustafa had won the right to return to his four-donum property in Episkopi after a Supreme Court ruling. The decision, however, was suspended pending the hearing of an appeal by the government and the Greek Cypriot refugee occupants of his home.
But on the first day of the Supreme Court hearing yesterday, both Attorney-general Petros Klerides and lawyer Christodoulos Taramountas, representing the Greek Cypriot refugees, withdraw their appeals.
The move took observers by surprise, with what had been expected to be a lengthily hearing ending in just a couple of minutes.
“The government withdraws its appeal,” Klerides told the court, echoed immediately after by Taramountas.
The Supreme Court accepted both withdrawals, with the judge ruling that the expenses of the proceedings be paid by the government.
A smiling Mustafa told the Cyprus Mail outside the court: “I am very happy with the decision and I will be moving back to my home now.”
Klerides denied the Greek Cypriot occupants were being made refugees a second time, insisting the case did not set a binding precedent.
And Interior Minister Andreas Christou sought to reassure refugees living on Turkish Cypriot properties, saying this had been a highly specific case and that the few similar cases were resolved amicable between the parties involved.
He said the families involved had been provided with alternative, larger accommodation.
Taramountas told reporters he believed that all parties had been left satisfied in the end, and that his clients’ rights had been protected, adding their main concern had been that they might end up on the street. Since alternative housing has been found for the families, there was little point in persevering with the case, he said.
He said what his clients wanted was “for the right to property to be respected, on this side just as in the occupied areas”, urging the political leadership to struggle for this principle.
“Politicians in this country must promote the message that the right to property ownership is sacred, respected and inviolable,” he said, adding that the Annan plan had failed to guarantee Greek Cypriot property rights.
He added his clients were not in conflict with Mustafa: “The dispute was between the Turkish Cypriot and the Guardian of Turkish Cypriot Properties.”
Both the Greek Cypriot refugee families have handed their keys to the Guardian of Turkish Cypriot properties and the government has offered them alternative housing.
Mustafa left behind a house and an orchard when he left 30 years ago. But a second house was built on his orchard after he left, something he says he will leave as is.
As the law stands, Turkish Cypriots who have lived in the south for more than six months can reclaim the properties they abandoned after the war. Knowing this to be the case, Mustafa applied and won reinstatement to the home he had not lived in for 30 years.
Other residents in Episkopi expressed concern they could be next. “It’s unfair: they’ll end up having everything over there, and everything here too,” one elderly refugee told CyBC. Another said he would only move once his own property was returned. Until then, it was “over my dead body,” he said.
But the landmark victory is not expected to open a floodgate of appeals, according to lawyer Constantinos Candounas, who has fought to reclaim Greek Cypriot properties in the north.
“I don’t believe we will see a huge influx of Turkish Cypriots suddenly following the steps of Arif Mustafa,” said Candounas. “I wouldn’t say that his case is a one-off, but it would be a hassle, in my opinion, because the Turkish Cypriot would have to give up his or her rights in the occupied areas, move to the south and reside for six months and possibly go through the courts for about three years.”
