THE GOVERNMENT has spared itself further embarrassment by withdrawing its appeal against the ruling granting Turkish Cypriot Arif Mustafa restitution of his property in Episkopi.
The case encapsulates much of the complexity and the human impact of the Cyprus problem. While few would have denied Mustafa’s right to his property, his case was complicated by the presence of Greek Cypriot refugees in his home. To many, there was something deeply disturbing in a court effectively evicting refugees to allow the return of a Turkish Cypriot, at a time when Greek Cypriot claims for return to homes in the occupied areas are dismissed with contempt.
One can understand the government’s distaste at the prospect of headlines about people twice made refugees, the first time by the Turkish army, the second by their own courts. Clearly, such concerns were behind the decision to appeal. Yet it was an absurd decision from the start.
Day after day, we condemn the regime in the north for its failure to respect our “sacred right to property”; we have launched myriad law suits, both against individual users of Greek Cypriot properties and against Turkey itself; we have won landmark cases before the European Court of Human Rights; we campaigned against the Annan plan because it did not allow all refugees to return to their homes.
Despite the pressure, not a single refugee has been allowed to return. Yet to deny the right of Arif Mustafa would be to play for tit-for-tat with the occupation regime. Had we pleaded special circumstances for the refugees on his property we would have been mirroring the bias in favour of “current users” in the loathed Annan plan; we would be admitting that property rights are not sacred, and depend very much on the circumstances, just as the Turkish Cypriot regime has argued over the decades.
What’s more, we would have run the risk of an appeal to the European Court of Human Rights. And imagine the embarrassment had the Court then invoked the precedent of Titina Loizidou – as well it might – in ruling against the Republic of Cyprus.
It’s a pity we had to make this case drag on so much when its implications were obvious from the very first day. Would it not have been better to work behind the scenes to rehouse the refugees, while holding up the case as an example of the impartiality of our legal system in upholding a basic human right?
Indeed, our courts have not let us down. Those who have are the politicians who have again exposed us with an unpleasant display of double standards. What this case shows is the urgent need for them to set aside their populist slogans and focus on achieving the political settlement essential to safeguard the rights of all Cypriots once and for all.
