IN THE aftermath of the Arif Mustafa case, the government yesterday rushed to reassure Greek Cypriot refugees that no precedent had been set and that they would not be left out in the cold.
In September 2004, Mustafa 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 Monday Mustafa was free to move into his old home after both the Attorney-general and the Greek Cypriot occupants withdrew their appeal against the decision. In the meantime alternative lodgings were found for the Greek Cypriot family.
It was a landmark case demonstrating the government’s new policy following the opening of the checkpoints towards Turkish Cypriots who had property in the south before 1974 and now wanted to reclaim it. Under a 1991 law, the properties were placed in the care of the Guardian of Turkish Cypriot Properties, effectively the Minister of the Interior.
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.
With the opening of the checkpoints in 2003, this suddenly became a far more realistic prospect for many Turkish Cypriots, including Mustafa who applied and won reinstatement to the home he had not lived in for 30 years. Other cases have seen behind the scenes settlements between the government and the original owners.
Amid fears that Monday’s outcome might set a precedent for many more Turkish Cypriots to reclaim their properties in the south – leaving their Greek Cypriot counterparts in the lurch – Attorney-general Petros Klerides vowed that any future cases would be taken on their merit.
Similar sentiments were echoed yesterday by Government Spokesman George Lillikas:
“The right to property is sacred and inalienable. No Cypriot government has ever deprived its citizens this right. On the contrary, the right to property is denied by the Turkish occupation army and the regime. We assure Greek Cypriot refugees that they shall not be left exposed.”
Legal circles said that had the hearing actually taken place and the Supreme Court upheld the previous ruling, then that would have set a precedent. This, they mused, was precisely why the government withdrew its appeal. In other words, the political upshot was thwarted by a technicality.
But not everyone was convinced of the government’s reassurances. Opposition party United Democrats said yesterday the property issue – which is at the heart of the Cyprus problem – should not be resolved through the courts but through a comprehensive political settlement.
“The outcome [of the case] shows that Cyprus is a state where the rule of law is supreme,” noted United Democrats leader Michalis Papapetrou.
“On the other hand, we fully sympathise with the concerns of Greek Cypriot refugees, who realise that after 32 years of occupation the status quo is extremely fragile.”
Away from the courts and the political arena, there was some tension yesterday at the Custodian offices in Limassol when Mustafa showed up to pick up the keys to his house. Greek Cypriot refugees on business there reacted to the scene, although the exchange of words with Mustafa was civil.
One exasperated Greek Cypriot man said:
“This man has won his house by an appeal. What about my home in Lefkoniko? Who will give me my property back? To whom can I appeal [in the north]?
“There are thousands more like me,” he added.
To avert further unrest, it was then arranged to hand over the keys to Mustafa on the premises of his house in Episkopi.
Back on his property, news crews hounded Mustafa for a comment.
“I am not happy yet. Only when all Turkish and Greek Cypriots return to their homes will I be perfectly satisfied,” he said.
