LEGAL circles in Cyprus are locking horns over the decision by some 1,000 Greek Cypriot refugees to appeal a European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) decision last December that said redress should be sought with a compensation commission under the breakaway regime.
The ECHR ruling in the case of refugee Myra Xenides-Arestis called on Turkey and its “subordinate local administration” in north Cyprus to provide an “effective local remedy” that gives “redress” to Greek Cypriot refugee Myra Xenides-Arestis, who fled her property in 1974.
The court instructed Turkey to put in place the mechanisms for redress within three months of the judgment and process Xenides’ claim within six months
“Turkey should provide genuinely effective redress…for the applicant as well as in relation to all similar applications (approximately 1,400) pending before the Court,” read the press release by the Registrar.
Given that Arestis’ plot of land lies in the walled-off, military-controlled Varosha, the ruling raised the question of what Turkey and the Turkish Cypriots plan to do with the town
A ghost town since 1974, Varosha has never been part of the self-proclaimed ‘Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus’ (‘TRNC’), and has always been seen as a bargaining chip that Turkey and the north could use as part of an overall settlement of the Cyprus problem.
Still, a recent amendment to the “compensation law” passed by the breakaway regime stipulates that certain properties may not be returned if they are deemed to compromise security – and that would presumably apply to Xenides’ property in Varosha, which is a closed-off area patrolled by Turkish Cypriot troops.
In these cases, redress would not be identical to restitution, but would be made via compensation.
The ECHR ruling makes no mention of restitution. However, things are still very much up in the air and it remains to be seen whether the European court accepts the Turkish Cypriot clause for security exceptions.
But this week, on the eve of the three-month deadline, six lawyers representing 1,000 Greek Cypriots challenged the decision, with the rationale that it jeopardised the applicants’ chances of getting their property back.
It was the latest move in the game of chess, all hinging on assumptions about what the other side will do next.
But Arestis’ lawyer Achilleas Demetriades has criticised the appeal, feeling that Greek Cypriot refugees might end up biting the hand that feeds them.
“It just doesn’t make sense to challenge a court from which you expect redress and justice,” Demetriades said yesterday.
“There is no doubt in my mind that this shall adversely affect our case. Moreover, by making all this noise about the issue we are baring our cards to Turkey, and that is not wise.
“We have information,” he went on, “that Turkey is devising various schemes by which to delay the operation of the compensation commission, for example by asking for a postponement on the implementation of the ECHR’s decision. So this move [by Greek Cypriot refugees] is counterintuitive.
Moreover, said Demetriades, the appeal “had no legal basis” because the ECHR registrar explicitly stated that the only parties who could appeal the decision were Xenides herself and Turkey.
“If you ask me, this case should be left to those who are in the know,” he quipped – a jibe at the lawyers filing the appeal.
Christos Klerides, one of the lawyers filing the appeal, took exception at the comments.
“I’m really disappointed that the standard of discourse has fallen so low,” Klerides said on state radio yesterday.
“If some people think that the ECHR ruling is a precursor to the return of Varosha, I’d very much like to see that. Since Mr Demetriades is advising his clients to take recourse in the north, perhaps he should also consider practising law there and see how that works out for him.
“We really need to get a reality check. Any way you look at it, the [ECHR} decision is deplorable, and has serious political ramifications regarding the Cyprus issue.”
Meanwhile across the divide, press reports yesterday said that the seven members of the compensation commission had been appointed. And according to Kibris, the National Unity Party (UBP) and the Communal Liberation Party (TKP) filed appeals against the “property law” recently passed by the Turkish Cypriot “assembly.”
??
??
??
??
