A TANGIBLE sense of anger and indignation hung over the breakaway Turkish Cypriot north as it woke up yesterday to the implications of Tuesday’s European Court of Justice (ECJ) ruling on the Orams case, and how it might affect the ongoing peace talks.
“Everything is possible now,” spokesman for the Turkish Cypriot leadership Hasan Ercakica told the Cyprus Mail yesterday when asked how they planned to react to the ruling.
The ECJ decision backed a Nicosia court ruling ordering British expat couple David and Linda Orams to demolish a house they had built on the Lapithos property of Greek Cypriot refugee Meletis Apostolides.
“I don’t want to say what the possibilities are, and I can’t say what is going to happen next, but everything that might come to mind is a possibility,” Ercakica said while clearly implying that the Cyprus negotiations might be affected.
Turkish Cypriot media touted that it was “the end of the talks”, while on the Greek Cypriot side government spokesman Stefanos Stefanou said the decision would have a direct effect on negotiations.
Ercakica’s comments came after a meeting between the Turkish Cypriot leader Mehmet Ali Talat and leaders of political parties in the north – a meeting at which the Turkish Cypriot political leaders expressed “unprecedented unity”.
“If there is one thing for us to feel happy and secure about it is the fact that we are all agreed in our reaction to this,” Ercakica said.
Although previously aware that the ruling was likely to go against the Orams, Talat’s spokesman said the Greek Cypriot leadership’s obvious pleasure at the ruling “revealed a lack of sincerity” at ongoing UN-sponsored reunification talks.
“If Christofias believes he can solve the property issue in the courts, why doesn’t he go and do it? And if he thinks he can do it this way, why doesn’t he leave the negotiating table? Can he please explain this to his people and the international community?”
But ruling AKEL’s general secretary, Andros Kyprianou, said: “These approaches are extreme. The court very correctly has said that nobody can illegally use the property of someone else. The message here is that there needs to be an end to the illegal constructions on properties belonging to Greek Cypriots and at the same time the solution to the Cyprus problem must take into consideration certain basic principles of international justice.” He added: “We feel the arguments of our side have been reinforced. So we wish and hope that the Turkish side, interpreting this ruling correctly, it approaches the negotiations table and positions itself in way that will be harmonised with the ECJ ruling.”
On Tuesday evening Talat appeared on local ‘state’ TV accusing the EU of “once again showing it does not play a positive role in seeking a solution to the Cyprus problem”. This he did despite being one of the north’s main proponents of EU accession for the breakaway state. He also said he believed cases such as the Orams would do little more than increase tensions between the two communities, thus making a solution yet harder to secure.
Although reported to be “angry, disappointed and concerned” about the ruling, Talat’s reaction was less severe than that of former leader Rauf Denktash who said it was a reason to call off negotiations with the Greek Cypriots.
“If it was me, I would leave the negotiating table,” he was quoted as saying in a Turkish Cypriot daily. He added criticism however for both Turkey and the north for not having been more involved in the case.
“How many times have I said Turkey and the TRNC’s government have to involve themselves in this case. It is being handled with just the testimony of one side,” he said.
A spokesman for the National Unity Party (UBP), which will take over the breakaway north’s administration in the coming days, also hit out at the ruling, saying that it was “unfair and one sided”.
“The chief judge was a Greek, and another of the judges was none other than Myra Arestis’ husband”. Arestis won a ruling at the European Court of Human Rights two years ago ordering Turkey to compensate her for the loss of use of her property in Varosha.
“If a judge has any personal interests in the outcome of a case they are presiding over, they are ethically obliged to withdraw,” the spokesman added.
There were other objections to the ruling. Turkish Cypriot international law expert and lecturer at the Eastern Mediterranean University (EMU) in Famagusta Kutred Ozersay said he believed the ruling rested on “weak ground”
“For such a big issue to be dealt with in a 12-page report seems to me to not to do justice to it,” he said. He added that the court had “ignored political issues” that gave the case implications well beyond the lives of Apostolides and the Oramses.
“This is not about individuals; it’s an international conflict,” he said, adding a call on the UK Appeals Court, where the ECJ’s ruling will go for implementation, to take this into account.
“The UK has to know that if it doesn’t take measures during the final stages of the case in the UK court, the continuation of negotiations in Cyprus – particularly on the property issue – will be meaningless. This is extremely serious,” he warned.
Ozersay however that it was difficult for the British court to do anything but ratify the ECJ ruling because “the wording on public policy issues narrows the scope of the discretionary power of the UK court to refuse to implement the ruling on public policy grounds, and public policy is the only grounds that can be used as a reason not to implement it”.
His only hope, he said, was that the British government, realising the implications for ongoing negotiations, might seek to impress on the court the need to take heed of the political issues relating to the case.
“This can be done through political statements that might indirectly make the court aware of the issues. Another way would be for the judge to delay proceedings while seeking the views of the Foreign Office. This is not unprecedented,” Ozersay said.
