Parties raise questions about ECHR ruling on Turkey property settlement
NO ONE can deprive anyone the right to seek legal redress but Cypriots need to think twice before they undertake initiatives that may harm efforts for a Cyprus settlement, said government spokesman Stefanos Stefanou yesterday.
The spokesman was commenting on the friendly settlement between Greek Cypriot Andromachi Alexandrou and Turkey over occupied land in the north that was endorsed by the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) on Tuesday.
Alexandrou dropped her case against Turkey, asking instead for the ECHR to approve an agreement reached with the ‘property commission’ in the north, providing for the restitution of part of her occupied property along with a payment of £1.5 million Sterling to her and her children as compensation in lieu of their properties and for loss of use.
Stefanou called on all Cypriots to think twice before they undertake any initiatives or take any decisions or actions that may harm efforts for a Cyprus settlement or the interests of the Republic of Cyprus.
Most commentators were in agreement yesterday that the ECHR endorsement did not constitute recognition of the legality or effectiveness of the ‘property commission’ in the north, as Turkey is keen to show. However, they also highlighted that it wasn’t exactly a positive development given that the ECHR is due to examine the validity of the commission this November in eight test case applications by Greek Cypriot refugees against Turkey. The ECHR only examines cases after all local options have been exhausted.
If the commission is deemed to provide adequate legal remedy to Greek Cypriots then they will lose automatic recourse to the Strasbourg-based court and will be forced instead to seek redress at the commission in the north first.
Asked if he would recommend that no other applications be lodged by Greek Cypriots against Turkey at the ECHR, Stefanou said that no one can deprive anyone the right to claim his rights in every legal way.
He noted, however, that such issues could not be resolved through any compromise with the occupation force but through the comprehensive settlement of the Cyprus question.
The spokesman further highlighted that the compromise made with Turkey did not clarify when part of Alexandrou’s property would be returned or whether she would have free use of that property.
AKEL’s Aristophanes Georgiou said Alexandrou’s compromise was not logical. The Chairman of the House Refugee Committee said: “It was a compromise which in essence traded a plate of lentils for a whole house.”
Human rights lawyer Achilleas Demetriades said the friendly settlement effectively provided compensation for the expropriation of Alexandrou’s land which represented two to ten per cent of the real value of her property.
“I wouldn’t be surprised if Turkey pays the sums it owes in other cases by November” to show that the system set up with the property commission was working just fine, said Demetriades. He noted that around 50 of the 350-odd applications to the commission have been settled.
Loucis Loucaides, a former ECHR judge, accused Alexandrou of pursuing personal interests over those of the country, while DIKO’s Fotis Fotiou called on all refugees to refuse to participate in any transaction with the occupying power.
Chairman of the House Legal Affairs Committee, Ionas Nicolaou, said the settlement was a “worrying development” as it could encourage others to pursue the same channels. It is also the second settlement with the commission ratified by the ECHR, after the Tymvios case last year.
The DISY deputy highlighted that there has yet to be a case at the commission where land was returned, adding that it was unable to secure anyone’s rights.
