THE OWNERS of an affected property in the areas not under territorial adjustment should file a claim with the Property Board for their rights to be recognised, exactly like the owners in the areas under territorial adjustment.
To understand the way rights are enforced when it comes to an affected property in the areas not under territorial adjustment, the following should be considered:
1) The agreed levels of reinstatement would apply.
2) Property rights can be exercised by way of reinstatement, or by way of compensation, or by leasing, exchanging or selling.
3) For a property to be reinstated, it must first be judged as suitable for reinstatement. This does not mean it would necessarily be included among the properties earmarked for reinstatement. The Property Board will issue final decisions after examining all the claims for reinstatement.
4) Companies would not have the choice of reinstatement.
5) An affected property would be eligible for reinstatement only if it satisfies certain conditions.
The exercise of property rights concerning a property in these areas would be regulated in a way so that reinstated houses and land would not exceed 10 per cent in any municipality or village, or 20 per cent of the total land area and the number of houses in each constituent state.
The owner of an affected property can file a claim either for the reinstatement of his property, for compensation, in exchange for title to the property in question, or to lease, exchange or sell the property. The Property Board will consider if the property is eligible for reinstatement before granting any of these options.
The Property Board will examine every case separately based on certain criteria in order to decide whether a property is eligible for reinstatement. It will keep a record of all properties which are eligible for reinstatement. The Board will examine all such claims before making final decisions.
If the total number of properties eligible for reinstatement exceeds the agreed levels of reinstatement, it will grant reinstatement in an order of priority. Claims for the reinstatement of residences will precede those concerning land. The claims would then be ranked based on the age of the applicant – older first. And finally, the Board will issue the final decisions based on the agreed levels of reinstatement.
The owner of a property that has been found as eligible for reinstatement in the initial examination can choose, instead of reinstatement, to lease, exchange or sell the property in question. The owner should however act before the Board publishes its final results.
Would priority be given to reinstate affected properties to former residents choosing to settle in the Turkish Cypriot state?
No. The Property Board will examine each claim in the same way, even in the case were the owner of an affected property decides to settle in the Turkish Cypriot state. Whether an affected property in areas that are not subject to territorial adjustment would be eligible for reinstatement, is a separate issue from that of settlement.
Properties, which are not eligible for reinstatement will be reinstated five years after the Foundation Agreement comes into effect (except for the properties which are vacant and will be reinstated after three years). Concerning the right of settlement, in the first six years there would be a moratorium. Consequently, with the exception of former residents of the four Karpasia villages, and any former residents who are over 65-years-old, who have the right to return after two years, all others opting to return would already know whether they are returning to their property since the final decisions for reinstatement would have been made by then. Priority in gaining residence in the other constituent state would be given to people whose properties have been reinstated, former residents of the relevant municipality or village before 1963 or 1974, and the heirs of people of any category.
Despite this, the reinstatement of a property to its owner does not necessarily mean that the owner in question would secure permanent residence in the constituent state where his property is located. However, any limitations to the right of permanent residence would not keep any Cypriot citizen from holidaying in his own reinstated property or any other housing anywhere in Cyprus for an average of three nights per week. Finally, these limitations will not prevent the freedom of movement throughout the island.
What does the UN plan provide for the four Karpasia villages and the villages inhabited by Maronites, concerning the issue of property reinstatement?
The limitations set by the agreed levels of reinstatement would not apply for the Karpasia villages of Rizokarpaso, Yialousa, Ayia Triada and Melanagra or the villages inhabited mainly by Maronites in 1974. They would also not apply to religious sites.
However, properties exempted from the agreed levels of reinstatement are still subject to the same criteria for eligibility as any other property located in areas not under territorial adjustment. Only religious sites are exempted from all conditions.
