Delegation compares Palestinian plight to the Cyprus problem
A TEAM of Palestinian refugee activists are in Cyprus on a fact-finding mission to study how the United Nations is striking a balance between international law and politics to formulate proposals on conflict resolution.
So far, they have been less than happy to note that the Annan plan, offered as a solution plan to the Cyprus problem, contradicted legal principles in international law.
They also observed that negotiations in Cyprus have been historically held on a very “elite” level, keeping grass-roots participation (and the ordinary citizen) to a minimum. By doing so, the group maintains the powers that be may have delayed the realisation of a final, durable solution.
Eleven members of the non-government organisation, BADIL (Resource Centre for Palestinian Residency and Refugee Rights) arrived last Monday to examine the issue of refugee return, housing and property restitution and compensation models in Cyprus.
This is their third fact-finding mission in as many years, having previously taken in Bosnia-Herzegovina and South Africa to look at what’s been done and the best practice used in each country to overcome similar problems.
The group leave the island next Tuesday, hoping to gather enough information to use in their search for a rights-based durable solution of the Palestinian refugee question.
Coordinator of the group is Terry Rempel from Canada, who has been working on the Palestinian refugee problem for the last eight years. Rempel spoke to the Cyprus Mail about what observations BADIL had picked up while in Cyprus.
“We came to Cyprus to look at the property issue and see how that’s trying to be addressed by the UN and the Greek and Turkish Cypriots. I know it’s a cliché, but the Cyprus problem is a very complex issue. We have seen both similarities and differences with the Palestinian problem.”
Rempel notes that Palestinian refugees, like displaced people in Cyprus, have been pressing from the start for basic rights, like the right to return and property restitution.
“What we learnt from our meetings with the UN and Foreign Ministry here is that when it comes down to politics, legal principles can be compromised. We have been looking at what that means for the refugee or displaced person in terms of justice,” said Rempel.
The Cyprus Republic is an independent state and a member of the European Union, and is recognised by every country in the world bar Turkey, he said. Cypriot citizens have access to legal channels to address problems of property, as Titina Loizidou did at the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR).
“The Palestinians are stateless and don’t have recourse to the EHCR. We are interested in the use of legal channels when the political process does not provide an adequate remedy, though, in the Palestinian case legal channels are viewed as an obstacle to solution.”
“In Cyprus, now that the Annan plan has been rejected, the question is what is the impact of these legal cases? Will they raise the bar or standard on future efforts for a solution, and what implications will that have for Palestine?” asked Rempel.
The group coordinator noted that the Annan plan had dabbled into new territories through its property provisions.
“There is now in international law, clear legal standards on property and restitution. But then we heard that the Annan plan developed the idea that a maximum of one third of property would be returned,” he said.
“For us it is disturbing that the UN itself is putting forward these types of plans. For Palestinians, the primary preference is restitution and where that’s not possible because a building was knocked down or in public use, then compensation.”
Rempel highlighted that the option of compensation, apart from sidelining the right to return, had its own problems of implementation. “Where does that money come from? In Bosnia, there was a choice of restitution and compensation but compensation was never put into practice because there was no money put in the fund.”
For those who wanted compensation, as an alternative, ended up selling their property on the market, getting a better deal as a result.
“We see it as a contradiction in international law. It also raises concerns for us when we look at what the UN came up with in the plan in Cyprus,” he said, explaining that dominant parties in Israel were also pushing for compensation as a final solution.
UN guidelines on the property rights of refugees and displaced persons makes it clear that restitution is a priority and primary remedy. “Where this is not possible, and there’s a narrow interpretation on that, compensation is the next subsequent remedy,” said Rempel.
“Allowing one third return of property is a political compromise not based on international law. Some UN officials feel it would have withstood scrutiny in an international court but we haven’t heard any individual answers that sounded convincing yet. There is a clear compromise in absolute provisions of international law to get an agreement. This is of great concern to Palestinians.”
Political writers in Israel have pointed to the Annan plan as a possible precedent for a solution, highlighting the limits on the right to return and property restitution, noted Rempel. The plan’s provisions on demographic ceilings in either ‘constituent state’ also support their views, he added.
However, the coordinator highlighted that the demographics are completely different in either case. As a result of 1963 and 1974, the communities in Cyprus are almost completely homogenous on either side, where as there are 1.3 million Palestinians inside Israel, half of them internally displaced, and 3.5 million refugees in the West Bank, Gaza Strip and East Jerusalem, as well as 500,000 Jewish settlers there, said Rempel.
“There is no clear division along ethnic or religious lines there, it’s more complicated that way.”
Also, Rempel noted that when formulating a plan for Cyprus, the UN were acting based on what they thought would be the likely demographic changes from a solution. In Israel, if half the refugees returned to their land, this would create equal population levels between the two sides.
Rempel argued that making political compromises would not necessarily result in a solution that could hold. “The best way to ensure balance between law and politics and to make a correct agreement durable is to get grass roots participation in the process from early stages.”
He noted that negotiations in Cyprus were always held on a high level. “We see that elite negotiators come up with complex plans to meet all political demands that parties bring to the table. But this is a very twisted and complex process to meet various demands, which basically deals with grass roots at the end of the process and then tries to convince them that this is the best compromise.”
Rempel argued that the best way to make an agreement long lasting is to deal with grass roots from an early stage.
He referred to the emergence of Israeli organisations working to educate Israelis on Palestinian rights of return and property restitution. High-level negotiations have been delayed due to the violence “but in the midst of that, there has been a positive development in trying to educate the Israeli population creating a common language and discourse.”
For example, members of an Israeli kibbutz built on Palestinian village have agreed to return 90 per cent of the village to its refugees after meeting with them.
“This is only achieved through grass roots early participation. Maybe it can’t be replicated but it widens the scope of potential solutions. Then you get to the final stage of official negotiations,” he said.
“We are told that civil society structures are not particularly strong and developed in Cyprus. It makes it difficult when bi-communal projects are limited to the same number of people. There is no structure for broader public participation.”
Comparing Cyprus to South Africa, Rempel noted that the great deal of participation in solving land issues there. “They started at local level, then regional, then national and so found ways to formulate a new land policy for the country. That in essence provides the glue to make an agreement durable.”
Cyprus, Rempel said, is more like Bosnia where an international solution was imposed. “The UN has a complex machinery in place in Bosnia but what happens when they leave we asked them? They didn’t know.”
