IMMOVABLE PROPERTY COMMISSION:
“2 GREEK CYPRIOTS TO GET THEIR PROPERTY BACK, ONE GREEK CYPRIOT TO BE COMPENSATED”

According to the commission’s decision, the properties of the 2 Greek Cypriots, who applied to the commission, will be given back to them and the other Greek Cypriot will be compensated.

Commission also offered a compensation of 460 thousand Cyprus Pounds to Arestis, which is one of the key cases in the agenda of European Court of Human Rights.

Commission, which the Greek Cypriots showed big interest, has announced its decision on 3 of the 16 cases, filed by Greek Cypriots. In line with the mutual agreement signed between the Commission and the applicants, without the need to go to the court, lands in Tatlısu region will be handed back to the former Greek Cypriot owners.

The authorities stated that the large pieces of land which was not in current possession of any TRNC citizen and was not in public service can immediately be reinstated as stipulated by the new law.

According to the Immovable Property Law, immovable properties that ownership or use of which have not been transferred to a natural or legal person other than the State may be restituted provided that the restitution of such property, having regard to the location and the physical condition, shall not endanger national security and public order. If the commission decided to reinstate immovable properties which are under the use of a TRNC citizen by appropriation or if improvement was made, the restitution of such property may take effect after the settlement of the Cyprus problem. Immovable properties of equal value in south are outside the scope of restitution.

The commission decided to compensate the third applicant for his property in the north. It was stated that the commission and the Greek Cypriot, who applied to the commission with a compensation demand for his property without need for a hearing, reached to an agreement. No information was revealed regarding the name of the Greek Cypriot and the amount of the compensation.

In line with the Immovable Property Law, if the commission decides for compensation this amount shall be paid by the Ministry of Interior, on behalf of the state, and the ownership right of the Greek Cypriot who was compensated shall be lost.

The commission also took a decision on Arestis case, which following Loizidu case, is on the ECHR’s agenda and is one of the key cases of the property issue in Cyprus.

The commission has offered to pay Arestis who applied to ECHR for compensation for his property, a total of 460 thousand CYP of which 220 thousand is for the value of the property and 240 thousand for the loss of income. The commission sent the offer to Arestis’ Lawyer in written and decided that the restitution demand for this property could be possible only after a settlement according to the new law. No response was given by Arestis yet.

Immovable Property Commission, which was established with the aim of forming an internal-law procedure for the property issue, which is one of the key issues of the Cyprus problem, formed in accordance with the “Law for the Compensation Exchange and Restitution of Immovable Properties”, within the scope of Article 159 of the Constitution on 19 2005 and is responsible to implement the said law.

Whether the Immovable Property Commission, which act as a court in line with the Law, will be accepted as an “internal law procedure” by the ECHR or not will become clear in the forthcoming days. The ECHR in its decision on Arestis case had requested from the commission to finalize some cases it filed until 22 June (today).

MEP’S: “EU SHOULD KEEP ITS PROMISE TO TURKISH CYPRIOTS”

During the discussion of Dutch Parliamentarian Camiel Eurling’s report on Turkey at the European Parliament’s Committee of External Relations, many Parliamentarians underlined that the EU was entangled in contradictions on the Cyprus issue.

The Parliamentarians from various political groups stressed that Turkey had responsibilities towards the EU, but at the same it should not be forgotten that the EU also had responsibilities towards the Turkish Cypriots. In addition, the Parliamentarians drew attention to the fact that some of the EU member states were using the Cyprus issue to block Turkey’s negotiation process with the EU.

Following are the views of some MEP’s:

Geoffrey Van Orden –MEP of British Christian Democratic Group

It is not only Turkey who has responsibilities on Cyprus. The EU also has responsibilities towards the Turkish Cypriots. The EU has not so far kept its promise given to Turkish Cypriots. All of these should be considered. We should realize that the problem in Cyprus was not derived from only one side.

Cem Özdemir –MEP of German Greens

As Community Institutions, we should encourage Turkey on the issue of EU reforms. South Cyprus has a responsibility at the point reached in the Cyprus issue. We cannot ignore this.

Emine Bozkurt –MEP of Dutch Socialist Group

It was stated in the report that the Greek Cypriot side has a responsibility in finding a political settlement to the Cyprus problem. This is important. In Cyprus, the isolations should be lifted. We should work in order to bring the two sides closer. We should support the positive steps taken by Turkey during the negotiation process.

Andrew Duff –MEP of British Liberal Group

It should be reminded that the EU has responsibilities towards the Turkish Cypriots. The promises given by the EU has not yet been kept. Some groups who are against Turkey’s EU membership were using the Cyprus problem.