Political Equality? This forum is the model for a solution!
 | |  |
 Posted: Fri Feb 04, 2005 2:37 am |
 |
|
| insan |
| lecturer |
|
| |
| Joined: 30 Jun 2003 |
| Posts: 2551 |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
| Quote: |
| 1. IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOLUTION - Creation of mechanisms that will ensure Turkey's compliance with the agreement. |
Reasonable and feasible.
| Quote: |
| 2. SECURITY - Cancellation of the unilateral intervention rights of the guarantor powers. |
Reasonable and feasible.
| Quote: |
| 3. ARMIES - full demilitarization within a specified time limit or when Turkey joins the EU. |
Reasonable and feasible
| Quote: |
| 4. SETTLERS - Clear definition of the maximum number that will remain, and assurances for the departure of all the rest. Clarification on the issue of the future influx of Turkish Citizens into Cyprus. |
Reasonable and feasible.
| Quote: |
| 5. TERRITORIAL ADJUSTMENT - Shortening of the timetable for the return of territories under Greek Cypriot administration, and a similar shortening of the timetable for the return of Greek Cypriots under Turkish Cypriot administration. |
Reasonable but I'm not sure of if it is feasible...
| Quote: |
| 6. PROPERTIES - An amendment away from the provisions of Annan 5, and towards something more similar to Annan 3. AKEL seems to prefer the concept of long-term leasing of properties, instead of the "logic of one-third", which was in the latest UN Plan. |
Reasonable and can be considered feasible.
| Quote: |
| 7. ECONOMY - Assurances for an integrated economy and an integrated monetary policy. |
If this does not mean to give the full control of economy in the hands of GC community, seems ok.
| Quote: |
| 8. ADMINISTRATIVE STRUCTURES - A differentiation of the administrative system for the various departments of the Federal Government. Instead of each department having a chairman and a vice-chairman who hail from different constituent states, and whose decisions will have to be reached by consensus, a ratio of Greek Cypriots and Turkish Cypriots Chairmen should be agreed upon (7:3 or 6:4) who will be authorised to make decisions by themselves. |
I couldn't understand this one. It should be elaborated. |
|
|
|
|
| | |
| Posted: Fri Feb 04, 2005 2:43 am |
|
|
| insan |
| lecturer |
|
| |
| Joined: 30 Jun 2003 |
| Posts: 2551 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Quote: |
| Well, obviously the bill has failed to get simple majority approval (as well as the 1/4 quota which it did get), therefore it cannot be approved. The Presidential Council would have to come back with an amended bill, or else "forget about it". |
But according to the relevant provisions of Annan Plan, at least 1/4 of the votes of each side would be adequate to pass a bill from the senate. According to the plan 1/4 of the votes of each side would constitute the simple majority vote on some matters. Or am I mistaken? |
|
|
|
|
| | |
| Posted: Fri Feb 04, 2005 2:44 am |
|
|
| Alexandros Lordos |
| instructor |
|
| |
| Joined: 28 Nov 2004 |
| Posts: 987 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| insan wrote: |
| Quote: |
| 8. ADMINISTRATIVE STRUCTURES - A differentiation of the administrative system for the various departments of the Federal Government. Instead of each department having a chairman and a vice-chairman who hail from different constituent states, and whose decisions will have to be reached by consensus, a ratio of Greek Cypriots and Turkish Cypriots Chairmen should be agreed upon (7:3 or 6:4) who will be authorised to make decisions by themselves. |
I couldn't understand this one. It should be elaborated. |
Basically, it is the concern that when you need two people to agree before a decision can be made, their will be delays, inefficiencies and personality clashes. So this proposal of AKEL cancels the requirement that each department must have two "co-heads", and instead proposes that each department have "one head only", but with at least 30% or 40% of the "department heads" being Turkish Cypriots. So essentially, it is a proposal to lessen administrative deadlocks. |
|
|
|
|
| | |
| Posted: Fri Feb 04, 2005 2:46 am |
|
|
| Alexandros Lordos |
| instructor |
|
| |
| Joined: 28 Nov 2004 |
| Posts: 987 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| insan wrote: |
| Quote: |
| Well, obviously the bill has failed to get simple majority approval (as well as the 1/4 quota which it did get), therefore it cannot be approved. The Presidential Council would have to come back with an amended bill, or else "forget about it". |
But according to the relevant provisions of Annan Plan, at least 1/4 of the votes of each side would be adequate to pass a bill from the senate. According to the plan 1/4 of the votes of each side would constitute the simple majority vote on some matters. Or am I mistaken? |
No no ... it is 1/4 from each community, and 1/2 of the total Senate. Both conditions must apply for a law to pass. |
|
|
|
|
| | |
| Posted: Fri Feb 04, 2005 2:50 am |
|
|
| insan |
| lecturer |
|
| |
| Joined: 30 Jun 2003 |
| Posts: 2551 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Quote: |
| Basically, it is the concern that when you need two people to agree before a decision can be made, their will be delays, inefficiencies and personality clashes. So this proposal of AKEL cancels the requirement that each department must have two "co-heads", and instead proposes that each department have "one head only", but with at least 30% or 40% of the "department heads" being Turkish Cypriots. So essentially, it is a proposal to lessen administrative deadlocks. |
Hmmm.. it seeems reasonable... will it be rotational or fixed? Though I don't believe it would be fair to share the departments disproportional to population percentage. Doesn't this disproportional share of head of departments cause problems between two communities? Or is it a carrot in order to get something better from TCs.(Curiosity) |
|
|
|
|
| | |
| Posted: Fri Feb 04, 2005 2:52 am |
|
|
| insan |
| lecturer |
|
| |
| Joined: 30 Jun 2003 |
| Posts: 2551 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Quote: |
| No no ... it is 1/4 from each community, and 1/2 of the total Senate. Both conditions must apply for a law to pass. |
Thanks for the clarification, Alexandros.  |
|
|
|
|
| | |
| Posted: Fri Feb 04, 2005 2:55 am |
|
|
| Alexandros Lordos |
| instructor |
|
| |
| Joined: 28 Nov 2004 |
| Posts: 987 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| insan wrote: |
Hmmm.. it seeems reasonable... will it be rotational or fixed? Though I don't believe it would be fair to share the departments disproportional to population percentage. Doesn't this disproportional share of head of departments cause problems between two communities? Or is it a carrot in order to get something better from TCs.(Curiosity) |
I don't know if it will be rotational or fixed, I suspect that AKEL means rotational ...
As to proportional representation, the GCs have grown used to TCs having 3:7 when it is proportional, because that is what it was like in the 1960 constitution. No one is going to insist on 2:8, just so that we will be "more proportional". Now, the 4:6 is probably the "bargaining carrot" that you mentioned ... it's like a message to TCs that "look we are not out to get a bigger share of the pie, we just want the pie as a whole to taste better (ie be more functional administratively)" ... |
|
Last edited by Alexandros Lordos on Fri Feb 04, 2005 2:57 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
|
|
| | |
| Posted: Fri Feb 04, 2005 2:56 am |
|
|
| insan |
| lecturer |
|
| |
| Joined: 30 Jun 2003 |
| Posts: 2551 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Quote: |
Alexandros, what do you think about a senate composed as follows?
24 GCs(20 from GC constituent state + 4 from TC constituent State)
24 TCs(23 form TC constituent state + 1 From GC constituent State)
The number of Senators from each constituent state may vary in the course of time, dependent on population percentage of each communities members living in the other constituent state. |
You didn't answer this one, Alexandros. Isn't it a good for providing full political rights to GC wich will become the residents(citizens) of TC constituent state. This may be apllied to the House as well... |
|
|
|
|
| | |
| Posted: Fri Feb 04, 2005 2:58 am |
|
|
| Alexandros Lordos |
| instructor |
|
| |
| Joined: 28 Nov 2004 |
| Posts: 987 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| insan wrote: |
| Quote: |
Alexandros, what do you think about a senate composed as follows?
24 GCs(20 from GC constituent state + 4 from TC constituent State)
24 TCs(23 form TC constituent state + 1 From GC constituent State)
The number of Senators from each constituent state may vary in the course of time, dependent on population percentage of each communities members living in the other constituent state. |
You didn't answer this one, Alexandros. Isn't it a good for providing full political rights to GC wich will become the residents(citizens) of TC constituent state. This may be apllied to the House as well... |
I DID answer, you must have missed it ...
Yes, of course I think it is a great idea! |
|
|
|
|
| | |
| Posted: Fri Feb 04, 2005 3:01 am |
|
|
| insan |
| lecturer |
|
| |
| Joined: 30 Jun 2003 |
| Posts: 2551 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Quote: |
| As to proportional representation, the GCs have grown used to TCs having 3:7 when it is proportional, because that is what it was like in the 1960 constitution. No one is going to insist on 2:8, just so that we will be "more proportional". Now, the 4:6 is probably the "bargaining carrot" that you mentioned ... |
During the intercommunal talks between 1968-73, Denktash had agreed 20-80 participation ratio in all government departments and public services. 
I don't think TC community would object the idea of having 20-80 share on executive body other than presidential council. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
