The Best Cyprus Community

Skip to content


First Results of Bicommunal Poll

Propose and discuss specific solutions to aspects of the Cyprus Problem

Postby Kifeas » Sun Jun 12, 2005 11:33 pm

gabaston wrote:kifeas

thanks for letting me know its sunday, but the jock's on you.

i am talking about tc land ownership at idependance 1960. what does pythagoras say about that?


Gabaston!
The figures I gave you are those of 1974, before the invasion and stealing /looting of all the GC land in the north by Turkey and your Denktash.

Why speak about 1960? Do you mean to say that the TCs didn't buy or sell any properties between 1960 and 1974? Are we not supposed to count these sales/purchases during these years? Why?

My god! You are so ignorant! I just do not know why I waste my time discussing these things with you. And this is not just the first time!
User avatar
Kifeas
Main Contributor
Main Contributor
 
Posts: 4927
Joined: Fri Mar 18, 2005 10:19 am
Location: Lapithos, Kyrenia, now Pafos; Cyprus.

Postby gabaston » Mon Jun 13, 2005 2:00 am

now you talk of 74 figures -
like ive said, everything since 1960 has been a farce. You can accept gc 74 figures if you wish, like and you can accept t-paps outrageous lie, and perpetuate the farce thats up to you.

if you cant refrain from insults please do not respond any further to my posts. GOT IT?

Kifeas

i shall answer your question like this.

when i was in cyprus for three months in 1966. I had an uncle who took my mother and me for a drive. He was a respected school teacher. He lived in a dingy dwelling. At some point during our drive he drove close to what must have been the dividing line between greeks and turks in nicosia/lefkosa. He stopped the car and pointed to a beautiful large mansion obviously on the greek side and then said
"you see that house there? That was my house before the troubles".

he did not SELL that house.ok understand ... need a slide rule or calculator to figure that one out???????????????.

and you talk of ignorance lol lol lol........................... amazing huh?

keep believing the lies they fed you.

what the f dyou think this is all about? seriously sleep on it. Turkey is a massive country with massive unspoilt beaches to develop. Why do you think they almost bankrupt themsleves over us? for a few olive and lemon trees? they got zillions - maybe you should use your brains for once or even harder try answering a stright question with a straight answer.....

does your brain ache when you attempt that.

below ive posed what should be a nice easy question for you. its not hard and i would like to know the answer. maybe then i can understand your point.
Last edited by gabaston on Mon Jun 13, 2005 2:30 am, edited 5 times in total.
User avatar
gabaston
Contributor
Contributor
 
Posts: 845
Joined: Mon Apr 11, 2005 2:11 pm

Postby gabaston » Mon Jun 13, 2005 2:09 am

please explain your comment about being forced by the TA to be in pafos
User avatar
gabaston
Contributor
Contributor
 
Posts: 845
Joined: Mon Apr 11, 2005 2:11 pm

Postby Kifeas » Mon Jun 13, 2005 10:14 am

gabaston wrote:now you talk of 74 figures -
like ive said, everything since 1960 has been a farce. You can accept gc 74 figures if you wish, like and you can accept t-paps outrageous lie, and perpetuate the farce thats up to you..


Everything since 1960 might have been a farce as far as the political situation is concerned. The figures I use are not the GC figures but the figures of the Official Land registry of the Republic of Cyprus. The Land Registry did not stop to function after 1960 and did not stop to register purchases or sales of land and property because of the political situation or the intercommunal fights. It is the same data that the TC side used in order to base the distribution of GC properties in the north after 1974, to the TCs who moved from the south and also to all the rest. It is the same data that the ECHR accepts as the only official and the only accurate one, in order to support its rulings in Loizidou and other cases, something which the Turkish Republic Lawyers did not dispute. It is the same data that the UN work teams have in mind when inviting for negotiations and when preparing solution proposals. No one has ever disputed this data. Furthermore, for every piece of property that is registered in someone’s name, be it a GC or a TC, there is always backup information. When a sale/purchase occurs and a transfer of the title deed from one person to another, there is also the necessary back up documentation.

gabaston wrote:when i was in cyprus for three months in 1966. I had an uncle who took my mother and me for a drive. He was a respected school teacher. He lived in a dingy dwelling. At some point during our drive he drove close to what must have been the dividing line between greeks and turks in nicosia/lefkosa. He stopped the car and pointed to a beautiful large mansion obviously on the greek side and then said
"you see that house there? That was my house before the troubles".

he did not SELL that house.ok understand ... need a slide rule or calculator to figure that one out???????????????.


You see! You even admit it your self. He didn't sell his property (house and land on which it is build.) That means that this property is still on his name (or his Family) and therefore it is calculated in the figures of the Land registry that I gave you before. It is still, up to this date, considered and calculated as a TC property, irrespective of the fact that he couldn't live into it, due to the intercommunal conflicts tha forced him to relocate.

gabaston wrote:what the f dyou think this is all about? seriously sleep on it. Turkey is a massive country with massive unspoilt beaches to develop. Why do you think they almost bankrupt themsleves over us? for a few olive and lemon trees? they got zillions - maybe you should use your brains for once or even harder try answering a stright question with a straight answer.....


What relevance does this paragraph has with the subject we are talking about? Why you mix up issues and change subjects? We are talking about the property ownership of TCs and GCs in Cyprus. You shift the subject and you start talking about the reasons Turkey is in Cyprus. By the way, the reasons that Turkey is in Cyprus do not have so much to do with the blue eyes of the TC community. The Turkish Army Generals admit the real reasons from time to time, and these are related to the strategic location the Cyprus has Vic a vie the security of the southern coast of Turkey and their access towards the open Mediterranean seas from the south. Do you know how many times your leader Denktash admitted that Turkey needs to occupy Cyprus for strategic reasons and even in a case in which there were no TCs in Cyprus, Turkey should somehow had to find a way to invent them in order to justify the need to be here? Many times!
User avatar
Kifeas
Main Contributor
Main Contributor
 
Posts: 4927
Joined: Fri Mar 18, 2005 10:19 am
Location: Lapithos, Kyrenia, now Pafos; Cyprus.

Postby Kifeas » Mon Jun 13, 2005 5:42 pm

Deleted and moved out as a new topic.
User avatar
Kifeas
Main Contributor
Main Contributor
 
Posts: 4927
Joined: Fri Mar 18, 2005 10:19 am
Location: Lapithos, Kyrenia, now Pafos; Cyprus.

Postby MicAtCyp » Mon Jun 13, 2005 10:29 pm

Good evening Alexandre.

Like I said before both the owner and the user have rights. Now following your request we are supposed to define the extend of these rights and set criteria for the fate of those properties that presumably will satisfy the sense of justice of both owner and user, as would eventually be done by any court. Having thought about it very hard, my criteria is ONLY ONE and SIMPLE. (Or is it not so simple after all? )

Here are the 3 main categories of properties and my criterion for each:

1. Empty and unused properties: returned immediately to the owner to do whatever he likes with them or go settle there.
2. Used agricultural land/bussiness premises . The user rights derive from the fact that he makes a living out of it. First option for rent/ buy/ exchange goes to the user.
3. Houses. The case of a house is different because it relates to the meaning of "home" . Here we do not only have the rights of owner - user but also responsibilities of the CY - state or others (in the case of settlers the responsibility of Turkey) . What I am absolutely sure it cannot be done is to throw a user out. Here again the right to buy/rent/exchange goes to the user.

So in the end as you can see, I give priority to buy/rent/exchange to the current users except for the cases that the land is not used, or it is empty. This however does not mean that each and everyone who will have this priority will necessarily proceed this way. There are many reasons for that. A basic reason is why should anyone pay for a property that is at least 30 years old and not pay something more to built a brand new one? Why should anyone chose to rent (money gone wasted) and not pay to buy something if he can afford.
So if we consider that a new house needs about 1 year to be built it is obvious that some refugees will return to their own houses after about a year. (If they want to) Combine that with the number of refugees that could return to their empty lands and built a house there, I beleive every GC refugee who really wants to return he will be able to do so wiithin a maximum of 2 years. Like I said in previous posts I will never expect more than 20 - 25% to return under TC administration anyway - even in the long run.

So having these basic criterion set out, lets look at some of the details regarding it's application and perhaps set the sub - criteria:

1) The majority of GC land that was empty or unused before 1974 remains unused and empty until today. Therefore many GC refugees could go settle there built a house or do whatever they like if they want.
2) Renting/exchanging/buying: Renting of a property today costs between 7. 5 - 10% of the value of the property annually. The percentage can be set by the state and be based on the value of the property re - evaluated every 2 years. Exchanging must be on a value - basis and any difference be payable through loans.

It is certain that we will have problems regarding the values of properties in cases of buying/exchanging. Would it be fair to ask the TC to pay according to the prices prevailing today at the free areas? Would it be fair to exchange according to the high values of the free areas and the low vallues currently in the northern part? The answer is no. So what should we do? Like I said previously I beleive a good part of those cases will be settled anyway by the individuals themselves. What about the rest who would not agree? I have the following suggestion:
Suppose both the owener and the user want to sell/buy but cannot agree on the price. The TC user says this property costs 20K here the owner says in the free areas it costs 60K so I have reasons to beleive in the next few years the property will cost 60K here too.
In this case the only solution for both buyer and user is to become co - owners of an unknown value property after the buyer pays the lower of the two amounts (in this case the 20K) . This co - ownership agreement will be valid for about 10 years and the value of the property and thus the ownership percentage for each will be fixed at the 10th year (when the values of properties will presumably settle) . If in the end the value of the property will be 60K indeed and in the meantimne the buyer did not pay any other amount he will be required to pay rent for 2/3rd of the property for 10 years just to have 33% of the ownership rights or the owner pay him back his 20K less the rent rights and regain full ownership.
A similar co - partnership process is the only solution I can think of, in case of exchanges, where the value of exchanges is not agreed.

3) Criteria for settlers (who will be allowed to stay) : The same criteria as any other Cypriot. No other criteria can be set because after a solution those people will be equal citizens. Obviously they will not be able to exchange anything. . .

4) Foreigners who bought GC properties: These people cannot be justified on grounds of necessity or force majeure. They knew all along what they were doing, and in the end they will lose it all or come to an agreement with the owner. Some people think they will lose it all. I don't think so. The free market works better! Lets see an example: A foreigner bought a villa build on GC land. The value of the land at current prices in the free areas is 60K and that of the building 80K total 140K. He paid only 80K. If the owner insists to get his land back the foreigner will pay 1K demolition costs and return to the owner an empty land worth 60K. (In this case the foreigner will lose 80K that he already paid+1K demolition costs. If however he offers the owner 80K for his land (instead of 60K that it actually worths) he will most propably have a deal and be left with a house worth 140K whereas he paid 160K, thus he will lose only 20K and still be left with a villa of his own. In this way both owner and foreign buyer come out winners!! See what the free enterprise can do? It can also work in another way. The foreigner says, what the hell I don't want to pay anything more, just give me 40K and take your land together with the villa back without me demolishing it. Deal again! In any case it is obvious that the foreigner will lose at a range of 20 - 50% of what they paid.

Now lets come to the matter of poor TC/GC refugees and settlers who use houses that cannot buy or rent. (For agricultural and bussiness properties they MUST pay rent otherwise they are deprived of them since they make profit and there cannnot be any excuse for not paying) . For the settlers it is the responsibility of Turkey to provide them new housing. For poor GC and TC the responsibility of CY - State to do so (propably with foreign aid) and in the meantime the owner be paid rent.

************************
Now after setting my SINGLE criteria and the sub criteria regarding a) the rent b) the value of properties for buying or exchanging, lets see your suggestions to see if we agree:

Alexandros wrote:
As for general criteria, exceptions to restitution
should apply according to one of two categories:

a. The current occupant has equivalent property to
exchange in the other constituent state.
b. The current occupant has made siginificant investment
to the property in question.


I understand you are trying to "create" a percentage of GC refugees who can be restituted.
I think we (GCs) have this false notion that the GC refugees will return to their old houses. For this to happen the current occupants must be housed somewhere else. This will take a long time. We also have another false notion, that when we talk about properties we mean only a house. It is not only a house, the majority of GC properties are agricultural and empty land. The way I see it GC refugees can only return on their own empty lands in the short run, where they themselves will build a house. Their old houses is another story that will take yeaaars to settle. Some will be able to return to their old houses though, as the current user will rather built a new house than pay for the old one.

While I don't disagree with your criteria "a" and "b" on the other hand I beleive the only hope to avoid discrimination and unjustices is to enlarge that set so much that in the end we will all lose truck and yet not be sure we covered everything. One example I can give is someone who was propertyless before 1974 (thus has nothing to exchange) but now is a millionaire who wants to buy the property his old mother is using. I beleive the only factor that can take care of such complicated financial matters is ONLY the forces of the free market. These will make everyone settle to what his needs are and to what he can afford. So these conditions are what will enable people to return to their properties and not any forced rules. One may say the TCs are poor how can they float over this? The answer is simple: They will have the first choice of what to do. They will have their own properties back (whereas the GCs will be in que) . And they will see their economic power increasing day after day contrary to that of the GCs. In the end it's not a matter of antagonism between rich and poor, it is a matter of each one getting back (propert wise) what he deserves nothing more nothing less. And whatever antagonism is going to be is between them and the GC refugees who are the most poor among the GC population.

wrote: I do not believe length of stay in a property should be
a criterion (as the Annan Plan suggested) , nor should
the economic condition of the current occupants be a
criterion (i. e. if they are poor or not) . Going down
such roads would in essense favor the settlers and allow
them to stay in GC properties, causing a massive
backlash amongst GC public opinion.


The settlers who will stay will be equal Cypriots, lets not forget that. Like I said for these people Turkey has responsibility and if Turkey really "cares for her people" - like they say all the time - she should take up her responsibility for them. After that it is the responsibility of the CY - State to take care of those people and take them upto the stanndard of the rest of the society.
On the matter of length of stay: I don't agree with what the Anan Plan said either, on the other hand however - whatever the length of stay - every human has a "home". The meaning of a home is different than that of a house/building. Lets say "home=nest". In this respect nobody can throw anyone out without providing him some options. In case he is poor the only option is for the state to provide him another "nest" for which he will pay a small amount according to his income.

wrote: Criterion A can be justified by the requirement that a
bizonal - bicommunal Federation should be the end result.
If you do not allow exchange of equivalent property,
then you can no longer talk of a TC constituent state.

Criterion B can be justified by the requirement to
maintain the stability of the TC local economy. If you
start taking away invested properties from their current
users, you are uprooting the infrastructure of the
economy.


I agree.

wrote: - What exactly do we mean by "equivalent property in the
other constituent state". Is that in terms of square
meters or calculated value, taking into account location
etc. ? At this point the question arises: When the
"point - system" was introduced by Denktash, how was
equivalency calculated? If it was calculated
incorrectly, e. g. not in accordance with value as well,
then we will have a reaction by TCs who will complain
that they have to give back something which they thought
they would have been allowed to keep.


The point system of Denktash was wrong. As an example see the case of Kifeas. A shepperd with 6 donums in Akoursos (? ) worth of nothing, got 6 donums of Kifeas land in Lapithos by the sea worthing a million. In my opinion ALL TCs know they got something much - much better/valuable, that is why they are so prompt for an agreed division even on an 18 - 82% basis. Anyway the exchange MUST be on value - wise basis. You wouldn’t exchange a diamond with a pearl would you?
Yes there will be problems but no solution can favor anyone on the expense of the other. This is not the real meaning of compromise.

wrote: - What do we do in the case where a non - Cypriot
(European tourist or Turkish Settler) has bought
property from a TC, which TC was using this property in
place of his original property in the south? Will the
non - Cypriot also be entitled to exchange the property,
keeping the property in the north and giving in return
the property in the south, or will the original owner
take precedence in such a case?


The answer about Europeans is definetely NO. There is no justifying reason of force majeure or necessity behind. The original owner takes full ownership back. About the settlers thats a more complicated issue. It becomes simple if Turkey accepts her responsibilities for those people at least regarding their housing needs.


wrote: - In the case of invested properies, the issue is a lot
more murky. There is no doubt that plots of land where
public works have been done (airports, roads, hospitals
etc. ) will remain with the current user (the constituent
state authorities, usually) in return for compensation,
but what about:
a) Plots of GC land on which a TC has built his home?
b) Plots of GC land on which a non - Cypriot has built a
home?
c) Plots of GC land on which a TC has built a business?
d) Plots of GC land on which a non - Cypriot has built a
business?
d) Plots of GC land on which a block of apartments have
been built?
e) GC homes which have been substantially renovated by a
TC?
f) GC homes which have been substantially renovated by a
non - Cypriot?


Properties for public use are compensatable.
The only option for empty land that was invested or built up by TCs is to buy the land either through agreement or through the co - partnership 10 year contract that I mentioned (in case the price is not agreed) . Foreigners will eventually lose part of their money but NOT ALL. The forces of the market will prove this

wrote: - and my final question, what do we do about properties
which belonged to GC corporations before 1974? Or
properties which belonged to the Church? Will the same
rules of restitution apply as for private citizens?


Most propably properties been used by Corporations are also being used by corporations now. The same procedure should apply as with properties of individuals. Church properties. Same procedure as per individuals. I don't think anyone would be willing to pay 3 million for a church to use it as dancing hall, so in the end all churches go back to the priests. Empty land also goes back to them, invested land or built up same procedure as per individuals.

***********************************

Alex, in the end my criteria are very simple. Current user can chose and has priority over his choice. Thereafter the power of free market takes over and arranges everything. And there are ways to settle disagreements on money or values even between the most stuborn donkies or goats.

On the other hand i beleive complicated criteria, and "manipulations" to ensure a certain high or low percentage of people to return are by themselves risky, unpredictable, and will in many cases cause injustice and discrimination, if not bloodshed.

****************

Now obviously we can continue the discussion in parallel.You may expand your multiple criteria and subcriteria and I will comment/criticise on them .And you comment/criticise spot the weaknesses of my the single criteria approach.It will be interesting to see where we will end up in the end.
User avatar
MicAtCyp
Regular Contributor
Regular Contributor
 
Posts: 1579
Joined: Sat Apr 24, 2004 10:10 am

Postby -mikkie2- » Mon Jun 13, 2005 11:30 pm

MicAtCyp,

I read your thoughts on the property issue with great interest. However, one needs to understand that the biggest problem regarding this issue is the settlers. The other big problem is how far is Turkey prepared to accept her responsibilities regarding the settlers and would she be prepared to pay to rehouse those that remain in Cyprus. I think that is a very big IF!

To my mind the more settlers that stay the harder the property issue becomes (I think you agreed with me on this in the past). And it rapidly becomes very hard when nobody is prepared to take responsibility for them, other than the CY state.

Using the free market to solve most of the property issues will work for those that own property, be it TC of GC. Your system of co-ownership may also work, although to be honest I have not really thought about it too much to form a solid opinion.

However, the more settlers that remain and lay claim to land and property the more perilous the issue becomes because in the event Turkey doesn't pay a single cent to rehouse these people the who ends up picking the tab? The Cy state. And what usually happens when the state takes control of housing people? It lumps them all together into cheap housing. This is true the world over. As well as paying a hefty price to rehouse these people we will also be creating one hell of a big social problem as well.

I may have misunderstood what you wrote but the impression I get is that the settlers would be the responsibility of Turkey. I think that is an assumption we can ill afford to make. The only thing we can do is to be able to put a cap on who will stay and be damn sure that we could afford to absorb them into the new state of affairs without making assumptions. This will mean stricter rules need to be implemented to define who would be eligible to be a CY citizen or not.

Also, the issue of the foreigners who have bought GC owned property. There must be several thousand people in this situation. I fear it may not be so simple for force majour to be implemented here. There might be many people that sold up and left their country of origin and settled in Cyprus with the money that they brought with them. Can we seriously consider putting people on the street if they have nothing to go back to? Quite possibly, many of these people may have to be treated in the same way as settlers!

These are my thoughts on what you wrote. Would be interesting to see Alexandros response to your ideas.
-mikkie2-
Regular Contributor
Regular Contributor
 
Posts: 1295
Joined: Tue Sep 21, 2004 12:11 am

Postby MicAtCyp » Wed Jun 15, 2005 1:41 pm

Mikkie,

There is nothing I disagree with you regarding the settlers.However I only analysed the property issue and I was very careful when referring to settlers to say "(those who will be allowed to stay)".I agree with everything you said that the issue of settlers will cause problems to the matter of properties, and in the end I aslo agree they will most propably be packed in cheap government housing. But that was beyond the scope of my post.
Some misunderstanding maybe? OK no big deal, still friends.

About the foreigners who built on GC properties. These people simply acted knowing very well their risks.It is not a matter of protecting their rights on grounds of necessity or force majeure because such grounds do not exist for them.On the other hand we must not forget the rights of the owner.Can we diminish his rights on grounds of not existing rights of someone else?
So the only answer I can give in case those foreigners cannot meet "the free market rules" that I described in my post, is to be deported back to their Countries and live a happy pention life in a ghetto housing there!
Of course you may ask what is the difference between them and the settlers? One major difference,is they were not born here, never worked here, never contributed to anything, did not have children. All they came here to do, is eat and shit until they die.
:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
User avatar
MicAtCyp
Regular Contributor
Regular Contributor
 
Posts: 1579
Joined: Sat Apr 24, 2004 10:10 am

Previous

Return to Cyprus Problem Solution Proposals

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Majestic-12 [Bot] and 0 guests