Cyprus-Forum.com

[Piratis]

Are the foreigners that buy property in the occupied Cyprus mislead or the know that what they buy is stolen property?

Do they realize that the deeds that they get are illegal and that after the solution they will loose everything and there will be nobody to sue to get their money back? (and that they can actually be sued from the legal owners of the property instead).

[metecyp]

I think most of them know that they're buying properties on somebody else's land. I don't know if this is true but from what I heard these people think that they will eventually get the land because (supposedly) the Annan plan states that if a person invests something on the land (luxury home for example) that is more valuable than the land, then the person has the priority on the land and the legal owner can only get compensation for his land at most.

I don't know if this is completely true but it troubles me a lot to see the north Cyprus being sold to Europeans. It saddens me even more to see the Annan plan being exploited so much but this is something that GCs will never agree (rightfully) so maybe I shouldn't worry too much. This whole incident also shows that time is not on our side, solution is getting more and more complicated, that's why we need to find a solution now.

[Piratis]

the Annan plan states that if a person invests something on the land (luxury home for example) that is more valuable than the land, then the person has the priority on the land and the legal owner can only get compensation for his land at most.

According to the Annan plan in such cases the legal owner will get compensated. The point is that if a land is given to somebody for $10000 but it worths 30000, then the real owner will be compensated with 30000 and not 10000. In any case this is just what the rejected Annan plan said, the plan that will finally be implemented might say very different things regarding this issue.

We have the case of Titina Loizidou, and recently we had the case of a Turkish Cypriot that got his house back also. So since I don't see a solution coming any time soon, I believe the property issue will be "solved" case by case in courts. I see those that illegally occupy property being taken to courts soon. While this might not affect the Turkish settlers, since they will not move out of Turkey/"TRNC" to be arrested, the foreigners will have serious problems since if they are found guilty they can easily be arrested when they move out of "TRNC".

[metecyp]

So since I don't see a solution coming any time soon, I believe the property issue will be "solved" case by case in courts. I see those that illegally occupy property being taken to courts soon. While this might not affect the Turkish settlers, since they will not move out of Turkey/"TRNC" to be arrested, the foreigners will have serious problems since if they are found guilty they can easily be arrested when they move out of "TRNC".

What you said is plausible but the problem is exactly what you described, i.e. case by case solution is too slow of a solution. Titina Loizidou case took how many years? 10? And it was finally solved how many years ago? 3-4? Then she had to wait for her money to be paid by Turkey for 3-4 years. Now she got her money for not being able to use her property, correct? But she still cannot use her property.

Now Turkey has more cards in her hand. She can prolong the game by saying how TCs said to the Annan plan and how GCs refused it and had they said yes to the plan, they could have received their property back etc.

I agree that there will be more cases won by GCs but by the time the whole thing is solved and GCs get their property back, are these people going to be around?

It seems like Cyprus will be a hostage until Turkey gets into EU. When is that going to happen? 2020? 46 years after 1974, almost half a century later, who is going to care...

[-mikkie2-]

I do not think that the Annan plan has any relevance.

Kofi Annan stated that if the plan was voted down, by either community, it would be null and void.

Turkey cannot use the provisions of the Annan plan as a way out.

The GC's voted no to this plan, because the property provisions of the plan would be unjust. The question of compensation for example is inadequate. It would be the GC's that would have to compensate themselves! Just one of the many irregularities of the Annan plan I'm afraid.

The weight of the large numbers of GC's going to the ECHR will eventually force Turkey to solve the problem justly. The right of Titina Loizidou to reclaim her prperty in Kerynia will come up in 2005. Faced with an inadequate compensation commission in the north that is now being justified with the failed Annan Plan, and the very serious fact that a TC has reclaimed his property using the legal organs of the Republic gives a very strong hand to those wishing to get back their land and property in the north.

The last 6 months has witnessed 2bn dollars worth of property sales in the 'trnc'. That covers just a fraction of the properties in the north. Can you seriously expect any compensation to adequately cover these kind of sums? The answer is no. To my mind, the only sensible solution is to allow people to reclaim their properties. Some would take them back, others will probably choose not to. Those that don't should then be compensated. But as the Turks want an ethnically pure state in the north, well, the price they will have to pay is billions of dollars! That is why I think that this problem will be forced into being solved relatively quickly rather than being prolonged.

[erolz]

Are the foreigners that buy property in the occupied Cyprus mislead or the know that what they buy is stolen property?

Do they realize that the deeds that they get are illegal and that after the solution they will loose everything and there will be nobody to sue to get their money back? (and that they can actually be sued from the legal owners of the property instead).

Most foreigners that buy property in the North are aware of the issues surrounding that property and take their own legal advice on the issue.

Most of those buying in the North do so because they prefer it to the South.

It would seem that your interpretation of the law and the status of these properties is not shared by many others. The chances that any agreed solution would involve the loss of foreign owned property without any compensation is near to zero in my opinion. The 'entity' which took control of the land and properties in 74 was not the foreign buyers of this land - it was what is now the TRNC authorites. Any liabilites would apply to the TRNC (or possibly Turkey) and not those that purachased the land subsequently. Why did the Loziadou case involve Turkey as the 'litigant'?

The idea that a foreign buyer of land / property in the North could be or would be arrested if they were to 'step outside' of the TRNC is simply wishful thinking in my opinion. Many such foreigners now regularly cross to the RoC - there is no sign of them being arrested for having brought a property or land that was owned by GC prior to 74. It is not likely they ever would be. The chances of them being arrested anywhere else is even less likely.

The TRNC took control of the land from its former owners. Compensation for this should be sought from the TRNC. It is the TRNC that has sold (or given away) land that previously belonged to others. Those that have subsequently bought that land from the TRNC are not liable for those actions, the TRNC is.

[Piratis]

The "TRNC" does not exist, and the only legal state on this island has informed those people that such purchases are not legal. The reason that nobody is arrested yet is because nobody was taken to court to be convicted yet.

[erolz]

The "TRNC" does not exist, and the only legal state on this island has informed those people that such purchases are not legal. The reason that nobody is arrested yet is because nobody was taken to court to be convicted yet.

These 'leagisitic' arguments get us no where.

The ROC has in the past told people that those that stay in former GC owned hotels in the North would be prosecuted and they tried to get the UK to prosecute the 'offenders' in the UK. The idea was rejected by the UK house of lords.

The RoC has in the past told those that enter Cyrpus through the North that they are 'criminals' - yet today the RoC courts refuse to punish such criminals.

You live in a 'dream world' where the TRNC does not exist (just who do you think any settlement will be made with by the way?) and where you think you can 'force' the non existant TRNC to comply to your wishes through slef rightgeous legalistic wrnaglings - which so far have got us absolutely no where. Stick to this useless strategy if you like. Personaly I think it does nothing but solidify division and need for division.

At least there are some GC that can ses the consequences of such an approach.

http://www.cyprus-mail.com/news/main.ph ... 6&cat_id=1

"We are back to square one. The solution of the Cyprus problem will once again be consigned to the realm of theoretical abstraction, legalistic discourse and unattainable targets as it had been for the three decades following the invasion. Papadopoulos showed his intentions in his speech by reverting to the meaningless diplomacy of high-principled rhetoric of the past, about international legality and single sovereignty, which leads nowhere. It is the rhetoric of nebulous ideas, of no practical import other than to make mediocre and ineffective politicians look clever and principled to the voters."

"Admittedly, the politicians peddle the cost-free, theoretical dimension of the national problem that leads nowhere because the majority of Greek Cypriots, contrary to what Papadopoulos told the UN General Assembly, are not keen on re-unification and sharing power with the Turkish Cypriots. Neither is Papadopoulos, for whom the main condition for a solution must be the preservation of the Republic of Cyprus in its present form, because he was given a state and will not hand over a community. With EU membership, the legal status of the Republic was guaranteed, which was why we should be looking for a different type of settlement, he concluded and invited Turkey to join him in finding a solution based on this new reality."

[Piratis]

Its all about balance of power.
turkey today is powerful and this is why they can violate so many human rights without a problem. But the balance of power changes. We were here for 3500 years, and we will be here again when this balance will not be the one that will allow for this injustice.

Meanwhile we should make sure that Turkey and the rest of the criminals pay as high cost as possible for their actions. And we can do that. Their occupation will cost them more than what they can gain from it.

[erolz]

Its all about balance of power.
turkey today is powerful and this is why they can violate so many human rights without a problem.

and you wonder why I have concerns over a united Cyprus where the GC as a community are more powerful than the TC as a community?

But the balance of power changes. We were here for 3500 years, and we will be here again when this balance will not be the one that will allow for this injustice.

Well if you are willing to wait another 3500 years until you can 'force' a settlement that is satisfactory to 'you' then so be it. Personaly I would like to see a united Cyprus in my lifetime. I am less concerned about my ancient or future distant ancestors than I am about achieving something today.

Meanwhile we should make sure that Turkey and the rest of the criminals pay as high cost as possible for their actions. And we can do that. Their occupation will cost them more than what they can gain from it.

There is a saying in English

"Cutting off your nose to spite your face".

What cost for GC and Cypriots in general in following such a strategy? Is there no price too high for _you_ to pay in your pursuit of a Cyprus with the TC community as a political minority? Were the events of 63-74 not too high a price? The events of 74 onwards? What future sufferings would you be willing to inflict on Cypriots in your pursuit of this 'justice'? For how many 1000's of years would you be willing to inflict them?

(by the way did you sell you PC yet? Has the market made you realise your 'minimum price' is simply unrealistic and too high yet? Or are you still ready to wait another 3500 years in the hope the market will come round to your view? I sold my Toshiba satelite 1.5ghz /384MB ram laptop here in the north for UK £370 the other day)