Cyprus-Forum.com

This is the power sharing proposal of Kifeas that many believe can be a compromise. How many accept and how many reject it?

If we have a house of 100 members (80 GCs plus 20 TCs) and decisions are taken on simple majority, it means that at least any 51 members out of the above 100 members will have to approve it. However, in order to qualify as simple majority, at least 4 (or 6) of the votes must come (included in the 51 votes needed) from the 20 TCs (20% or 30% of the TC members,) and at least 16 (or 24) of the votes must come from (included in the 51votes needed) from the 80 GCs.

For example we can have the following combination for simple majority to qualify.
I take a special case example that needs 30% minimum from each side.

Case 1:
6 TCs plus 45 GCs equals 51 /100. (Qualifies)

Case 2:
20 TCs plus 31 GCs equals 51 /100. (Qualifies)

Case 3:
5 TCs plus 46 GCs equals 51 /100 (it doesn’t qualify)

Case 4:
1 TC plus 80 GCs equals 81 /100 (it doesn’t qualify)

The above proposal is for the parliament.

For president, I propose the following:

- Like in the USA to have a president and a vice president voted together. The president and the vice president should come from a different community.
- For the combination (president - vice president) to win the elections they should win the 50%+1 vote of all Cypriot votes combined, but this should include a minimum of 20% of votes from each community.
- To be guaranteed that at least 1 every 5 presidents should be a Turkish Cypriot.
- To have presidential elections every 4 years
- Personally I would agree if the 1st or 2nd president is required to be a TC so TCs will not feel that they will wait too long to have a TC president.

Beyond that I propose to leave the system as simple and efficient as possible. Without a ton of parliaments, senates, presidents, prime ministers etc.

This would be what they have in Bosnia, and this is how that is described by Guardian:

Bosnia currently has one of the most complicated and wasteful systems of government ever devised. It is split into two ethnic halves, a Bosnian Serb republic and a federation of Muslims and Croats, both with their parliaments and governments. There is then a national parliament, presidency, prime minister and government. Over the past 10 years, the ethnic entities have enjoyed strong powers, with central authority weak, albeit strengthened in recent years largely as a result of Lord Ashdown's initiatives.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/yugo/article/ ... 14,00.html

I have no problem with this kind of power sharing arrangement. Are we to assume that we still have the geographical separation of the 2 communities continues but with the necessary 80 20 adjustment to reflect populations?

When I read the above article from Guardian, I feel I want to spit on the face of any and every Anglo-American that worked to device and promote the Annan plan 5 for Cyprus, whose philosophy was not much different than the Bosnian model they devised 10 years ago and they now realized it’s unworkability and they want to modify it.

Issy1956 wrote:I have no problem with this kind of power sharing arrangement. Are we to assume that we still have the geographical separation of the 2 communities continues but with the necessary 80 20 adjustment to reflect populations?

Issy1956, how do you define or understand the “geographical separation” that you mentioned above?

By the “geographical separation” I mean something akin to what we have today or can we go back to pre 74 with a mosiac like distribution of people. This wouldnt happen immediately but could result from allowing free settlement and movement of Cypriots over a longer period-perhaps limited at first but increasing over time. I hope I have made my self clear.

I also agree with such power sharing agreement.

All sounds fine, but I would make a slight change regarding to elect the 1st or the 2nd President to be a TC. Why? Why have that in there.? If the President and the vice President, each will come from different communities, then you're going to have for example TC+GC or GC+TC for President and vice President. Cypriots from both communities will vote for both candidates as a package, so, if the TC Presidential candidate gets the support mostly from the TC's, the GC vice Presidential candidate will get most of his support from the GC's, and the same when you have GC for President and a TC for vice President. It is very possible, a good GC vice Presidential candidate, will be able to draw more votes from the GC's than a GC Presidential candidate. This will help elect a TC as a President, and in due time, the GC vice President will run as a President himself, and if he has proven himself while being a good vice President, he will get great deal of support from GC's and TC's. Same again, if you reverse the rolls of the President and the vice president candidates.

I would say, lets not give the TC's a "hand out" by "selecting" them to be the President, instead, lets "elect" them to be the President.

I would say, lets not give the TC's a "hand out" by "selecting" them to be the President, instead, lets "elect" them to be the President.

TCs can get a lot of "hand outs" not just this one in order to be reasured that there is no case they can get anything less than their fare share in anything.

I personally have no problem with that. (what I have a problem with is when some TCs are asking for A LOT more than their fair share and they do not realize how unfair that is and then they are puzzled that such things (e.g. Annan plan) are rejected by us)

When the day comes that TCs and GCs will trust each other then the TCs could come and say that this "1 every 5" thing is not needed anymore.

Piratis wrote:- Personally I would agree if the 1st or 2nd president is required to be a TC so TCs will not feel that they will wait too long to have a TC president. ]

Piratis,

You're confusing me with your last post. Are you saying you support what you wrote above or not.? As I explained in my last post on this subject, there's no need to "hand out" a presidency to a TC once every 5th round. As long as GC + TC run together as one package (team) for the President and vice President posts. How do you propose to do that anyway, by telling the GC's, sorry, you must all vote for a TC this year, because it's their turn to have a President. As long as the Parliament is protected for both sides in passing or denying legislations, I don't think it's very important who the president is, as long as, he is not given powers to by-pass the Parliament.

I yearn for the time when party policies will be the voters choice and not the ethnicity.
There are decent , intelligent G/C politicians just as there are T/Cs . Roll on the day , may be if I was a few years younger !!