Cyprus-Forum.com

by **donyork** » Mon Jan 17, 2005 12:56 am

It is a standard Greek-Cypriot claim that foreigners purchasing property former Greek-Cypriot property in the north ‘are dealing in stolen goods’ acquired from ‘non-owners’, and therefore that both vendor and buyer are ‘criminals’. This viewpoint is so widely held among the more rabid elements in the south that it is quoted as if it were the accepted opinion across Europe and the civilised world.

Theft, and dealing in stolen goods are universal crimes, which is to say that every country recognises such acts as illegal. Accordingly, the Greek-Cypriot claim if valid would mean that every country would prohibit the purchase by their citizens of property in northern Cyprus, with criminal penalties imposed on those who transgressed. It would be akin to drug trafficking, or money laundering.

But this is not so. In Britain as elsewhere across the world, it is wholly legal for a citizen both to acquire property in northern Cyprus, and to transfer the necessary purchase monies to northern Cyprus. In consequence the foreign owners of property in the north include not only Britons, but Germans, Danes, Swedes, Danes, Dutch, Norwegians, and others. Moreover — in Britain, as elswhere — the property so acquired becomes part of the domestic assets on which taxation can be levied. For example, a British owner who dies in possession of a property in northern Cyprus, will have that property treated as part of his or her assets for the purposes of inheritance tax. Rental monies obtained by letting the property are liable to income tax.

This being so, if one is to give credence to Greek-Cypriot claims, the British Treasury and Inland Revenue are dealing ‘in stolen goods’ and the proceeds thereof, and thereby are equally guilty of a criminal act as an accessory. This would similarly be the case in Germany and other countries of the EU, as well as in the United States.

One needs only to state it in these terms to identify this extremist Greek-Cypriot claim as utter nonsense, at least outside its own borders, and repetition does not make otherwise. Well, not in the real world, anyway.

by **Saint Jimmy** » Mon Jan 17, 2005 2:09 am

Hey don (may I call you don?

)

obviously this whole issue (and many, many others) is a legal blur. I mean, you can get legal scholars to say this, and you can get others to say that. Both will be right and both will be wrong.

Your arguments do make sense, but so does the GC reasoning on the matter. It is as much nonsense as stating that land obtained by illegal means (according to UN resolutions) can be legally sold and bought.

It's just another of those Gordian knots that live in Cyprus and can only be cut loose. Simple as that.

by **brother** » Mon Jan 17, 2005 5:31 pm

Hey jimmy must inform you that 'don' in turkish means 'pants', but i am sure he will see the funny side of it.

by **Piratis** » Mon Jan 17, 2005 8:25 pm

'don' in turkish means 'pants'

And 'donyork' means "smarty pants" :lol:

So smarty pants, do you think that if I go to the US and I buy something stolen that I will be arrested when I come in Cyprus if I am not accused?

Those people did buy stolen property, and now the procedures have started so they will be convicted. When this happens they will pay the penalty, or choose to be fugitives in your pseudo state, where the Turkish army allows no laws to be applied.

Spain was once the destination of choice for British criminals on the run but now fugitives head to Northern Cyprus, safe in the knowledge they cannot be extradited.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/k ... 645783.stm