Cyprus-Forum.com

[Viewpoint]

Then our legal teams have to get binding documents which can never be challenged before making any sort of comitment. Nothing is written in stone and if it means making a few minor changes to faciliate getting rid of a thorne buried deep in their side and uniting Cyprus, I think they will stick to what they sign. Hopefully some of these derrogations will become redundant as both sides will not try manipulate or dominate the other state.

Well, all I can say is, good luck, because in a democracy, everything can be challenged in the courts and changed if deemed illegal.

If the EU place their signature on illegal unbinding documents then cancel their own undertakings then that underlines the integrity and fabric of the whole union.

[Kikapu]

Then our legal teams have to get binding documents which can never be challenged before making any sort of comitment. Nothing is written in stone and if it means making a few minor changes to faciliate getting rid of a thorne buried deep in their side and uniting Cyprus, I think they will stick to what they sign. Hopefully some of these derrogations will become redundant as both sides will not try manipulate or dominate the other state.

Well, all I can say is, good luck, because in a democracy, everything can be challenged in the courts and changed if deemed illegal.

If the EU place their signature on illegal unbinding documents then cancel their own undertakings then that underlines the integrity and fabric of the whole union.

No it doesn't, because agreements can be challenged in the courts all the time and they are. It is all a matter if interpretation, one way or the other.

[Viewpoint]

Then our legal teams have to get binding documents which can never be challenged before making any sort of comitment. Nothing is written in stone and if it means making a few minor changes to faciliate getting rid of a thorne buried deep in their side and uniting Cyprus, I think they will stick to what they sign. Hopefully some of these derrogations will become redundant as both sides will not try manipulate or dominate the other state.

Well, all I can say is, good luck, because in a democracy, everything can be challenged in the courts and changed if deemed illegal.

If the EU place their signature on illegal unbinding documents then cancel their own undertakings then that underlines the integrity and fabric of the whole union.

No it doesn't, because agreements can be challenged in the courts all the time and they are. It is all a matter if interpretation, one way or the other.

So now you are saying the EU will challenge their own agreements? you are a liar and fabricate posts to mislead those that are gulliable enough to believe you.

[Oceanside50]

the north

..occupied territories

True we occupy them, so this "occupied" label is to us very funny.

Illegally occupy a part of Cyprus...as this TC has admitted by wanting to give back property that he illegally occupies to its rightful Greek Cypriot owner..

http://cyprus-mail.com/2014/07/31/turki ... ossession/

“Eray Ozer is looking for the real owners of these lands, the title deeds of which were given to him in 2004, in order to give them back without waiting for absolutely anything in return,” wrote the paper.

Ozer reportedly visited the Turkish Cypriot daily on Wednesday holding the title deeds in his hands and saying: “This property is not mine. It was taken by force from its real owners. I cannot reconcile with my honour leaving this property as inheritance to my children.”

[Nikitas]

VP asked:

"Please provide an example, everyone appears to be just making sweeping statements. There will be cases where the EU will have to accept derrogations or transition periods."

OK let us take a mundane and concrete example, the management of garbage. Here in Greece some communities are notoriously slow in implementing EU regulations regarding the burial of garbage. The result is a fine amounting to several hundred thousand Euros per day. One such rebel community is Kouroupitos in Hania in Crete, you can look it up.

The fine is paid by the NATION not the community causing the problem. So let us put this in context of BBF, where one community decides to veto an EU regulation and the fine is levied on the whole nation, ie both communities in our case, then what?

It cannot happen is the usual response. If it can happen in a centralised unitary state like Greece and others in the EU it can happen in Cyprus. We might need a local EU compliance arbitration office to determine which community is responsible for which infractions and pass the fines along.

Then there is the envirionmental bit. Holland had refused to commit certain areas as bird protection areas under EU 409/79 Directive. It was taken to the EU court by its own nationals, and the court found that it had no discretion as to which areas it would devote to environmental protection. If an area fulfilled the criteria it was bound to be so declared, and Holland was fined.

Can you hear the clamour: it is our country, we do what we want, etc etc that will reverberate after such a decision?

You do not need to jump to high end constitutional stuff and derogations from the basics. The EU usually gets you on the little things. Just think, 80 per cent of legislation passing in EU nations originates in Brussels. Are you ready to deal with this reality? The GCs are, and are moving along just fine, but they eliminated their nationalist complexes long ago. I wonder about the TCs.

[Kikapu]

Then our legal teams have to get binding documents which can never be challenged before making any sort of comitment. Nothing is written in stone and if it means making a few minor changes to faciliate getting rid of a thorne buried deep in their side and uniting Cyprus, I think they will stick to what they sign. Hopefully some of these derrogations will become redundant as both sides will not try manipulate or dominate the other state.

Well, all I can say is, good luck, because in a democracy, everything can be challenged in the courts and changed if deemed illegal.

If the EU place their signature on illegal unbinding documents then cancel their own undertakings then that underlines the integrity and fabric of the whole union.

No it doesn't, because agreements can be challenged in the courts all the time and they are. It is all a matter if interpretation, one way or the other.

So now you are saying the EU will challenge their own agreements? you are a liar and fabricate posts to mislead those that are gulliable enough to believe you.

No, I never said that the EU will challenge their own agreements, and if you can comprehend what I wrote, I never said that. But they could if they wanted. Why not? What I said was, agreements can be challenged in courts, and whom do you think the challenges will come from? How about from the Cypriots themselves as well as by the local and the Federal government. So the question to you is, what will you do if and when any derogation that goes against EU's own principles are then reversed, regardless whether or not the EU had signed them few years earlier.

[Viewpoint]

Then theres no validity in any agreements signed with the EU or GCs, just fabrication to be renegged and challenged at the first opportunity, pretty much like the 1960 agreements...somethings never change. You are drowning in your own lies Kikapoo, trying to get out of the poo you spread on this forum but people are clever enough to right through your biased pro GC crap. Thank you for confirming what I have always claimed GCs cannot be trusted to abide by their signature but to drag the EU into the shit is another level of stupidity on your behalf.

[Kikapu]

Then theres no validity in any agreements signed with the EU or GCs, just fabrication to be renegged and challenged at the first opportunity, pretty much like the 1960 agreements...somethings never change. You are drowning in your own lies Kikapoo, trying to get out of the poo you spread on this forum but people are clever enough to right through your biased pro GC crap. Thank you for confirming what I have always claimed GCs cannot be trusted to abide by their signature but to drag the EU into the shit is another level of stupidity on your behalf.

You cannot be expecting to be living in the EU under an Apartheid system, and if you think you can do just that, that you are deluding yourself. You need to follow the rule of law, the EU rule of law and not the rule of law of the jungle that Turkey has taught you. TCs cannot live forever as “Pirates of the Mediterranean”. There will be an awakening to reality how the Europeans and the west in general live by, which are Democracy, Human Rights and International law, and just to sweeten things a little, add the EU Principles for good measure. I know you are not in the bit interested in these principles, because it would mean for you to give up on your stole GCs properties in the north, but hey, there's a price to be paid for living on HARAM.

[Viewpoint]

You cannot keep banding this crap about as I have always said nothing is carved in stone. I have agreed to your demands yet you still talk about aparthied crap, get a grip you need to understand that anything seen as posing a problem or danger to TCs even if forced onto the table in the shape of an EU principle will be rejected full stop, no ifs or buts about it. You cannot use the EU to force your demands upon us we yield 50% of the say in any future solution so there needs to be enough flexiblity to accomadate not only your demands but ours as well, you cannot pull the EU card everytime you want to shit on us, that will not work as we no longer trust the EU either as you have said they can renegge on any agreements they have signed just like the GCs did in 1963.

[boulio]

If you want to yield 50 % you must go back to 1960 agreements with the veto,that means completely going back.all refugees to there homes.if not we go to a federation with a 75-25 % split in land you run your affairs that are allocated to the states and ithe majority decides on issues left to the federal govt.