Cyprus-Forum.com

[kurupetos]

dont you see any reason why they may give the two finger salute my dear.

That's not you... because you don't have teeth!

[Oceanside50]

My point is that the TC side doesn't seem to realize that the power sharing arrangement we are willing to accept is already a big loss for the GCs (compared to what we currently have). To entice GCs to accept such power sharing arrangement then issues such as property rights, territory, settlers, guarantees etc should not be very far from what our side can consider as ideal. If the Turkish side is not ready to make big compromises on those issues then it should make a compromise on the power sharing arrangement. Otherwise I really can't see a result that will be voted by the majority of GCs.

may i take this opportunity to remind you that in 1963 tcs shared that power by having a veto and you forced the tcs into enclaves and stole it power from them you piece of little shit. if you dont want to give back what you stole declare udi and form your own county. groc is what you deserve.

you people left the parliament on your own accord and before that were trying desperately to infringe on the majorities rights...again another joke

[Oceanside50]

The Annan plan did specify that the Tc constituent state would have a majority of Tc and it gave the TC a mechanism to insure that, it was called the no right to appeal clause...Any law made against the GC could not be appealed higher then the TC state Supreme Court...this is apartheid and segregation..and its not distorted.

Just tell me the exact section and article that claims this. Untill you do and having looked for it myself I claim 'bullshit.

go ahead and quote this....

http://www.hri.org/docs/annan/Annan_Plan_Text.html

Foundation Agreement Annex II, Attachment 3

6. (1) A constituent state may apply to the Supreme Court of Cyprus for an injunction barring a person who does not hold its internal constituent state citizenship status from entering or residing in that constituent state.

(2) The Supreme Court shall grant the injunction if the relevant person has been, or is actively engaged, in acts of violence or incitement to violence and the presence of that person in that constituent state would be a danger to public safety or public order.

That is the constituent state may apply to the FEDERAL Supreme Court to bar someone from entering or residing in that constituent state and only if the FEDERAL supreme court deems that person has been, or is actively engaged, in acts of violence or incitement to violence and the presence of that person in that constituent state would be a danger to public safety or public order.

8. (1) A constituent state may, until Turkey accedes to the European Union, limit, on a non-discriminatory basis, the establishment of residence by Cypriot citizens who do not hold the relevant internal constituent state citizenship status.

(2) Permissible limitations include a moratorium on such residence during the first six years after the relevant date. Thereafter, there may be limitations if the number of such residents has reached 6% of the population of a village or municipality between the 6th and 9th years after the relevant date and 12% between the 10th and 14th years after the relevant date, and 18% until the 19th year or Turkey’s accession to the European Union, whichever is sooner

That is permissible restrictions by a constituent state on residency by members who previously were not of that constituent state were TEMPORARY until the 19th year.

8.(6) No later than 20 years after the relevant date the federal government and the constituent states shall review the provisions of this section in light of experience.

That is that these rules would be reviewed at the 20th year at both the constituent state level AND the federal level.

8. (7) Any restrictions on residence shall not prevent the freedom of movement throughout the island of Cyprus, including the right of any Cypriot citizen to temporarily stay or have a holiday in their own properties or any other accommodation anywhere on the island of Cyprus.

That is there would be NO restriction at all on 'freedom of movement' of Cypriots within Cyprus, from day one and forever.

9. (2) Notwithstanding the above, with a view to protecting its identity, either constituent state may take safeguard measures to ensure that no less than two-thirds of it Cypriot permanent residents speak its official language as their mother tongues.

This is the 'woolly' clause I could not find earlier. It does NOT restrict how many GC can move to and reside in the TC component state (and thus vote in that component state at the component state level) - it just limits how many of such could do so without being able to speak Turkish, just as it allowed the same limit in the GC constituent state. Learn how to speak Turkish and after the 19th year enough GC to outnumber TC 3:1 in the TC component state could reside there under the what the Annan plan ACTUALLY says.

This is what the Annan plan (the final version) ACTUALLY said. Now are you going to show me the claimed 'no right to appeal clause' as you describe it ? Somehow I suspect not.

Foundation agreement article 4

Article 4 Fundamental rights and liberties
1. Respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms shall be enshrined in the Constitution. There shall be no discrimination against any person on the basis of his or her gender, ethnic or religious identity, or internal constituent state citizenship status. Freedom of movement and freedom of residence may be limited only where expressly provided for in this Agreement.

why is freedom of movement and residence restricted and isn't that a violation of a citizens rights?

[Oceanside50]

Why would the Tc want an apartheid segregated state?...There is a segregated state now. what rights do GC have in the occupied areas?....no right to property no right of speech, religion or that they are guaranteed due process...Nothing of the sort exists and the problem is that you want to keep it that way..even after a solution...and its evident to what you agreed to and the GC voted against..

GC have no rights in the TRNC now because the TRNC does not make any claim to represent those people. To claim that they would therefore have none of those rights in an agreed federal solution like say the Annan plan is about the grossest distortion of actual fact possible. Under the Annan Plan ANY Cypriots right to property, free speech, religious freedom and movement in EITHER component state were protected from day one in perpetuity. The ONLY right that was restricted was that of RESIDENCE for that is what determines in which component state one voted at the component state level. As far as those restrictions applied to the component state citizenship a person held at the time the Annan plan came into force, they were explicitly defined as TEMPORARY. As far as such restrictions applied on a non temporary basis they applied only to those, beyond a 1/3 number, who could not speak the language of that component state.

There in this regard Oceanside50, the absolute truth of what the Annan plan actually said, as linked to on the UN website and then there is what you CLAIM it says. Can you spot the differences because I sure as hell can.

lets look at the impact of these discriminatory laws and how they played out in other federations...(The decision of the Federal Supreme Court made the decision the law of the land. Any solution to the Cyprus problem(assuming its a BBF) will make the solution Federal law..

The Jim Crow laws..(It has been mentioned that Federal and state laws can branch out...) heres an example

Jim Crow laws were state and local laws enforcing racial segregation in the Southern United States. Enacted after the Reconstruction period, these laws continued in force until 1965. They mandated de jure racial segregation in all public facilities in states of the former Confederate States of America, starting in 1890 with a "separate but equal" status for African Americans. Conditions for African Americans were consistently inferior and underfunded compared to those available to white Americans. This body of law institutionalized a number of economic, educational, and social disadvantages. De jure segregation mainly applied to the Southern United States, while Northern segregation was generally de facto — patterns of housing segregation enforced by private covenants, bank lending practices, and job discrimination, including discriminatory labor union practices.

Jim Crow laws mandated the segregation of public schools, public places, and public transportation, and the segregation of restrooms, restaurants, and drinking fountains for whites and blacks. The U.S. military was also segregated, as were federal workplaces, initiated in 1913 under President Woodrow Wilson, the first Southern president elected since 1856. By requiring candidates to submit photos, his administration practiced racial discrimination in hiring.

Its not a question of if theres only partial restriction on civil rights, inherently one civil rights violation will violate all your civil rights because of the power of a state to enact more laws that are concurrent to the law(federal law) that violated your one civil right as has been seen in these Jim Crow laws enacted against the negroes in the southern USA states

Plessy v Ferguson

Plessy v. Ferguson, 163 U.S. 537 (1896), was a landmark United States Supreme Court decision upholding the constitutionality of state laws requiring racial segregation in public facilities under the doctrine of "separate but equal".[1] The decision was handed down by a vote of 7 to 1 with the majority opinion written by Justice Henry Billings Brown and the dissent written by Justice John Marshall Harlan.

Heres how many different types of laws were enacted through one Federal Supreme Court decision...enacted by the different southern American state's legislature

Jim Crow laws touched every aspect of everyday life. For example, in 1935, Oklahoma prohibited blacks and whites from boating together. Boating implied social equality. In 1905, Georgia established separate parks for blacks and whites. In 1930, Birmingham, Alabama, made it illegal for blacks and whites to play checkers or dominoes together. Here are some of the typical Jim Crow laws, as compiled by the Martin Luther King, Jr., National Historic Site Interpretive Staff:

Barbers. No colored barber shall serve as a barber (to) white girls or women (Georgia).


Blind Wards. The board of trustees shall...maintain a separate building...on separate ground for the admission, care, instruction, and support of all blind persons of the colored or black race (Louisiana).


Burial. The officer in charge shall not bury, or allow to be buried, any colored persons upon ground set apart or used for the burial of white persons (Georgia).


Buses.All passenger stations in this state operated by any motor transportation company shall have separate waiting rooms or space and separate ticket windows for the white and colored races (Alabama).


Child Custody. It shall be unlawful for any parent, relative, or other white person in this State, having the control or custody of any white child, by right of guardianship, natural or acquired, or otherwise, to dispose of, give or surrender such white child permanently into the custody, control, maintenance, or support, of a negro (South Carolina).


Education.The schools for white children and the schools for negro children shall be conducted separately (Florida).


Libraries. The state librarian is directed to fit up and maintain a separate place for the use of the colored people who may come to the library for the purpose of reading books or periodicals (North Carolina).


Mental Hospitals. The Board of Control shall see that proper and distinct apartments are arranged for said patients, so that in no case shall Negroes and white persons be together (Georgia).


Militia. The white and colored militia shall be separately enrolled, and shall never be compelled to serve in the same organization. No organization of colored troops shall be permitted where white troops are available and where whites are permitted to be organized, colored troops shall be under the command of white officers (North Carolina).


Nurses. No person or corporation shall require any White female nurse to nurse in wards or rooms in hospitals, either public or private, in which negro men are placed (Alabama).


Prisons. The warden shall see that the white convicts shall have separate apartments for both eating and sleeping from the negro convicts (Mississippi).


Reform Schools. The children of white and colored races committed to the houses of reform shall be kept entirely separate from each other (Kentucky).


Teaching. Any instructor who shall teach in any school, college or institution where members of the white and colored race are received and enrolled as pupils for instruction shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor, and upon conviction thereof, shall be fined... (Oklahoma).


Wine and Beer. All persons licensed to conduct the business of selling beer or wine...shall serve either white people exclusively or colored people exclusively and shall not sell to the two races within the same room at any time (Georgia).1

It proves that in a federation if you violate one civil right then in essence you can violate all of them....

[cypriotnado]

Oceanside you make some valid points. But The ROC is already part of a confederation the EU,which now with its single currency is rapidly evolving towards becoming a full federation Any unified Fed Cyprus would be part of the EU and its laws taxes, services,human rights would need to comply with those of the EU. In 50 years much will have changed again as Europe becomes more federalised.

[Oceanside50]

Oceanside you make some valid points. But The ROC is already part of a confederation the EU,which now with its single currency is rapidly evolving towards becoming a full federation Any unified Fed Cyprus would be part of the EU and its laws taxes, services,human rights would need to comply with those of the EU. In 50 years much will have changed again as Europe becomes more federalised.

Eu laws and rights are nullified with an Annan type solution, because the GC majority would have voted themselves laws of the land that take away their rights...A Jim Crow Cyprus is not a solution to the Cyprus problem.

[erolz66]

Article 4 Fundamental rights and liberties
1. Respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms shall be enshrined in the Constitution. There shall be no discrimination against any person on the basis of his or her gender, ethnic or religious identity, or internal constituent state citizenship status. Freedom of movement and freedom of residence may be limited only where expressly provided for in this Agreement.

why is freedom of movement and residence restricted and isn't that a violation of a citizens rights?

I am STILL waiting for your to show the evidence of your previous claim that

The Annan plan did specify that the Tc constituent state would have a majority of Tc and it gave the TC a mechanism to insure that, it was called the no right to appeal clause...Any law made against the GC could not be appealed higher then the TC state Supreme Court...this is apartheid and segregation..and its not distorted.

You have yourself shown with the above quote from the Annan that you previous claim that the Annan Plan contained

denying of peoples rights to property, due process, religion, language etc...

was in fact bullshit. You have and continue to distort what the Annan plan actually said, as clearly seen in this thread. Why is that ?

It proves that in a federation if you violate one civil right then in essence you can violate all of them....

This is all bullshit, no different from your gross distortions of what the Annan plan actually says, except perhaps a bit less unsubtle. Nation states, any nation state, federal or otherwise have the right to and do limit individuals personal freedoms. They do so every time they jail someone, they do so every time they compulsory purchase someone's property, every time they issue a restraining order. The truth is under the terms of the Annan Plan the ability of a component state to limit a Cypriot citizens freedom of movement within their component state area of jurisdiction is only allowed if a FEDERAL court has ruled that such an individual "has been, or is actively engaged, in acts of violence or incitement to violence and the presence of that person in that constituent state would be a danger to public safety or public order." To claim as you do that this is a 'thin end of the wedge' that would then allow a component state under the terms of the Annan plan, to at will, without any let or hindrance, violate ANY right of a citizen who would in turn have no recourse to either a federal court or indeed the ECHR to challenge such, is just nonsense of the highest order.

[erolz66]

Eu laws and rights are nullified with an Annan type solution, because the GC majority would have voted themselves laws of the land that take away their rights....

Bullshit. No settlement plan, not the Annan plan or any future plan, can remove a persons right to take violations of their human rights to the ECHR. The only way such a plan could do so would be for the new entity created under it to leave the Council of Europe, which in turn would require them to leave the EU.

[cypriotnado]

Oceanside you make some valid points. But The ROC is already part of a confederation the EU,which now with its single currency is rapidly evolving towards becoming a full federation Any unified Fed Cyprus would be part of the EU and its laws taxes, services,human rights would need to comply with those of the EU. In 50 years much will have changed again as Europe becomes more federalised.

Eu laws and rights are nullified with an Annan type solution, because the GC majority would have voted themselves laws of the land that take away their rights...A Jim Crow Cyprus is not a solution to the Cyprus problem.

With Annan The ROC was not in the EU. The current talks have a major heading which deals with EU compliance. The EU is also rightly becoming more involved. Laws are never static, what's agreed now will evolve as Cyprus and Cypriots evolve. Cypriotness is a relatively new thing - 40 years ago many were screaming for Enosis or Taksim. Any solution would need to recognise that trust takes time. My vision is that one day we will not talk of majority and minority but just of one people.

[Oceanside50]

Article 4 Fundamental rights and liberties
1. Respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms shall be enshrined in the Constitution. There shall be no discrimination against any person on the basis of his or her gender, ethnic or religious identity, or internal constituent state citizenship status. Freedom of movement and freedom of residence may be limited only where expressly provided for in this Agreement.

why is freedom of movement and residence restricted and isn't that a violation of a citizens rights?

I am STILL waiting for your to show the evidence of your previous claim that

The Annan plan did specify that the Tc constituent state would have a majority of Tc and it gave the TC a mechanism to insure that, it was called the no right to appeal clause...Any law made against the GC could not be appealed higher then the TC state Supreme Court...this is apartheid and segregation..and its not distorted.

You have yourself shown with the above quote from the Annan that you previous claim that the Annan Plan contained

denying of peoples rights to property, due process, religion, language etc...

was in fact bullshit. You have and continue to distort what the Annan plan actually said, as clearly seen in this thread. Why is that ?

It proves that in a federation if you violate one civil right then in essence you can violate all of them....

This is all bullshit, no different from your gross distortions of what the Annan plan actually says, except perhaps a bit less unsubtle. Nation states, any nation state, federal or otherwise have the right to and do limit individuals personal freedoms. They do so every time they jail someone, they do so every time they compulsory purchase someone's property, every time they issue a restraining order. The truth is under the terms of the Annan Plan the ability of a component state to limit a Cypriot citizens freedom of movement within their component state area of jurisdiction is only allowed if a FEDERAL court has ruled that such an individual "has been, or is actively engaged, in acts of violence or incitement to violence and the presence of that person in that constituent state would be a danger to public safety or public order." To claim as you do that this is a 'thin end of the wedge' that would then allow a component state under the terms of the Annan plan, to at will, without any let or hindrance, violate ANY right of a citizen who would in turn have no recourse to either a federal court or indeed the ECHR to challenge such, is just nonsense of the highest order.

The violation of the right of movement:

The Greek Cypriots will NEVER be permitted to return and form the majority in any of the villages they were ethnically cleansed from in 1974. Annans restrictions mean that even if a Greek Cypriot village is empty today NO Greek Cypriot will ever be allowed back unless SIXTEEN TIMES as many Turkish Cypriots are allowed to colonise it at the same time (Article 3 Para 7 of the foundation agreement). These restrictions because they are on a village-by-village basis will make it impossible for the Greek Cypriots to form any kind of viable community in the north.

The Right to Organize, The Right to Language/Culture

The free formation and organisation of Greek Cypriot political parties in the north will be virtually outlawed in the same way as free Kurdish parties are outlawed in Turkey. (Articles 1, 3 para. 2 & para. 3, 73 para. 2, 74 para. 2, 76 para. 1 of the so-called �Turkish Cypriot constituent state� constitution)

and a provision specifying those laws that shall become laws of our respective constituent state, by asking the following question as stipulated in Article 1 of Annex IX of the Foundation Agreement:
“Do you approve the Foundation Agreement with all its Annexes, as well as the Constitution of the Greek Cypriot/Turkish Cypriot constituent state and the provisions as to its laws to be in force, to bring into being a new state of affairs in which Cyprus joins the European Union united? Yes/No”;

The Turkish Cypriot component state would have control over the Greek Cypriot's ability to move to and live within the portion of Cyprus that they would control. Thus, the possibility of Turkish Cypriots becoming a minority in their own state would not exist.

Therefore denying the right to appeal and due process to Greek Cypriots would be a mechanism of control and insure that the majority in the Tc state would remain Tc.... Denying a right to appeal above the TC state Supreme Court would be one tool to use against the GC....and denying them their due process..

Article 22:

Decisions of the Property Court shall not be subject to further review or appeal to the Supreme Court.

Again if some don't understand what a BBF is, just from Article 22 laws can be branched out to include no appeal to GC on other social issues....and again this is another joke for any free thinking western human...