Overview Historic ECHR judgment condemns Turkey A ‘bleak house’ in the occupied areas Photo report:
Joint Lobby / Ayios Amvrosios anti-occupation rally ECHR judgment omits mention of illegal colonists I will resist – a CD by Demetris Fanis UK general election 2001 outcome – a Lobby analysis Refugees must reclaim, rebuild and return Petroleum, not olive oil Link hands for Cyprus Quotes
The European Court of Human Rights finds Turkey guilty of violating the rights of the missing persons for whom “there is arguable claim that they were in Turkish custody at the time of their disappearance” (Article 5, paragraph 150). View large photo
No agreement on Cyprus can now possibly not reflect the decision of the ECHR because it would, in effect, go against a high level judicial ruling.
The refugees, through the ECHR decision, have once again been projected into the spotlight. Their resolve to reclaim their ancestral lands and homes is the key to reuniting the island without ethnic partition and segregation.
The prospects for a negotiated settlement to the island’s long standing division have never, in spite of appearances, looked better. Denktash and Turkey are in considerable difficulties, with domestic opposition both in the occupied area and in Turkey against their obstinate stand on Cyprus growing daily, amongst intellectuals and the broad mass of people.
The ruling of the European Court of Human Rights on 10 May 2001 finding Turkey guilty of violating the European convention on human rights on 14 counts, is a devastating blow to Turkey, the illegal so-called ‘TRNC’ and is a tremendous boost to civilised values.
The decision of the Court also reaffirms its judicial declaration in 1997 (Titina Loizidou v Turkey), and places Turkey under enormous pressure to comply with the ruling or face going into further conflict with the Council of Europe. It can actually be stated that at this point in time, Turkey seems more likely to be expelled from European institutions such as the Council of Europe rather that succeed in its application to join the European Union of nations.
The main points of the judicial declaration are as follows:
- Violation of the right to life and right to personal freedom of the Greek Cypriots missing since the 1974 conflict, because Turkey has consistently refused to conduct an effective enquiry into their fate.
- Inhumane treatment of the relatives of the Greek Cypriot missing persons.
- Violation of the human rights of Greek Cypriots and Maronites still resident in the occupied area.
- Violation of the property rights in the occupied area of Greek Cypriots who are “denied access to and control, use and enjoyment of their property as well as any compensation for the interference with their property rights”.
- Violation “concerning the refusal to allow the return of any Greek Cypriot displaced persons to their homes in northern Cyprus”.
These are the main provisions of the ruling, but interestingly the Court even found Turkey guilty of violating the rights of Turkish Cypriots living in the occupied areas but only for the “legislative practice of authorising the trial of civilians by military courts”. The Court did not find Turkey guilty of violating articles of the convention concerning prohibition of slavery and forced labour, freedom of assembly and association (though many would consider there was strong evidence of this).
Lastly, the ECHR decision reaffirmed that the Government of the Republic of Cyprus is the sole legitimate Government in Cyprus and that the so-called ‘Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus’ is illegal under international law.
According to Turkish and Turkish Cypriot media reports, Denktash and his illegal regime are, in the wake of the ECHR decision, confirmed as being completely out of touch with the ‘realities’ concerning a settlement of the Cyprus issue. Denktash is now no longer the sung hero in Turkey of Turkish Cypriot ‘independence’; he is loathed and held responsible for so many of the ills facing the Turkish people because of his obduracy on the Cyprus issue. Many feel that Turkey is being punished as a result of its stance on Cyprus.
The Patriotic Unity Movement in the occupied area (a popular resistance movement to Denktash and his regime) has openly stated that the ECHR decision is “official proof of the bankruptcy of Turkey’s partition policy in Cyprus” (Avrupa 18 May 2001), quoting the General Secretary of PUM, Izzet Izcan. He went on to say that over half of the Turkish Cypriots have left Cyprus; the majority of the people in the occupied area support a federal solution and are against union with Turkey. They support immediate accession to the EU and are scrabbling for passports of the Republic of Cyprus.
Denktash, meanwhile, steadfastly states that he will not resume any proximity talks until his illegal regime is recognised by the world as a sovereign state. The ECHR decision puts paid to any possibility of that ever happening. Denktash knows that in resuming the proximity talks he and Turkey must accept the judgment of the ECHR as a fait accompli including the return of the refugees to reclaim what is rightly theirs. Once he steps back into the proximity talks it means he has conceded defeat.
In the meantime, more ominous developments are taking place in the occupied area. The underground Turkish Cypriot terrorist group, TMT, originally co-founded in the 1950s by Denktash and several other conspirators to split the Turkish Cypriots from the Greek Cypriots, has now been reconstituted as TMT-B. To give it an air of legality, the fascist group has been further named the ‘National People’s Movement’. Amongst other things, the organisation is pledged to fight against those who do not support the confederation solution; and to fight against those who support the EU and who maintain bicommunal contacts and activities with the Greek Cypriots.
The chief organiser of this terrorist organisation is none other then Taner Etkin, a counsellor to Denktash and former ‘Minister of Foreign Affairs’.
It seems that Denktash is prepared once again to use terror tactics specifically against his own people if the popular movement against him continues to swell.
Above: Protesters at the joint Lobby for Cyprus and Ayios Amvrosios Association anti-occupation rally are prevented from crossing the green line and returning to Ayios Amvrosios in the area of Cyprus currently under Turkish occupation. The rally was attended by British MPs Jimmy Hood and Bill Tynan and Canadian MP Jim Karygiannis who is of Greek origin. Mr Karygiannis stated: “I was deeply offended when they asked me where my father and mother came from. That’s immaterial to my desire to visit the occupied areas”. The Greek Cypriot refugees of Ayios Amvrosios will never give up their right to return to their homes and lands and reclaim what is rightfully and legally theirs! View photo report
The most obvious omission from the European Court of Human Rights’ ruling of 10 May 2001 was any specific adjudication on the matter of the colonists. Mention, was made however of the colonists under the subsection, ‘Home and Property of displaced persons’. It states: “The Court held, by sixteen votes to one, that there had been a continuing violation of Article 8 by reason of the refusal to allow the return of any Greek Cypriot displaced person to their homes in northern Cyprus. Having regard to that conclusion, the Court found unanimously, that it was not necessary to examine whether there had been a further violation of that Article by reason of the alleged manipulation of the demographic and cultural environment of the Greek Cypriot displaced persons’ homes in northern Cyprus”.
The court adjudged Turkey guilty on 14 counts of human rights violations, but unfortunately it did not consider it “necessary” to adjudicate on a matter concerning the massive influx of illegal immigrants and demographic manipulation.
The refugees have the inalienable right to reclaim and return to their stolen lands and properties, therefore the colonists who currently occupy the homes and lands in large numbers must surely be humanely repatriated. Given the reality that these illegal colonists have so distorted the demography of the occupied area and of Cyprus as a whole, their unwanted and unwelcome presence (to both Greek and Turkish Cypriots) should be addressed in an honest and forthright manner.
Given the illegal status of the colonists, the laws of the EU must now be brought to bear just as they would in Britain, Germany, France or in any other EU member state. No other country in the federal body or with candidate status would be expected to take a tolerant view of illegal immigration, especially when it would constitute such an enormous demographic change. In the case of the Republic of Cyprus, a minimum of 12%–15% of the entire population is composed of illegal Turkish colonists. If the EU fails to acknowledge and address this problem then it could be found in contempt of its own laws.
There are not only laws but a huge body of evidence that points to deliberate social engineering in the occupied area (Cucco Report). The consequence has been a huge influx of colonists and the driving away of tens of thousands of indigenous Turkish Cypriots who seek a better life elsewhere as they feel their ethnic/national identity, hopes and opportunities are eroded.
It is high time that the cudgel was taken up on this issue and that Turkey and its illegal regime in the occupied north of Cyprus be brought to task. The European institutions (executive and legislative) must address illegal immigration in the occupied part of Cyprus which is of course part of the sovereign territory of the Republic of Cyprus itself.
(I will resist) – a CD by Demetris Fanis
Lobby for Cyprus is proud to announce the Demetris Fanis CD I will resist. Demetris is donating all profits to the Lobby for Cyprus enlightenment fund, though the objective of the CD is not merely fundraising. With this CD we spread the word that we will resist any settlement or accommodation on the Cyprus issue which will divide our country and deny us our right to return. Through the lyrics and the help of friends such as Demetris Fanis and Alexia and anyone else who wishes to join our worthwhile cause, we send the message that we are determined to continue our struggle for as long as it takes.
If you would like a copy of the Demetris Fanis CD I will resist, please enclose a cheque for £6 plus 50p postage and packing made payable to Lobby for Cyprus. View CD cover
Lobby for Cyprus took active participation in the UK 2001 general election by supporting candidates who have actively opposed the current Turkish occupation of the northern part of the island and who have supported Cyprus’ efforts to join the European Union.
Conversely, Lobby opposed those candidates who were supporters of the illegal Denktash regime. Following the 1997 general election the number of anti-Cypriot MPs had dwindled, so the number Lobby needed to campaign against was few. As some of these pro-occupation candidates were standing in safe seats, far from London, Lobby could not realistically have any success in opposing them.
As a non-party-political organisation Lobby did not support or oppose any candidates on the basis of which party they were standing for.
The candidates that Lobby supported fell into three main groups.
Group 1 consisted of candidates who had done more than merely declare their support for Cyprus. They had been MPs in the last term of parliament who had actively supported Cyprus, for example by raising discussions in the House of Commons, tabling and supporting Early Day Motions, or had consistently raised the issue of Cyprus with decision makers. The list consisted of candidates who had held marginal seats and thus needed the help of the community. They consisted of Linda Perham (Ilford North), Joan Ryan (Enfield North), Stephen Twigg (Enfield Southgate), Rudi Vis (East Finchley) and Tony Wright (Great Yarmouth). The constituency of East Finchley raised a contentious issue as the sitting MP Rudi Vis and the Conservative candidate John Marshall have both proved to be friends of Cyprus. In cases such as this it was decided by members of Lobby to support sitting MPs so they could continue their work into the new term. Lobby felt that Rudi Vis in particular has contributed greatly to the just cause of Cyprus, in his role as Member of the Council of Ministers and especially in his efforts regarding the Loizidou versus Turkey case in the European Court of Human Rights. Lobby assisted the above candidates by door-to-door canvassing, letter writing to members of the community and by giving the candidates the opportunity to make their positions on Cyprus known through appearances at meetings or by interview. Approximately 20,000 Lobby letters written in Greek and English were hand delivered to virtually every Greek Cypriot in the above marginal constituencies.
Group 2 consisted of candidates who are friends of Cyprus, though were in constituencies that were too far for Lobby to effectively campaign in, or Lobby’s resources restricted a more involved participation. Lobby therefore contacted these MPs and sent a letter of support, expressing gratitude for their efforts.
Group 3 consisted of candidates who are friends of Cyprus and Lobby, but were considered to be in safe seats or did not require the assistance of Lobby other than moral support. They included Jimmy Hood (Clydesdale), Alan Meale (Mansfield), Bill Tynan (Hamilton South) and Andrew Dismore (Hendon).
In total Lobby sent letters of support to over 60 candidates across the party political spectrum. All those listed above held their seats and we hope they will continue their efforts for justice and freedom for Cyprus.
Regrettably, a number of MPs whose actions in the past led us to believe they are supporters of the illegal Denktash regime held their seats. They are Jamie Cann (Ipswich), Nigel Evans (Ribble Valley) and Dan Norris (Wansdyke).
Stephen Day (Cheadle) lost his seat, John Taylor (Strangford) did not stand at the election and Roger Stott who won the seat of Wigan in 1997 died in 1999. Therefore, the House of Commons has since the 1997 election lost three MPs who appeared to be sympathetic to the occupation regime.
Despite what is overall a favourable outcome to the 2001 UK general election regarding Cyprus, we must not be complacent. Prior to the election, Lobby sent letters to Tony Blair and Robin Cook, pointing out Lobby’s disappointment that the government has not significantly used its influence to bring pressure on Turkey to end its occupation of the northern part of Cyprus and for the right of the Greek Cypriot refugees to return to their homes and lands.
However, Cyprus does have a number of committed friends in the House of Commons and it is our duty over the next term of parliament to remind them of their pre-election promises and their commitments to see a free and united Republic of Cyprus, a member of the European Union of nations.
View letter sent to the Prime Minister, Robin Cook and other senior Ministers prior the the UK 2001 general election
With the historic decision of the ECHR finding Turkey guilty of massive violation of the rights of Greek Cypriots, now more than ever the refugees must restate their resolve to reclaim what is rightfully theirs.
It has to be made loud and clear that our objective is not to accept a quid pro quo i.e. compensation or so-called land exchanges. Denktash cannot secure the legalisation of the theft of our land through international recognition of a sovereign and independent confederated state. Under the circumstances, he has only two options: return to negotiations (the United Nations sponsored proximity talks, underpinned as they are now by the ECHR decision), or not resume the talks and with Turkey face the consequences.
Making a calculated guess, he and Turkey will in time be forced to re-enter talks. The refugees, both in Cyprus and the diaspora, must then make the persistent call that they intend to reclaim what is theirs irrespective of whether they intend to resettle or not.
The key to the equation is that the refugees reclaim en masse their stolen properties, then wait: wait to evaluate the security situation, wait to consider whether they want to return with their families, their villagers and townsfolk and take up permanent or temporary residence. They may decide to sell – that is their prerogative, but in the first instance the refugees must reclaim what is theirs and then decide what to do.
We cannot overstate the importance of the refugees exercising the right to use their title-deeds and reclaim what is theirs. In order to preserve the Greek Cypriot identity throughout the island it is preferable that as many Greek Cypriots as possible resettle on a permanent or temporary basis in the liberated area of the north. Under no circumstances can we accept an ethnically cleansed division of our beloved homeland.
The familiar quip over the years has been that Cyprus has no oil, only olive oil. That has now been turned on its head by the discovery of a mega bubble of oil in the eastern Mediterranean to the south of Cyprus. Though contested by other interested countries outside Europe (Egypt and Israel included) who want a share of the mineral wealth, there is, according to satellite and geological surveys, enough oil within the borders of Europe to make it an asset not to be taken lightly.
Competitive tendering for further exploration and drilling is being fiercely contested by European and US based oil companies and consortia. Oil, after all, is still the life-blood of all modern industrial nations and the fact that the USA controls most of the world’s strategic oil reserves (including the Middle East’s) and the supply of oil to its competitors, makes it imperative for the Europeans to control this new huge reserve of oil.
This is the way the game is played. And it makes it even more urgent for the EU to absorb Cyprus within its ranks, in spite of the objections of Turkey.
The EU, reinforced by the ECHR substantive decision to find Turkey guilty of misconduct in Cyprus cannot simply allow the island to be anybody’s, least of all Turkey’s. Turkey, in the context of the oil find, must be viewed as an interloper, an unnecessary inconvenience for reasons of economy and security.
In the same breath, the EU will do all in its power to prevent Cyprus from becoming a US battleship in the eastern Mediterranean. After all, the EU will wish to protect its assets and would certainly not wish to be side by side with a US superbase in the region.
The Cyprus issue has taken yet another twist, not only because of a landmark decision of the ECHR but also because of liquid gold – oil. It is this huge mineral wealth that has introduced a new configuration in the balance of competitive forces in the eastern Mediterranean.
To mark the 27th black anniversary of the Turkish invasion and continuing occupation of Cyprus, the Cypriot community formed a human chain at Parliament Square on Thursday 19 July. Thank you for showing your support!
Christopher Hitchens,
The Trial of Henry Kissinger (Verso)
(2001)
Unity Wharf, Mill Street, London SE1 2BH
telephone/facsimile +44 (0)20 8888 2556
If you require a hard copy version of Lobby for Cyprus News please contact Lobby via e-mail: admin@lobbyforcyprus.org
Lobby for Cyprus News is published by Lobby for Cyprus - a non party political organisation with the aim of reuniting Cyprus
©Lobby for Cyprus 2001