Turkish North Cyprus lifted visa checks with the south of the island in a symbolic gesture as peace talks get underway.
Police officers from the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus will no longer ask people crossing from the south of the island to fill out a form containing passport data that, once stamped, acted as a form of visa.
It was lifted over the weekend after an unpublicised trial run last Friday, as Turkish Cypriot president Mustafa Akıncı and Nicos Anastasiades, the Greek Cypriot president of the Republic of Cyprus.
The two leaders agreed to draw up measures for mutual trust that both communities would benefit from, with the lifting of ‘visa’ requirements being one.
FAMAGUSTA CALL
Also over the weekend, Turkish and Greek Cypriots met to demand the opening of another crossing in Famagusta, on the east of the island.
On Saturday, members of the “Famagusta, our City” and Turkish Cypriot “Famagusta Initiative” groups assembled on the either sides of the divide to voice their demand for opening a road dubbed the “Avenue for the Return”.
The Cyprus Mail reported the groups saying in a joint declaration that “opening the road would promote co-operation and cultivate dialogue, thus building trust between the two communities and peace in Cyprus”.
CONFIDENCE BUILDING
The two community leaders instructed their negotiators, Andreas Mavroyiannis and Özdil Nami, to come up with a joint list of confidence-building measures that could be announced at their next meeting, which is expected to take place on Friday 28 May.
These may include the opening of more crossing, but local press reported the negotiators were also asked to come up with other ideas.
There are seven crossings between North and South Cyprus, with two located inside the British base at RAF Dhekelia.
The Cyprus Mail said the most likely locations for future crossings were Dherynia, Pyroi-Athienou, and Lefka, the last of which is wanted by Turkish Cypriots.
There are also rumours of demands for a crossing at Paphos Gate in Nicosia’s old town, the paper reported.
THE LAWS OF NORTHERN CYPRUS ARE ACCEPTED IN EUROPE:
(Northern Cyprus :=: Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus)
Not only the “TRNC Immovable Property Commission (and its related laws)” but also “ALL THE LAWS OF TURKISH REPUBLIC OF NORTHERN CYPRUS” WAS ACCEPTED ON BEHALF OF EUROPE (European Court of Human Rights; ECtHR).
ECtHR Decision 02.07.2013, App. nos. 9130/09 and 9143/09; Pavlides v. Turkey; Georgakis v. Turkey
http://hudoc.echr.coe.int/sites/eng/Pages/search.aspx#{“fulltext”:[“Pavlides”],”documentcollectionid2″:[“CASELAW”],”itemid”:[“001-122907”]}
ECtHR: “…notwithstanding the lack of international recognition of the regime in the northern area, a de facto recognition of its acts may be rendered necessary for practical purposes. Thus, THE ADOPTION BY THE AUTHORITIES OF THE “TRNC” OF CIVIL, ADMINISTRATIVE OR CRIMINAL LAW MEASURES, AND THEIR APPLICATION OR ENFORCEMENT WITHIN THAT TERRITORY, may be regarded as having a legal basis in domestic law for the purposes of the Convention”.
Note: In the related ECtHR’s decision above, the case application of the Greek Cypriot was IMMEDIATELY REJECTED; i.e., his application was found INADMISSABLE.
That is to say, he was expelled by ECtHR just at the beginning; therefore, his case was not handled (no sessions were held) by ECtHR at all.
EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS: “GREEK CYPRIOTS HAVE NO RIGHT TO RETURN BACK TO NORTHERN CYPRUS”
ECtHR: “The places from where Greek Cypriots migrated in Northern Cyprus are not their homes ANYMORE since the Greek Cypriots LIVED ALMOST ALL OF THEIR LIVES IN ANOTHER PLACES AND THEY HAVE NO CONCRETE AND PERSISTING LINKS TO THE PROPERTIES THEY CLAIMED. Furthermore, that’s why, the Greek Cypriots have no right to return back to Northern Cyprus. ”
(Tasos Asproftas: [Application no. 16079/90] and Marianna Petrakidou [Application no. 16081/90]).
http://hudoc.echr.coe.int/sites/eng/Pages/search.aspx#{“fulltext”:[“Asproftas”],”documentcollectionid2″:[“CASELAW”],”item”:[“001-98684”]}
http://hudoc.echr.coe.int/sites/eng/Pages/search.aspx#{“fulltext”:[“Petrakidou”],”documentcollectionid2″:[“CASELAW”],”itemid”:[“001-98688”]}
(Greek Cypriots objected to the ECtHR’s no-return-back-for-Greek-Cypriots decision and take the case to the Grand Chamber; In 18.10.2010, the Referral Request of Greek Cypriots was rejected in ECtHR Grand Chamber as well, and hence, THE DECISON OF ECtHR THAT THE GREEK CYPRIOTS CANNOT RETURN BACK TO THE NORTH WAS FINALIZED:
ECtHR Grand Chamber rejected Greek Cypriots and kicked their backs (Case Law: Appeals Requests of Asproftas and Petrakidou)
http://www.mediafire.com/view/?izlctlan0vm7le9 (ECtHR APPEALS DECISONS)
Cases referred to the ECtHR Grand Chamber
Referrals accepted (page 1)
……………………………………………..
Requests for referral rejected (Those to whom ECtHR kicked their backs) (page 1)
……………………………………………..
Asproftas v. Turkey and Petrakidou v. Turkey (nos. 16079/90 and 16081/90); judgment of 27.05.2010 (page 3) http://www.mediafire.com/view/?izlctlan0vm7le9
TO SUM UP:
THE FACT THAT GREEK CYPRIOTS DO NOT HAVE RIGHT TO RETURN TO THE NORTH BECAME CASE-LAW IN EUROPE (2010) AND IN AMERICA (2014).
That is to say, the Greek Cypriots who make an application about a property in Northern Cyprus will always be kicked to their backs not only in Europe but also in USA.
USA’s FEDERAL COURT: “NORTHERN CYPRUS IS A DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC”
USA’s FEDERAL COURT and USA’s COURT OF APPEALS REJECTED GREEK CYPRIOTS
==1. USA’s FEDERAL COURT REJECTED GREEK CYPRIOTS: THE TOUMAZOU CASE-LAW==
“..Greek Cypriots CANNOT CLAIM that the government in control of Northern Cyprus gave their homes to Turkish Cypriots….
Although the United States does not recognize it as a state, the TRNC purportedly operates as a DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC with a president, prime minister, legislature and judiciary…
TRNC is NOT VULNERABLE to a lawsuit in Washington”
The news of the Court Decision (13.10.2014): http://www.courthousenews.com/2014/10/13/72392.htm
Page of the Court case: http://dockets.justia.com/docket/district-of-columbia/dcdce/1:2009cv01967/139002
Decision of the Court: http://docs.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/district-of-columbia/dcdce/1:2009cv01967/139002/53
TOUMAZOU et al v. REPUBLIC OF TURKEY et al
Defendant: REPUBLIC OF TURKEY and TURKISH REPUBLIC OF NORTHERN CYPRUS
Case Filed: 19.10.2009
Decision Date: 09.10.2014
==2. USA’s FEDERAL COURT REJECTED GREEK CYPRIOTS: LATCHFORD DECISION ==
LATCHFORD et al v. TURKISH REPUBLIC OF NORTHERN CYPRUS et al
Defendant: TURKISH REPUBLIC OF NORTHERN CYPRUS, HSBC HOLDINGS PLC and HSBC BANK USA, N.A.
http://dockets.justia.com/docket/district-of-columbia/dcdce/1:2012cv00846/154428
http://docs.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/district-of-columbia/dcdce/1:2012cv00846/154428/22
Case Filed: 24.05.2012
Decision Date: 31.10.2014
http://docs.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/district-of-columbia/dcdce/1:2012cv00846/154428/22
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
On September 30, 2014, the Court dismissed Toumazou v. Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus, Civil Action No. 09-1967, WITH PREJUDICE, WHICH IS A RELATED CASE “INDISTINGUISHABLE BY FACTS OR LAW”. See Plaintiff’s Notice of Appeal at 1 n. 1, Toumazou v. Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus, No. 09-cv-1967 (D.D.C. Oct. 29, 2014), ECF No. 55. The Court therefore ORDERED PLAINTIFF TO SHOW CAUSE IN WRITING WHY THIS CASE SHOULD NOT BE DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE TO THE COURT’S SEPTEMBER 30, 2014 Order and October 9, 2014 Opinion in Toumazou. PLAINTIFF FAILED TO RESPOND. It is hereby ORDERED THAT THE COMPLAINT is DISMISSED with prejudice. The Clerk of Court SHALL REMOVE THIS CASE FROM THE DOCKET OF THIS COURT. This is a final appealable Order.
==3. USA’s FEDERAL COURT REJECTED GREEK CYPRIOTS: FIOURIS AND OTHER 96 GREEK CYPRIOTS DECISION ==
Fiouris v. Turkish Cypriot Community, Civil Action No. 2010-1225 (D.C. 2014)
Defendant: TURKISH CYPRIOT COMMUNITY, HSBC HOLDING, PLC ve HSBC BANK ABD, N.A.
http://dockets.justia.com/docket/district-of-columbia/dcdce/1:2010cv01225/143132/
http://law.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/district-of-columbia/dcdce/1:2010cv01225/143132/22/
Case Filed: 20.07.2010
Decision Date: 31.10.2014
On September 30, 2014, the Court dismissed Toumazou v. Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus, Civil Action No. 09-1967, with prejudice, which is a related case “indistinguishable by facts or law.” See Plaintiff’s Notice of Appeal at 1 n.1, Toumazou v. Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus, No. 09-cv-1967(D.D.C. Oct.29, 2014), ECF No. 55. The Court therefore ordered plaintiff to show cause in writing why this case should not be dismissed with prejudice pursuant to the Court’s September 30,2014 Order and October 9, 2014 Opinion in Toumazou. Plaintiff failed to respond. It is hereby ORDERED that the complaint is DISMISSED with prejudice. The Clerk of Court shall remove this case from the docket of this Court. This is a final appealable Order.
https://www.docketalarm.com/cases/District_Of_Columbia_District_Court/1–10-cv-01225/FIOURIS_et_al_v._TURKISH_CYPRIOT_COMMUNITY_et_al/22/
http://www.law360.com/cases/4db72cb6c0ce161243000002
https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/2747346/fiouris-v-turkish-cypriot-community/
One can see the list of 96 Greek Cypriots who lost their cases against TURKISH CYPRIOT COMMUNITY in the following link as well:
http://leagle.com/decision/In%20FDCO%2020141103575/FIOURIS%20v.%20TURKISH%20CYPRIOT%20COMMUNITY
== 4. USA’s COURT OF APPEALS REJECTED GREEK CYPRIOTS ==
USA APPEALS COURT: “The TOUMAZOU decision about NORTHERN CYPRUS is valid (a case-law) NOT ONLY in USA but also in ALL COUNTRIES”
USA Court of Appeals: Case 14-4449
Look at page 10 below:
http://blogs.reuters.com/alison-frankel/files/2014/12/sokolowvpa-pamotiontostay.pdf
Toumazou v. Turkish Republic of N. Cyprus, No. 09-cv-1967, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 143535, at *11 (D.D.C. Oct. 9, 2014) (holding that the TURKISH REPUBLIC OF NORTHERN CYPRUS “IS ‘AT HOME’ IN NORTHERN CYPRUS, AS ITS NAME SUGGESTS, NOT IN THE DISTRICT OF COLOMBIA”)
The same decision can be seen on page 17 below:
http://online.wsj.com/public/resources/documents/PLOPAbrief.pdf