If a TC owns some of Larnaca airport

mamachina


Joined: 22/11/2008
Posts: 730

Message Posted:
18/11/2009 13:48

as we are always being told, why dont they do a Court case or something like the GC's do for property here. Or for that matter any TC who definitely had title to land/house in the south. Or has this topic been covered many times before I joined? Or cant they afford it, or arent they allowed to? Or what?????......... Come on MMM I bet you know, or Paul or DC or........

petez


Joined: 04/12/2008
Posts: 560

Message Posted:
18/11/2009 15:32

I dont think it would help with the current talks if they did.

malsancak


Joined: 23/08/2009
Posts: 2874

Message Posted:
18/11/2009 15:46

the GCs feel that they can "compulsory purchase" TC land in the south with asking the owner and without actually paying for it

Geoff


Joined: 25/06/2008
Posts: 1370

Message Posted:
18/11/2009 21:34

Have you noticed that when it comes to the matter of GC owned land in the North the GCs say they want the detail to be part of any settlement.

But when it comes to the matter of TC owned land in the South the GCs say that can be discussed AFTER a settlement!

I may be naive - but with that kind of attitude it is difficult to see how any settlement can be achieved in practice.

Geoff

mikelapta



Joined: 20/11/2008
Posts: 2186

Message Posted:
18/11/2009 21:44

If this is accepted,maybe halfway down the runway,you have to changed to Turkish Airlines.Then take-off,land at Ercan,stay on plane for refuellling,or wait in lounge for 5 hours.I hope settlement takes place!!!

mmmmmm



Joined: 19/12/2008
Posts: 8398

Message Posted:
18/11/2009 21:56

Hi mamachina re msg 1



YES ! The topic has been covered many times.. but it must be a couple of months since it was last raised ;)



Larnaca airport is built on land that was ( is?) owned by TCs..





There was a small airport there before the 1974 debacle - but after August 1974 the 'south' had lost use of Nicosia International ( as had the 'north' )



The 'north' used Tymbou ( Ercan) as it's replacement.. the 'south' had nowhere suitable near Nicosia ( due to the close proximity of TR occupied zones and the inability to approach take off with out getting close to TR 'controlled' airspace) .



Topographically the 'south' was restricted in sites..



The British had airspace 'rights to the west ( Akrotiri) and east - Kingsfield and Dhekelia.



So, Nicosia 'international' had to be situated 50 km south of Nicosia.



The land was used for a public works project..



What is WRONG is that the 'rump' RoC have refused to pay out - siting this can only be part of an agreement :(

mmmmmm



Joined: 19/12/2008
Posts: 8398

Message Posted:
18/11/2009 22:00

or citing even :(

andy-f


Joined: 03/05/2009
Posts: 1256

Message Posted:
18/11/2009 23:35

waw even the mighty mark makes spelling mistakes!

mmmmmm



Joined: 19/12/2008
Posts: 8398

Message Posted:
19/11/2009 00:24

I make LOADS.... I KEEP asking for an edit facility

Geoff


Joined: 25/06/2008
Posts: 1370

Message Posted:
19/11/2009 08:40

Yes! Spellcheck would be useful. What say Izzet??

HildySmith


Joined: 02/07/2009
Posts: 1708

Message Posted:
19/11/2009 09:05

I was told that a TC also owns land which is where the hospital is based in the south - is this correct. What will the GC's do about 'guaranteeing' the TC's the same rights as GC's????

Texas


Joined: 22/09/2009
Posts: 634

Message Posted:
19/11/2009 09:24

I understand that land needs to be compulsory purchased for projects such as hospitals and airports. This happens everywhere.



How come, when we need land for an equally necessary project, such as a descalination plant, and we need to "use" Greek Cypriot land in the North, the GC's force the project to be halted?

Chegwin


Joined: 24/03/2009
Posts: 775

Message Posted:
19/11/2009 09:30

Geoff and all the Ems.

Why not write your notes out on word then do whatever editing you require then cut and paste?

Just a thought.

Chegs

mamachina


Joined: 22/11/2008
Posts: 730

Message Posted:
19/11/2009 09:51

Thanks everyone - still a little confused but basically they can do what they like and we this side cant?

phylray



Joined: 21/09/2007
Posts: 1727

Message Posted:
19/11/2009 09:56

I have wondered about this too, and am tired of telling people who have read the much publicised

news reports of G.C owned land/houses in the north, that T.C's own land in the South too, and

explaining that my property is not built on G.C land.

mamachina


Joined: 22/11/2008
Posts: 730

Message Posted:
19/11/2009 10:03

Perhaps we should club together and do large posters detailing "facts" - or what goes for facts over here - or some way of putting more people straight on to both sides of the story????? = Put them up in undergroundd stations - might cause an awful fuss from the GC's but even that might helpt!!! I just get so tired of explaining to visitors who come over that "yes, there were atrocities - on both sides" "Yes, the Orams case is a problem, but there iare land/houses to the south that belong to TC's in just the same way" etc etc etc Oh for szome sort of a settlement, Im getting to the stage I dont really care which way it goes as long as it goes, and we can get on sorting life out.

mmmmmm



Joined: 19/12/2008
Posts: 8398

Message Posted:
19/11/2009 10:36

Dear mamachina



but there were mechanism for TCs to move back.. it took the ECHR decisions and fines to get TR to do ANYTHING..



Even then they didn't pay out and please tell me where one TC/ Turk has been moved out of a property owned by a GC ..





OH YES, there are 'wrongs' both sides.. but Can a GC - in the 'rump' RoC sell his 'refugee status property' to a non Cypriot for private gain .... NO..



If we are talking 'balance' let's get the 'wrongs' in perspective..



Where has the wholesale 'selling' of property - still legally owned by Cypriots - for private gain - occurred ?

malsancak


Joined: 23/08/2009
Posts: 2874

Message Posted:
19/11/2009 11:24

Hi M6, perhaps you'd like to read this account of TC homes in the south being demolished in 1974 and later

http://www.diplomaticobserver.com/news_read.asp?id=836

It's a long read because it contains so many accounts of TC homes being destroyed. Why is this not an issue? The GC propaganda machine seems to grind out so many accounts of TC illegal acts that sometimes you forget what they did to TC homes. It's time to redress this a bit I think.

Texas


Joined: 22/09/2009
Posts: 634

Message Posted:
19/11/2009 12:00

Mark



You make a fiar point, re: "Wholesale selling". But, even though this is a wrong, the TC's had to, and still have to find ways of financially supporting themselves. We have a beautiful island, but cannot compete in getting enough tourists, etc.



Whether or not, the isolations are self-imposed, regardless of trying to do a deal with the GC's. TC's need to survive.



I accept, they do not need to spend their funds on new Mercs, etc. But I would like to see a TC that sells his exchange property, give up his/her rights to their TC property in the South. This could be a possible part-solution to the property issue. You never know, us Brits, might come out of this in profit! (Assuming the TC property in the South becomes "ours" in the event of a solution).

mmmmmm



Joined: 19/12/2008
Posts: 8398

Message Posted:
20/11/2009 02:02

Dear Mal,



re msg 18



I haver read only the first line of the article you refer to and found the first fib, already..and you were talking 'propaganda'?!! ;)



>>Following the TRNC Council of Ministers decision on 23 April 2003 to open the borders,<<



You mean TURKEY had to open the UN cease fire line to all Cypriots because a TC had taken them to the ECHR and won the right to move freely... ?





I'll read more and revert.. but not a good start, you'll agree?

mmmmmm



Joined: 19/12/2008
Posts: 8398

Message Posted:
20/11/2009 02:12

OK, I've read on...



Mosques.. you'd know that over a hundred Mosques are kept in usable condition by a specific govt dept?



Yup, there are many villages that are TC where the houses have fallen into disrepair - but no wholesale selling for profit to third parties .. wouldn't you agree ?



Wouldn't you agree that it has been possible for some TCs to reclaim their occupied properties - it isn't easy .. the six month residency rule [ in the 'south'] isn't 'fair' - but there has been a mechanism in place.. WITHOUT the ECHR forcing the issue.



YES, there were TC areas with their has been building ( LCA airport), MacKenzie beach area in Larnaca.. but NO wholesale selling for profit .. wouldn't you agree?



One side has obviously tried to maintain TC property rights... t'other has claimed they were 'exchanged'... wouldn't you agree an exchange is a mutually agreed contract ?

malsancak


Joined: 23/08/2009
Posts: 2874

Message Posted:
20/11/2009 02:24

oh m6, you disappoint me