Will restitution be the answer to the Cyprus problem

rosie123


Joined: 26/05/2008
Posts: 70

Message Posted:
30/05/2008 13:59

Quote from Mehmet Ali Talat,there are three options under which the land/property issue can be resolved,Compensation,Exchange or Restitution.

Or am i going over old ground ?

Rosie

millzer


Joined: 12/04/2007
Posts: 978

Message Posted:
30/05/2008 15:23

It is slightly old ground, but my understanding of this statement is he doesn't mean that pre-74 owners will have the choice of ANY of the three options! In some instances there may only be one option.

artoned


Joined: 19/02/2008
Posts: 17

Message Posted:
30/05/2008 16:00

what problem there is not one, life here is great you know what they say if it is not broke don't fix it,let them keep talking nothing much will happen.

ilovecyprus


Joined: 08/05/2007
Posts: 2880

Message Posted:
30/05/2008 17:52

Not sure if Talat is referring to the Annan plan. It's possible as this is the basis for TC negotiations. My sketchy understanding of this is:



Compensation to those who cannot return to their land due to the land being upgraded/enhanced by the current occupiers.



Exchange of land between those in North and South who agree to do so



Repatriation for those whose land or property is unoccupied or unenhanced



I think time will play a part in this as well. Those who have only recently occupied property (bought property) may well be penalised in some way.

ilovecyprus


Joined: 08/05/2007
Posts: 2880

Message Posted:
30/05/2008 18:00

ps 'Time' might be used by both leaders to give priority to all Cypriots in matters of property. Although not always precise, time could be used to favour Cypriots on both sides over foreign purchasers, as many overseas buyers have only made recent purchases.

wynyardman



Joined: 15/12/2007
Posts: 4580

Message Posted:
30/05/2008 19:53

Hi All,



My view, given that it is a compromise situation,is that as long as people are adequately

compensated, in whatever form it may take, is just, then there is little more that Governments, can do.



wyn

rosie123


Joined: 26/05/2008
Posts: 70

Message Posted:
30/05/2008 20:35

Wyn,i like to think you are correct,but could they say,no compensation for you,you knew the risks,as you say on another posting,you pays your money

PtePike



Joined: 20/05/2008
Posts: 2334

Message Posted:
30/05/2008 21:26

Msg 7



Surely compensation should go to the person who was wronged, not someone who cashed in on the refugee's misfortune?



ES

rosie123


Joined: 26/05/2008
Posts: 70

Message Posted:
30/05/2008 22:50

POST 9,are we now getting the true feelings of the locals and how they feel about us British,or am i taking your post the wrong way.

Rosie

wynyardman



Joined: 15/12/2007
Posts: 4580

Message Posted:
30/05/2008 23:14

rosie123,



I felt that what Mr Talet meant was, a just settlement, where everyone was adequatley compensated, and no one loses out, but of course that has to be within the confines of an overall settlement, which may well be what everyone hoped for.



I fail to see that he could be any more straight forward.

wyn

Aussie


Joined: 17/06/2007
Posts: 657

Message Posted:
31/05/2008 01:14

Logically subsequent owners should inherit the same type of rights as the first Turkish Cypriot owner who received TRNC land in exchange for property in the South, which seemed to be the case udner Annan.



To deny The Turkish Cyriot owners the right to sell and deal with this property as they see fit would at the very least substantially reduce their freedom of action and the value of their property. What is the value of a property you can't sell for over 34 years regardless of circumstances ?



In any compensation deal the large number of Turkish properties in the South should go a long way to covering any compensation payable.



The number of Greek cypriots who were allowed to permanently live in the Turkish state was also limited I think to 10% so presumably large scale return of GC's will not be on the agenda this time either, except for land transferred to the GC State such as Varosha etc.



Of course this is all highly hypothetical.



Aussie

Lemtich



Joined: 15/02/2007
Posts: 1487

Message Posted:
31/05/2008 02:50

This land issue is really the elephant in the room for all of us who have bought on developments on "exchange land" in North Cyprus.



Now this may sound harsh, but I believe that if a GC refugee wishes to reclaim their land and it has been subsequently been built on, then compensatation should be paid to them as to its value as building land before construction.



No one expects developments that have taken place over the last 30 odd years to be demolished and equally those who could have sold the land for development if there hadn't been the 1974 forced relocation, can't really expect more in compensation than those who currently sold that land for development.



In the UK, many land owners have sold land to builders, they receive the going rate for building land with planning permission, they don't receive the value of the land after properties have been built on it.



I know my property has been built on "exchange land". When I saw it in 2005, it was a scrubby field with a few rows of trees, Google Earth still shows the location as it was.



If the GC former owner requires compensation to be paid to them for the loss of that scrubby field, I will pay my share of what the current market value of that land is as seen.



I know there is a lot of history attached to this issue and a lot of grievance. I personally had no part in that. But what has happened cannot be undone, there is no legal answer to this land issue now, only a political one that encompasses all of Cyprus.



I am willing to pay my share of something in recognition to those who lost their land all those many years ago, it must have been hard rgen for all Cypriots., both of Turkish and Greek origin.



Lem

Aussie


Joined: 17/06/2007
Posts: 657

Message Posted:
31/05/2008 13:17

Lemtich



I agree that Greek Cypriots in a settlement should be paid the land value before it was developed. Computing this is of course difficult especially if you consider issues such as rezoning from farm to residential land etc which massively increased land value.



I do disagree that such payment should be up to the current owner. The whole idea of the exchange system was the Turkish lands in the south would be available to be sold or exchanged to pay compensation. Arguably if compensation is still payable after this and the TRNC governement with outside help doesn't pay why wouldn't the the cost fall on the Turkish Cypriot owner who sold you the land as they received the initial benefit and full market value on the resale to the current owner.



If the Turkish properties in the South aren't used to directly compensate Greek Cypriots who will get them ? If they revert to the original owner they will be double dipping getting property in the South and land sold for cash in the North





Aussie

eager


Joined: 23/02/2007
Posts: 1272

Message Posted:
31/05/2008 13:29

surely any compensation should be paid by the developers. They are the ones who bought the land in the first place, with the intention of building on it and thereby making profit.

Lemtich



Joined: 15/02/2007
Posts: 1487

Message Posted:
31/05/2008 15:28

I take your point about TCs and developers profitting from the sale of exchanged land, I think what I was trying to say was that the buck usually ends with the current owner whatever the situation.



Having said that, the point you made about TC land in the south deserves attention. This is where a political settlement rather than a legal one over land title would have to be negotiated.



Lem