Close Larnaca and Paphos airports

karakum5c



Joined: 18/03/2008
Posts: 1021

Message Posted:
02/05/2009 22:21

The TRNC government should find the original Turkish Cypriot farmers who used to own and farm the land both Larnaca and Paphos airports are built on. They should then go to the British courts demanding that all flights to the UK from the said airports should be banned untill they are demolished and runways dug up so the original owners can be allowed to graze their animals again. As the airports are government run they should demand that all ROC assets in the UK are frozen to pay compensation to previous owners, a very hefty rental would be due.

When successful they should then get the judgement enforced in every EU country, it would mean all flights to the ROC would have to go via Athens for a stop over.

Tootie


Joined: 28/08/2008
Posts: 2037

Message Posted:
03/05/2009 03:40

Im sorry but i cant see why this topic is sticky?

erolz


Joined: 17/11/2008
Posts: 3456

Message Posted:
03/05/2009 03:48

Nor does it make any legal sense to be honest. The RoC will and does simply claim that any land used for such projects that involved TC pre 74 land was subject to a legal compulsary purchase order, as land in any other country can be and is. And that the money 'paid' for this is being held in trust for the pre 74 TC owners pending a solution.



Now the pre 74 TC owners could try to gain fair recompense for their lost land under such a senario in RoC courts and if the RoC refused to give it or blantantly undervalued it at the time it was compulsary purchased they could pursed it futher through ECHR. Certainly they would have a good case that the RoC can not legaly deny them such recompense until a solution, nor place unreasonable demands like requiring they be resident in the south for 6 months before being able to pursue such a claim in the RoC.



What they can not do is stop the RoC taking the land under a compulsary purchase order , nor pursue anything in UK courts.

erolz


Joined: 17/11/2008
Posts: 3456

Message Posted:
03/05/2009 03:59

People seem to think this recent ruling must 'work both ways' but in many ways, it does not. They also seem to think that TC can take their land disputes re pre 74 TC land in the south to UK courts. They can not.



Even for TC that have land in the south that has been and continues to be used by GC post 74, they can not get a RoC ruling saying such use is illegal, if the RoC claims that such use was granted legaly to the GC under the RoCs 'property guardianship' laws.



First what a TC must do who has land being used in such a way would be to try and exhaust local (RoC) remedies for the use of their property without their permission and when they loose such cases in RoC courts challenge the legality of the RoC property guardianship laws in the ECHR who would then almost certainly requirw the RoC ammend those laws so as to allow for both fair compensation for previous use regardless of a general settlement and return without any pre conditional requirments on the pre 74 TC owner.

Tootie


Joined: 28/08/2008
Posts: 2037

Message Posted:
03/05/2009 04:01

Nobody can say or even try to predict what will become of all this.

But as long as we all wake up in the morning then everything else is what we all call History.







tootie x

pinkchilli


Joined: 30/11/2008
Posts: 689

Message Posted:
03/05/2009 08:34

Erolz



So, why would the "backers" of the Orams, not go down your route, which, with my very limited knowledge, seem an excellent option?

mikemans


Joined: 12/04/2009
Posts: 103

Message Posted:
03/05/2009 12:50

I seem to remember a few years ago a GC member of parliament asked where is the rent that is owed to TC owners that had been collected. The sum at that time was supposed to be about 1.5 billion cypriot pounds. The answer the MP got from his own government was that the money did not exist and no one could give an answer to the sorrution and loss of this money. The subject was reported I believe in Cyprus Times and was quitely allowed to fade away. Parhaps some of the GC readers here can expand a little on this strange phenomenen.

Coachie



Joined: 29/07/2008
Posts: 2135

Message Posted:
03/05/2009 14:09

Close them down..And what happens to the country..no tourists, no money, anarchy will prevail,then war will break out again. Yes,I know Ercan is in the north ,but that would never cope the number of flights.Not a practical idea really..

mmmmmm



Joined: 19/12/2008
Posts: 8398

Message Posted:
03/05/2009 15:08

Re msg 1



karakum5c



and WHY did the GCs NEED to develop Larnaca airport ? ...



and WHERE were they going to locate it ? Bearing in mind the topography of the island and the sudden disappearance of 37% of the land available ( and Tymbou ( Ercan) , Nicosia International and the presence of two UK landing strips on the southern coastal plain ?







Any more "great" ideas ?

erolz


Joined: 17/11/2008
Posts: 3456

Message Posted:
03/05/2009 15:31

pinkchilli



"So, why would the "backers" of the Orams, not go down your route, which, with my very limited knowledge, seem an excellent option?"



Sooner or later TC will start to persue claims against their lost land in the south and when they do so many cans of worms will open up. Issue about the legitimacy of RoC pre conditions on making claims, issues of abuses of use even under the RoC's property guardianship body , issues of the legitimacy of the property guardianship body itself, issues of amounts 'collected' on 'behalf' of pre 74 TC owners, issues on pre conditions for TC to claims such amounts and many more besides.



The main reason why TC have to date been more reticent to start such proceedings is in my opinion their belief that ultimately such things should and will be settled politicaly thropugh a settlement and not legaly on an indivdual basis. This may change following the ECJ ruling.

clayton


Joined: 30/11/2008
Posts: 1143

Message Posted:
03/05/2009 15:45

seems the gc want it all there own way.want it the greeks who started the war,then got their arses kicked.then decided to go all legal.might be wrong but reading theforum seems that way to me.by the way got nothing against greeks yet been on holiday there many times.

mmmmmm



Joined: 19/12/2008
Posts: 8398

Message Posted:
03/05/2009 16:23

Dear ErolZ re 10



But TCs HAVE and ARE taking legal action in the "rump" RoC and several cases were settled out of Court ..



I have often said that the RoC guardianship system was abused - but in general the RoC have not allowed a "refugee" to sell on land owned ( still ) by a TC for private gain - it can only be moved on to another"refugee" - and the understanding is that the property is held in trust for the TC - pending a settlement.



re msg 11

Clayton



You must have been VERY selective when reading posts:



1/ Which "War" was started by Greeks? Are you referring to the Grek Junta inspired Coup - which more than half of GCs fought against ? .. Or the "war" when TR invaded and managed to unite GCs who had been fighting each other two weeks beforehand?



2/ The UN reminded GREECE and TURKEY that the UN was mandated to keep peace... The UN ruled that Cyprus was a sovereign state and all third party states should withdraw.



3/ "TRNC" is illegally invalid - UN - but self

mmmmmm



Joined: 19/12/2008
Posts: 8398

Message Posted:
03/05/2009 16:25

( cont) from 12



Self inflicted " wound" - that allows GCs to legally bash TCs over the head.

Carbotec


Joined: 28/02/2009
Posts: 98

Message Posted:
03/05/2009 16:46

Have non of you heard of the "spoils of war" do I need to say more?

Middle Easter


Joined: 13/06/2007
Posts: 146

Message Posted:
03/05/2009 20:36

m's



May I apologise for some of the 'no so smart' postings that surround you own, which take an opposing view. Nevertheless, I really think your own version is somewhat biased in both phrasing & choice of words.



In response to your points:



1) If GC's turned their attention from fighting vs. each other in 2 wks, to fighting the TC, then they were an unstable bunch, eh? Before Turkey intervened were the GC were purely fighting each other? of course not, from '63 EOKA made substantial bloody raids against TC's resulting in virtual division of the 2 communities



2) Correct. From '60 Greece & Turkey were mandated to keep the peace & intervene should violence erupt. This is why Turkey intervened & the Island is separated as it is now. I am not saying I agree with the position, but there were many atrocities committed by both sides & thank goodness the violence has stopped.



3) I hardly think the legality of the TRNC was a paramount thought when Turkey had to intervene.......

mmmmmm



Joined: 19/12/2008
Posts: 8398

Message Posted:
03/06/2009 22:18

Dear M-E re msg 15



>>>If GC's turned their attention from fighting vs. each other in 2 wks, to fighting the TC, then they were an unstable bunch, eh<<<<<



Oh dear.. not too clued up on CY Historical FACTS, are we...?



1/ FACT: EOKA were mainly GCs fighting for independence from the UK



2 / FACT: EOKA B were mainly GCs fighting the left wing and Makarios - supported by a rt wing Greek Military Junta - who had no respect for the elected representation.



3/ FACT: Many "unstable" GCs were pro rapproachment viz a vis TCs and lost their lives / were injured fighting fascist EOKA "supporters" ... I could quote you one GC whose family were ejected from North Nicosia in 63 - and were ejected in Aug 74 whilst recovering from injuries inflicted by EOKA-B.... He had no problem with TCs one day and hated fascist GCs and Greeks, but ended up "hating" Turks , too ... He isn't unstable..

mmmmmm



Joined: 19/12/2008
Posts: 8398

Message Posted:
03/06/2009 22:23

cont from msg 16



4/ FACT: both Greece and Turkey were and still are members of the UN and AGREED that the UN should be the peace-keepers .. whilst running guns to "their " faction .. if they hadn't indulged in gun running - there wouldn't have BEEN so much fighting - both sides had "agendas"





5/ Could you help us decide WHO kicked off the riots and ethnic cleaning of '63 - it is not clear cut..





6/ "TRNC" didn't "exist" under '83 .. TR intervened in '74



When you are up on CY history - THEN - you can comment on any "bias" your perceive" ..