North Cyprus resident 'not Turkish Cypriot'

A Cyprus Supreme Court judgement denying the return of property in the south of the island to a Turkish Cypriot living in the north has brought a torrent of criticism from Turkish Cypriots.
Ahmet Suleyman had been claiming return of his Limassol property plus compensation of £3,680 for use of part of it for roadworks. He had moved to the north of the island following the Turkish invasion in 1974 but now wished to make use of freer movement between the north and the south.

The case was similar to but not identical to that of Turkish Cypriot Arif Mustafa who has won his fight for return of his home in the southern part of the island – a mirror image of cases taken to the European Court of Human Rights by Greek Cypriots who had been forced to desert properties in the north in the aftermath of the 1974 invasion.

Although the original 2004 Cyprus Supreme Court decision requiring return of Mustafa’s house and orchard in the village of Episkopi, near Limassol was originally blocked by the Cyprus Government, it subsequently dropped its objections. And shortly afterwards it announced new property rights for Turkish Cypriot refugees who had returned to the south.

The crucial difference between the Mustafa case and that of Suleyman, is that Suleyman still lives in the north of the island. That meant he was not in a part of the island controlled by the Republic of Cyprus and was therefore not recognised by Cyprus law as a ‘Turkish Cypriot’, said Supreme Court Judge Frixos Nicolaides.

His property will remain with the Guardian of Turkish Cypriot Properties pending reunification of the island.

Turkish Cypriot message boards were soon buzzing with indignation that the judge should have implied that living in an occupied area of the island made Turkish Cypriots ‘guilty’ of some unspecified crime.

‘In any civilised country such a ruling would be greeted with disbelief’, said one comment. ‘Talk about bending the law’.

However, a similar argument was used in the UK High Court in 2006 to save a property in the north from seizure. Greek Cypriot Meletios Apostolides won a decision in Cyprus courts requiring the British owners of a house constructed on land he had abandoned in 1974 to have the property demolished and compensation paid.

Because of the partition of the island the judgements could not be enforced. However, when Cyprus joined the EU, Apostolides took his case to the High Court, seeking enforcement in the UK.

High Court ruled in favour of the British couple, David and Linda Orams, who had bought the property. Mr Justice Jack held that the Cyprus judgement against the Orams was not enforceable in English courts as in its EU accession treaty the Cyprus Government had signed a protocol admitting it did not have jurisdiction over the occupied north of the island.