Interview at Famagusta.News, on the occasion of the 46th anniversary of the black anniversary of the occupation of Famagusta, was granted by the lawyer, human rights expert, Achilleas Dimitriadis, who stressed the need for urgent pressure from the owners on the issue of Famagusta. He stressed, in fact, that Varosi is the beacon of the solution of the Cyprus problem and that if this beacon goes out, then the path to the solution has been lost.
Read the interview as it is:
The provocative actions of Turkey and the pseudo-state have intensified recently regarding the opening of the enclosed city of Varos. You have made repeated statements on how the Greek Cypriot side should move in order to prevent any accomplishments. What is your opinion?
I believe that our side, together with the political movements in the United Nations and the European Union for the resumption of talks, should have a plan to shield the property of the people of Varosi so that they can hope for their return, since Varosi, for the time being, is uninhabited.
This begins with the people of Varosi updating their ownership certificates and if their property is written on a company to update the directors and shareholders. They must have 2020 ownership certificates.
They must then decide whether to appeal to the Turkish Real Estate Commission (EAI) based in occupied Nicosia. Everyone must remember that only Turkey is north of the ceasefire line. Subordinate local government is not a state and the actions of individuals applying to the EAI cannot constitute recognition of a state. Besides, many of these have already been told to us by the ECtHR in the case of Loizidou vs Turkey.
How much ally is time?
In my opinion, the passage of time and inaction do not help the case of the return of the people of Varos. First, they are decreasing every year and second, EVKAF has prepared a plan which it has already implemented. If we do not deal with it, Varosi will remain in EVKAF as he wrongly claims and so he will proceed to develop it.
What is your position on the handling of specific cases in the ECtHR on the issue of Famagusta and the occupied properties in general?
Since October 2016, the State has made, without explanation, a change in its policy (since 1989) to help Cypriots against Turkey in the ECHR. I still do not understand why, but the fact remains that in the case of the Coma of Gialos he left the Applicant, who finally won and in fact received restoration for two of her properties. No help in the press. Finally, in the case of Varos he has a subdued support of 2½ pages. In fact, in the latter he asks for the Land Registry and € 3,000 to give an estimate, which is unprecedented.
It is worth emphasizing here that the issue of the amount of compensation is very important. Based on what values will the rent losses be calculated? With those of the occupied or with those of the free areas? There is a big difference and a bigger responsibility of the State for the non-cooperation of the Land Registry.
You repeatedly urge a group appeal of those who own property on the coastal front of Varos. Could this be, at least in part, a brake on Turkish provocation?
Turkey wants to open Varosi to use and develop the coastal front. So if we can stop this growth then there is a chance it will not open.
The only legal way to get to the ECtHR is to apply to the EAI where the landlord or heir will ask for: (a) a return and (b) the missing rents from 1974. I do not advise people to sell their property. Just to claim it. I believe that the Municipality, the EVEA and Famagusta lawyers can help him do it, if he decides of course.
How groundless can Turkey-pseudo-state claims about EVKAF assets be legally?
According to Turkish Cypriot law since 2005, the EVKAF, by a court decision of the Famagusta District Court of the local administration subordinated to Turkey, allegedly decided that a large part of Varos belongs to the EVKAF. This must be overthrown. This reversal can only take place in the ECtHR. There is already a case where as I mentioned above, the State is sluggish but the effort continues.
Dr Kucuk and Mr Denktash received (on behalf of the Turkish Community, including EVKAF)) 1960 1.500.000 from the British Crown in XNUMX to settle all claims for damage to their property. Now they have changed their minds! We must prove this colonial compromise that is in "Annex U" of the Establishment Treaty before the ECtHR. If we do not, Varosi stays in EVKAF!
Although many have in the past accused the Famagusta effort of being "Familiarization of the Cyprus problem", the issue of Famagusta remains a predominantly humanitarian problem. How should the issue of Varos be treated from the perspective of a human rights lawyer?
Varosi is the perfect legal case to claim restoration because there is no one inside - there is no user.
In order to go to the ECtHR, one must first exhaust the Turkish domestic remedies within the occupied territories. This starts with EAI and continues in the Courts there. If you do not apply you (legal speakers) can not claim a return against Turkey. Do you think it is a coincidence that they talk about the 280 applications to EAI? Unfortunately, we have already been warned about what they are planning. We must react.
Of course, this is everyone's choice. After 46 years of inaction of the State, I believe it is time for the owners to take action, if of course they want to return. If they only want compensation, then they can wait for the solution of the Cyprus problem.
A message for the people of Famagusta.
Varosi is the beacon of the solution of the Cyprus problem. If this lighthouse goes out, then the path to the solution is lost.
Famagusta.News