VZCZCXRO9486
RR RUEHSR
DE RUEHNC #0440/01 0821613
ZNY CCCCC ZZH
R 231613Z MAR 06
FM AMEMBASSY NICOSIA
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC 5739
INFO RUEHAK/AMEMBASSY ANKARA 4591
RUEHTH/AMEMBASSY ATHENS 3535
RUEHLO/AMEMBASSY LONDON 1150
RUEHVI/AMEMBASSY VIENNA 0436
RUEHSR/AMCONSUL STRASBOURG 0001
RUCNDT/USMISSION USUN NEW YORK 0494
RUEHBS/USEU BRUSSELS

C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 03 NICOSIA 000440 
 
SIPDIS 
 
SIPDIS 
 
E.O. 12958: DECL: 03/22/2016 
TAGS: PREL PGOV PHUM CY
SUBJECT: TURKISH CYPRIOTS MEET ECHR DEADLINE FOR 
ESTABLISHING PROPERTY COMMISSION, BUT WILL ANYONE NOTICE? 
 
REF: 05 NICOSIA 1886 
 
Classified By: Ambassador Ronald L. Schlicher; Reasons 1.4 (b) and (d) 
 
¶1.  (C)  SUMMARY:  Turkish Cypriot authorities have met the 
European Court of Human Rights' (ECHR) deadline for revising 
the property compensation commission that the court had 
earlier ruled inadequate to be considered an effective 
domestic remedy.  The new commission has a more diverse 
membership -- including two foreigners -- and new powers 
based on a law approved by the Turkish Cypriot "parliament" 
in December.  There are real questions, however, as to 
whether the new-look commission will cross the ECHR's 
threshold of credibility and whether Greek Cypriots would be 
willing to seek redress through a Turkish Cypriot institution 
under any circumstances.  The lawyer for the plaintiff in the 
most recent ECHR ruling, Xenides-Arestis vs. Turkey, publicly 
expressed confidence that the court would refuse to endorse 
the commission.  Others on the Greek Cypriot side seem less 
certain, and a group of hard-line lawyers representing a 
large number of clients with pending (and now frozen) cases 
before the ECHR sent a letter to the court seeking a right to 
appeal the Arestis decision and attacking the credibility and 
integrity of a number of the judges on the panel.  No matter 
how the ECHR ultimately rules on this case, the wave of 
bitter and complicated property litigation is unlikely to 
abate anytime soon.  END SUMMARY. 
 
Commission Announced Just In Time 
--------------------------------- 
 
¶2. (C) On March 21, the "TRNC" announced the establishment a 
Property Commission designed to adjudicate Greek Cypriot 
claims for restitution of and/or compensation for their 
property in the north (ref A).  The Commission was 
established under a December 2005 Turkish Cypriot law passed 
to comply with the ECHR's Xenedis-Arestis ruling, which 
required Turkey (and its "subordinate local administration," 
the "TRNC") to establish "effective domestic remedy" for 
Greek Cypriot property claims arising from Turkey's 1974 
military intervention and subsequent occupation of one-third 
of the island.  In its ruling, the Court had laid out several 
specific criteria -- such as the real possibility of 
restitution and a more transparent, impartial 
claims-adjudication body -- for any new Property Commission 
to be considered "effective."   The Court gave Turkey three 
months to design a system that would comply with this ruling 
(the March 21 announcement of the establishment and 
composition of the Commission squeaked in just under this 
deadline) and another three months to implement it in full. 
Pending this, the Court has put on hold the approximately 
1400 additional Greek Cypriot complaints against Turkey known 
collectively as "Loizidou Clones." 
 
¶3. (C) The new Commission will theoretically be able to order 
the return of property to pre-1974 Greek Cypriot owners, 
although the law provides for several limitations on this 
power.  Property being used by the Turkish military, for 
example, will be exempt from restitution.  In cases where 
restitution is not granted, the Commission will have the 
power to grant compensation to the Greek Cypriot owners, 
either in the form of alternative property or payment based 
on market value.  The Commission consists of five Turkish 
Cypriots and two foreigners (Hans Christian Kruger and Daniel 
Tarschys of Sweden -- a former Deputy General Secretary and 
former General Secretary of the Council of Europe, 
respectively).  Turkish Cypriot observers suggest that the 
membership of the Commission has been carefully calibrated to 
include women and men, friends and opponents of the ruling 
CTP, and a smattering of apparently credible foreigners. 
This, according to one advisor close to "President" Talat, 
means the Commission will be "neither too harsh nor too 
generous" with Greek Cypriot claims. 
 
Will It Pass Muster?  Will Greek Cypriots Apply? 
--------------------------------------------- --- 
 
¶4. (C) It remains to be seen, however, whether this 
Commission will meet the ECHR standards as "effective local 
remedy."  Greek Cypriot property lawyer Achilleas 
Demetriades, who represents Xenedis-Arestis, has publicly 
asserted that the new Commission will not be accepted by the 
Court -- and many Turkish Cypriot observers quietly share his 
doubts.  Given the restrictions written into the Turkish 
Cypriot law, it is unclear how much property the Commission 
 
NICOSIA 00000440  002 OF 003 
 
 
will actually be able to return to Greek Cypriot owners (as 
opposed to offering compensation); meaningful restitution is 
a key element of the criteria spelled out by the ECHR last 
year. 
 
¶5. (C) Turkish Cypriot lawyers suggest the ECHR will have no 
grounds to make a ruling on the Commission until it has 
started working and they can see whether it is as effective 
in practice as Turkish Cypriots claim it is on paper.  The 
procedure can only work when an application is made.  For 
example, it is unclear what level of compensation will be 
acceptable to the Court in cases where restitution is denied. 
 Although the Turkish Cypriots insist that Ankara (which is 
eager to wash its hands of responsibility for Cyprus property 
by supporting a "TRNC" domestic remedy) is willing to pay all 
the costs of the new Commission, it seems unlikely that 
either the Commission or the GOT will be willing or able to 
foot the bill for multiple, multi-million dollar compensation 
packages.  If the new Commission low-balls too much, the ECHR 
could balk. 
 
¶6.  (C) Hoping to force the issue (and repulsed by the idea 
of having to apply to a "TRNC" body to get their houses 
back), seven Greek Cypriot lawyers representing approximately 
1000 of the 1400 refugees with applications pending before 
the court announced last week their intention to appeal the 
Arestis decision allowing Turkey the chance to establish 
effective local remedy.  In their letter to the Court, the 
lawyers reportedly called into question the credibility and 
objectivity of the ECHR President and an ECHR judge, claiming 
to have "evidence" that the two ECHR judges accepted personal 
visits from the Turkish Ambassador to Luxembourg. 
 
¶7. (C) It is not clear that this appeal will go anywhere, 
however.  As Cyprus' Attorney General has noted, these 
lawyers have no grounds for appeal because they represent 
neither the plaintiff (Arestis) nor the respondent (Turkey). 
Indeed, Arestis' lawyer, Demetriades, has publicly 
discouraged this group from further action, arguing -- among 
other things -- that personal attacks against the Court and 
its Judges could damage the Greek Cypriot cause at the ECHR. 
 
¶8. (C) It is also an open question whether Greek Cypriots 
will be willing to apply to the Commission.  Some on both 
sides of the Green Line have even expressed doubts as to 
whether Arestis herself will apply to the Commission.  One 
Turkish Cypriot legal expert warned that, if Arestis did not 
apply and refused to discuss a 'friendly settlement' with the 
"TRNC," she would be forced to wait for a comprehensive 
solution to the Cyprus problem before settling her case. 
Indeed, many Greek Cypriots share the Government of Cyprus's 
opposition to any act (such as filing an application for 
compensation or restitution) that would legitimize in any way 
an organ of the "occupation regime."  There are also rumors 
that the government may consider introducing legislation 
expressly forbidding ROC citizens from applying to the 
Commission.  If this works, the Turkish Cypriot side could, 
by default, appear blameless by having attempted to fulfill 
its duty to the ECHR.  In such a case however, the question 
of whether the new Turkish Cypriot "local remedy" is 
"effective" could conceivably be postponed indefinitely. 
Most Turkish Cypriot sources believe this to be a highly 
unlikely scenario, and feel the Commission will be tested 
soon.  Those legal experts close the "TRNC government" have 
told us that the Commission has already received applications 
for restitution/compensation from Greek Cypriots, albeit 
anonymously. 
 
Turkish Cypriot Opposition Files Challenges 
------------------------------------------- 
 
¶9.  (C) Meanwhile -- despite reports of heavy political 
pressure from the AKP to let the law stand -- the main 
nationalist opposition grouping, the UBP, has filed a 
constitutional appeal to the "TRNC's" highest court.  UBP 
accused the ruling CTP of caving into pressure from the Greek 
Cypriots, and speaks on behalf of many Turkish Cypriots when 
it says the individual restitution of property in the north 
(up to 80 percent of which is Greek-owned) could open a 
Pandora's box and leave the Turkish Cypriots displaced from 
their homes -- without any of the benefits they might have 
gained had the property question been settled in the context 
of a comprehensive Cyprus settlement.  Furthermore, UBP 
argues that the law is "unconstitutional" in that it allows 
redress for pecuniary damages -- an act tantamount to an 
 
NICOSIA 00000440  003 OF 003 
 
 
admission of guilt by the Turkish Cypriot side. 
 
¶10. (C) From the other end of the spectrum, the TKP (a tiny, 
far-left Turkish Cypriot opposition party) has also filed a 
complaint claiming that the Property Commission absolves 
Turkey of its responsibility for the Cyprus property 
question, leaving innocent Turkish Cypriots vulnerable. 
Turkish Cypriot legal experts doubt these challenges will 
overturn the law, however, although they do represent a 
political embarrassment to "President" Talat and the ruling 
CTP, which drafted the law. 
 
COMMENT 
------- 
 
¶11.  (C)  A ruling by the ECHR that the Turkish Cypriot 
Property Commission, in fact, constituted an "effective local 
remedy" would have enormous political repercussions on 
Cyprus.  ECHR legitimization of a "TRNC" institution (even 
indirectly as a "subordinate" entity of Turkey) would 
constitute a landmark victory for Turkish Cypriots, who have 
long resisted Greek Cypriot efforts to portray the Cyprus 
problem as a dispute between two sovereign states -- the ROC 
and Turkey -- rather than a conflict between the two 
communities on the island.  An ECHR ruling that forced Greek 
Cypriots to deal directly with Turkish Cypriot authorities 
would be a major political boost to the "TRNC."  This outcome 
is far from certain, however.  Furthermore, even if the Court 
accepts the Commission, Greek Cypriots are certain to return 
to the ECHR with challenges to the fairness of its future 
rulings.  The current wave of bitter and complicated property 
litigation (by both communities over land north and south) is 
unlikely to abate.  END COMMENT. 
SCHLICHER