Notice: This is the official website of the All Empires History Community (Reg. 10 Feb 2002)

  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Register Register  Login Login

A scientific Peace Plan for Cyprus

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  12>
Author
iskenderani View Drop Down
Baron
Baron
Avatar

Joined: 24-Mar-2005
Location: Greece
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 449
  Quote iskenderani Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: A scientific Peace Plan for Cyprus
    Posted: 18-Sep-2005 at 14:07

INTERNATIONAL EXPERT PANEL

CONVENED BY

THE COMMITTEE FOR A EUROPEAN SOLUTION IN CYPRUS

 

A principled basis for a just and lasting Cyprus settlement in the light of International and European Law

 Preamble

1.         The purpose of this Report, prepared by an International Expert Panel, is to seek a just Cyprus settlement providing for the peaceful and prosperous future of all the people of the island. In order to do this, one must apply the key principles drawn from international and European law which apply in the settlement of international disputes, including disputes concerning members of the European Union. Such principles lie at the heart of international and European law. Failure to respect such principles is likely not only to prejudice the success of any particular settlement plan by internalising contradictions with international law and thus weakening its sustainability, but also to constitute a destabilising element for the future. The precedent of a political settlement contrary to accepted international and European legal principles may well be resorted to in other dispute situations with serious consequences for the stability of the international order.

 

2.         The fundamental principles of international and European law offer a unique guide and methodology by which to initiate and successfully conclude a process leading to a Cyprus settlement within the framework of a new and genuinely Cypriot Constitution in accordance with the right of self-determination. This is at the very core of a European solution for Cyprus, consistent with international and European law.

 

3.         The solution of the Cyprus problem must be found by respecting and applying the fundamental principles on which international law and the European Union are founded: these are in brief, the peaceful settlement of disputes; the sovereignty, independence and equality of states; the prohibition of aggression and the non-recognition of its consequences; and respect for human rights, liberty, democracy and the rule of law. Both the present state of affairs in Cyprus and the terms of the current Annan Plan are inconsistent with these fundamental principles. It is also essential to arrive at a solution that fully respects the need for the reconciliation of, and cooperation between, the communities and all relevant parties.

 4.         The European Union is called upon to seize this historic opportunity and to assume its special responsibility for actively helping to put in motion a process of constitution-making that will finally allow the Republic of Cyprus, as a member state, to recover full sovereignty and independence and to establish peacefully a constitutional order respecting the above mentioned principles, and based on full respect for diversity.

 Basic facts

5.         The Republic of Cyprus came to independence in 1960 by virtue of a series of international agreements. However, unlike other decolonised territories, it was subject to Treaty of Guarantee provisions in favour of the United Kingdom, Turkey and Greece. In 1974, Turkey, invoking the coup by the Greek Junta against the legitimate Cypriot government of Archbishop Makarios, invaded and proceeded to occupy northern Cyprus. This initial action, however, hardened into a prolonged and continuing occupation which has now continued for over 30 years and which has involved a series of human rights violations as attested by the organs of the European Convention of Human Right.[1] Since 1974, Cyprus has been  de facto divided into the Republic of Cyprus recognized by the international community and the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus, an entity[2] declared invalid by UN Security Council resolutions 541 (1983) and 550 (1984) and recognized and sustained only by Turkey. While roughly half of the Turkish Cypriot community has emigrated since the 1974 events, mainly to the United Kingdom, more than 120,000 Turkish settlers are now living in northern Cyprus, transforming the Turkish Cypriots into a minority within their own constituency. The population of Cyprus at present (settlers apart) is 802,500 of whom some 80% are Greek Cypriots, 11% are Turkish Cypriots (this figure was 18% in 1974) and 9% are Armenians, Maronites, Latins and alien residents.

6.         The Annan Plan as presented in its final version by the Secretary General of the United Nations on 31 March 2004 provided for a federal state, the United Republic of Cyprus, replacing and abolishing the existing Republic of Cyprus and incorporating the occupied northern area. On 24 April 2004, two separate referendums were held. While 65% of the Turkish Cypriot and settler voters in the occupied north accepted the Annan plan, 76% of their Greek Cypriot counterparts in the Republic of Cyprus rejected it. On May 1st, 2004, the Republic of Cyprus as a whole became a member state of the European Union. An Additional Protocol to the Treaty of Accession provided for the temporary suspension of the acquis communautaire in the occupied areas. Negotiations on Turkeys accession are about to start.

The Fundamental Principles

1.      The Peaceful Settlement of Disputes

a) The Meaning of the Principle

7.         Article 2 (3) of the United Nations Charter provides that; All members shall settle their international disputes by peaceful means in such a manner that international peace and security and justice are not endangered. Accordingly, a settlement that does, or appears likely to, endanger international peace and stability and is inconsistent with accepted standards of justice cannot be consistent with the obligations upon all states laid down in the Charter.[3]

b) Annan Plan Deficiencies

8.         The terms of the Annan Plan would in fact have embedded instability into the heart of a Cyprus settlement and would inevitably have led to increasing friction and destabilisation. This is underlined by the provisions concerning the position of foreign nationals with effective control over key areas of governmental activities in Cyprus. Examples where non-Cypriots would (in the event of disagreement between the equal numbers of Greek and Turkish Cypriots) have effective control appeared to include the Reconciliation Commission; the Supreme Court invested with legislative and executive powers; the Central Bank; the Relocation Board; the Property Court and the organs of the Property Board. Bearing in mind the experience of the period 1960-63, the need for stability in the ordering of governmental activities is critical. Further, the foreign nationals concerned would not be democratically accountable to the people of Cyprus.

9.         Any settlement of an international dispute must also be in accord with justice. This point is noted below (paragraph 15) in relation to the fundamental principle of respect for human rights.

2.      The Sovereignty, Independence and Equality of States

a) The Meaning of the Principle

10.       International law, as well as EU law, is founded upon the recognition of independent and sovereign states. Consequential principles include the obligations of non-intervention in the internal affairs of states and respect for the territorial integrity of all states.[4] In addition, the right of self-determination provides that while people within a state have the right to participate in the governance of that state, the free choice of the people of a state, conforming to fundamental international and European values must be respected on the international level.

 b) Annan Plan Deficiencies

11.       The Annan Plan is founded upon the abolition of the legitimate and recognised Republic of Cyprus. Further, the right of intervention in the internal affairs of Cyprus, reserved to Greece, Turkey and Great Britain as the Guarantor Powers according to the Treaty of Establishment of 16 August 1960 and extended in the Annan Plan to cover the territorial integrity, security and constitutional order of both the federal United Cyprus Republic and the constituent states, constitutes a significant limitation on the sovereignty and independence of Cyprus and a challenge to the international and European legal orders. This was underlined by the proposed creation of a Monitoring Committee, composed of representatives of the guarantor powers, the constituent states and the UN, to monitor the implementation of the Annan Plan settlement and with the power to make recommendations. Furthermore, the Annan Plan provided for the permanent demilitarisation and disarmament of the new Cypriot state, thus raising questions as to the right to self-defence.

 

12.       In addition, one notes under the Annan Plan the right of the UK to complete and unimpeded access for any purpose whatsoever to the waters between the Sovereign Base Areas waters and the fact that international judicial or third party settlement procedure is expressly forbidden with regard to disputes concerning the Sovereign Base Areas. Such disputes were to be resolved by an arbitrator appointed by the authorities of the Sovereign Base Areas.

 

  1. The Prohibition of the Act and Consequences of Aggression

a) The Meaning of the Principle

13.       The prohibition of aggression is at the heart of the international legal order. It is enshrined in international law in general terms,[5] in international criminal law,[6] and with regard to specific situations. Prohibiting the consequences of aggression means rejecting the benefits obtained as a result of illegal aggression and is enshrined, for example, in the jus cogens norm of the non-acquisition of title to territory as a result of aggression. In the context of Cyprus, the UN Security Council adopted resolutions 541 (1983) and 550 (1984) declaring the purported Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus to be illegal and calling upon all states not to recognise it.[7] Further, the implantation of settlers from Turkey in an attempt to manipulate the demography of the island of Cyprus runs counter to the principles of international law, especially those relating to self-determination and human rights. In particular, Article 49 of Geneva Convention IV on the Protection of Civilian Persons 1949 (ratified by both Cyprus and Turkey) prohibits the transfer by an occupying power of part of its own civilian population into the occupied territory. It should, of course, be noted that, having established the illegality of the position of the settlers, the question of the future of the settlers and their families is a separate matter to be determined by the parties concerned within the framework of an overall just and fair settlement and in a manner consistent with international and European law.

 

b) Annan Plan Deficiencies

14.       The Annan Plan provided for the legitimisation of acts of the TRNC and by extension of the TRNC itself. The Plan declared that all acts of any authority on the island of Cyprus (excluding the Sovereign Bases Areas) would be recognised as valid unless the particular act at issue was inconsistent with international law, irrespective of the question of the status of the authority in question. Equally seriously, the provisions of the Plan in relation to the settlers from Turkey were hardly consistent with international law.[8] First, the Plan permitted the settlers to vote in the Turkish Cypriot referendum, even though the former now constitute a majority of inhabitants of the north and even though this recognised as a decisive constitutional force an illegal consequence of an illegal aggression. The UN has not envisaged settlers voting in internal self-determination elections in other situations, such as the West Bank and Gaza, Western Sahara and East Timor. Secondly, the status of the settlers is legitimised in addition by permitting large numbers of them to stay in the north. It goes without saying that in any solution to the dispute, the settlers must be treated in a way which is consistent with international human rights law. As such the position of the settlers is different from that of the substantial number of Turkish troops in occupied northern Cyprus. The presence of such troops in the current situation clearly constitutes an affront to the principles of democracy and human rights and a symbol of aggression and they will need to be withdrawn.

 

  1. Respect for Human Rights

a) The Meaning of the Principle

15.       Respect for human rights requires the government to promote and fully to respect the fundamental rights and freedoms granted to the individuals by international conventions, the European legal order and national constitutions. Human rights play a critical role in international law and in European law. The European Convention on Human Rights binds Cyprus and Turkey. The European Court of Human Rights has held on several occasions that, since 1974, Turkey is directly responsible for continuing violations of basic fundamental rights by occupying the Northern part of Cyprus, by preventing displaced Greek Cypriot citizens from returning to their homes and property or from having access to and enjoyment of them, by not investigating the fate of thousands of still missing persons and by failure to protect freedom of religion and freedom of expression. These decisions, unprecedented in scope and gravity, have still not been fully implemented.[9] Further, the rights enshrined in the European Convention constitute fundamental principles of the European Union, which itself is based upon the principles of liberty, democracy, respect for human rights and rule of law.[10] The European legal order, therefore, both through the European Convention of Human Rights and the acquis communautaire, provides the most stringent and efficient system of protection of human and minority rights worldwide. Moreover, both Cyprus and Turkey are parties to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, article 1 of which lays down the right of self-determination, and to the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination.

 

b) Annan Plan Deficiencies

16.       Under the Annan Plan, serious restrictions of political and civil rights, of freedom of residence, breaches of the prohibition of racial discrimination and severe violations of property rights and of the right to respect of ones home would be maintained and even perpetuated for all Cypriot citizens during several decades and in certain cases permanently (eg. freedom to chose ones residence and the right to return to ones home). The question of settlers has been addressed above (paragraph 14). The Annan Plan would have prevented the right of all displaced Greek Cypriots from returning to their homes and would have significantly limited the right of Greek Cypriots who own property in the north from recovering their property.[11] Further, the Annan Plan sought to deny the right of recourse to the European Court of Human Rights for property owners deprived of their rights (as determined by the Court) by the expedient of declaring the United Republic of Cyprus the appropriate respondent state, and thus absolving Turkey, and stating that existing applications should be struck out on the grounds that under the Plan adequate domestic remedies had been provided for. Parallel to this, Article 6 of Annex IX of the Foundation Agreement contained in the Annan Plan provided that the EU be requested to endorse the plan as accepted by the parties and that this would result in the adoption of primary law. The implication of this would be in essence the prevention of the EUs Court of Justice from challenging the plan on the grounds of violating the fundamental principles of the EU.

To be continued..

Back to Top
iskenderani View Drop Down
Baron
Baron
Avatar

Joined: 24-Mar-2005
Location: Greece
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 449
  Quote iskenderani Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18-Sep-2005 at 14:09

  1. Democracy

a) The Meaning of the Principle

17.       Democracy refers to the establishment and continued existence of a genuinely representative government responsive to the people. It requires that the basic rules establishing and organizing the state and its relationship with society be accepted by the citizens. It further requires full respect of the will of the people as expressed by the voters and/or their legitimate representatives. Democracy is founded on majority rule, in full recognition and application of individual, minority and group rights, as appropriate. The principle of democracy is an increasingly important part of international law, and at the very heart of European law. Article 3 of the Statute of the Council of Europe refers to pluralist democracy, respect for human rights and the rule of law as principles of the Council system,[12] while article 6 of the Treaty on European Union declares the principles of liberty, democracy, respect for human rights and the rule of law as founding principles of the Union.[13]

 

b) Annan Plan Deficiencies

18.       The Annan Plan process whereby agreements, constitutions and laws are sought to be imposed on an independent state without being the result of any democratic legislative process or dialogue cannot be consistent with the principle of democracy. Neither can strict reliance on arithmetic equality between two demographically unequal communities.[14] A constitutional and institutional framework that requires mutual consent of the representatives of both ethnic communities on all levels of government and in each one of the three traditional powers (legislative, executive and judiciary) reserves a permanent right of veto to both, majority and minority. Leaving the final decision in case of stalemate to foreign citizens in such critical organs as the Supreme Court and others[15] is in stark contradiction to the principle of democracy.

 

19.       On 24 April 2004, 76% of the voters of the Republic of Cyprus in the government controlled area rejected the Annan Plan. This decision must be accepted by all as a valid exercise of democracy and of the right to self-determination.

 

  1. The Rule of Law

a) The Meaning of the Principle

20.       The rule of law in international law provides that all official activities must be undertaken in a way that is consistent with legal principles. It further means that legal processes must be established and respected in order for legal principles to operate effectively, so that, for example, the principle of due process is critical. As previously noted (paragraph 15), both the Council of Europe and the European Union are founded upon inter alia the principle of the rule of law.

 

21.       There can be no international rule of law in a territory illegally occupied by a foreign power. Indeed, the fact that a member state of the European Union is prevented from exercising its sovereignty over part of its internationally recognised territory challenges the reality of the European rule of law itself.

 

b) Annan Plan Deficiencies

22.       The Annan Plan proposed the replacement of the Republic of Cyprus by a new state that would with great difficulty have been able to provide for a stable government, since instability would have been embedded into it, as noted above. In addition, the restrictions on human rights and the ability to pursue them freely pursuant to the European Convention on Human Rights and under the European Union, and the general principles of international law including those norms derived from international treaties binding on Cyprus (e.g. the International Covenants on Human Rights) would have severely challenged notions of due process and the rule of law.

  

The Way Forward: A Constitutional Convention for Cyprus

23.       Based on the 1960 Constitution, the Republic of Cyprus is the only internationally recognized and legal government of the island. Its accession to the European Union has put it under the protection of the latter, so that any solution of the Cyprus problem must commence with the existing institutions and legal order of the Republic of Cyprus as accepted by its people and internationally legitimised. From here, ways and means must be found to adapt the existing institutions and law adequately, taking into account the will of the people as a whole including all communities, in order to recover democratic rule and full sovereignty in the internationally recognised territory of the Republic.

 

24.       A democratic process of autonomous constitution-making consisting of several steps should enable all the people of Cyprus to overcome the present stalemate and to find means and measures that will eventually bring about re-unification and reconciliation consistent with the fundamental principles noted above. The Constitutional Convention as an instrument of democratic constitution making has been successfully used, particularly in the decolonisation process. Constitution drafting must be integrated in, and not separated from, the democratic political process.

 

25.       A Constitutional Convention for Cyprus, democratically elected or designated so as to reflect appropriately the will of the voters and the aspirations of civil society of the different communities of the island as a whole, should have the sole responsibility for drafting and adopting a new Constitution for Cyprus, building on, and eventually amending or replacing, the existing 1960 Constitution of the Republic of Cyprus.

 

26.       The members of the Constitutional Convention should have complete liberty and responsibility for choosing whatever political system they may prefer, whether presidential, parliamentary or combinations thereof; for finding territorial arrangements by an appropriate decentralization scheme in regions, districts, communes or whatever and for shaping procedures that will be able to protect efficiently minority and human rights, in the interest of the people of all the communities in Cyprus. Experts both from within and from outside Cyprus may be asked to give advice and assistance to the Convention or its members. The only legal limits of the Conventions sovereign constitutional power are strict compliance with European constitutional principles and the acquis communautaire, and international human rights and minority protection standards derived from international law and from the European Convention on Human Rights and other European instruments.[16]

 

27.       The new Constitution as framed by the Convention should be submitted to separate and simultaneous referendums to be held on both parts of the island, according to the April 24, 2004 experience.[17] Only the people of Cyprus can bring about the legitimacy essential for a new beginning. Any solution of the Cyprus problem must be legal and legitimate and must build on the only existing constitutional scheme that is recognized by the European Union and the international community, and that is the 1960 Constitution of the Republic of Cyprus. The procedures regulating the election or designation of the Constitutional Convention, its composition and functioning, as well as the holding of the constitutional referendums will have to be provided for by amendments to the 1960 Constitution. It is further proposed that the Constitutional Convention process take place under European Union auspices.

 

Recommendations

28.       The International Expert Panel seeks a fair and equitable Cyprus settlement that allows the communities to achieve reconciliation and a peaceful and prosperous future. It therefore commends the Fundamental Principles of International and European Law as noted above to all relevant international institutions, including the United Nations, the Council of Europe, the Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe, but most particularly to the European Union in the light of the historic opportunity presented to it by the recent accession to membership of the Republic of Cyprus and the opening of accession negotiations with Turkey.

To be continued..



Edited by iskenderani
Back to Top
Mortaza View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar
Avatar

Joined: 21-Jul-2005
Location: Turkey
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 3711
  Quote Mortaza Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18-Sep-2005 at 14:10
I didnt read all, I just looked and saw to much EU. This is not a good sign.
Back to Top
iskenderani View Drop Down
Baron
Baron
Avatar

Joined: 24-Mar-2005
Location: Greece
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 449
  Quote iskenderani Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18-Sep-2005 at 14:11

29.       The International Expert Panel recommends:

a) The acknowledgement of the aforesaid Fundamental Principles by those parties involved in seeking peace, justice and security in Cyprus.

 

b) The adoption of a Resolution in the European Parliament (and in other pertinent international institutions) reaffirming the Fundamental Principles.

 

c) The establishment in the European Parliament (and in other pertinent international institutions) of a monitoring mechanism by which the conformity of any proposed Cyprus settlement with the Fundamental Principles may be ensured.

 

d) The creation of a Constitutional Convention under European Union auspices and on the basis of the 1960 Cyprus Constitution to bring together the parties directly concerned in order to reach a settlement in conformity with the Fundamental Principles.

 

Conclusion

30.       The accession of the Republic of Cyprus to the European Union has fundamentally changed the internal as well as the external aspects of the Cyprus problem. Greek and Turkish Cypriots have now become citizens of the Union, enjoying the rights and subject to the duties provided for in the European legal order. The Republic of Cyprus is a member state and thus one of the Masters of the Treaties.

 

31.       Had the Annan Plan been accepted and implemented before accession, that very accession would have rested on shaky legal grounds, as the Union would have integrated a new member state which would not even have signed the accession treaty, while the Republic of Cyprus, which has signed the treaty, would have ceased to exist. Now that accession has become a reality, the abolition of the Republic of Cyprus through a revised Annan Plan is prevented by the very existence of the European Union.

 

32.       The European Union has the historic opportunity and the special responsibility for promoting a new process of democratic constitution making in Cyprus and for convincing all communities to take part in such a process. In so doing, the European Union would ensure the application of its own principles and values, as well as those of international law generally, within the territory of one of its own member-states.

 

******

 

APPENDIX: Article 6 of the Treaty on European Union

 

1. The Union is founded on the principles of liberty, democracy, respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms, and the rule of law, principles which are common to the Member States.

 

2. The Union shall respect fundamental rights, as guaranteed by the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms signed in Rome on 4 November 1950 and as they result from the constitutional traditions common to the Member States, as general principles of Community law.

 

3. The Union shall respect the national identities of its Member States.

 

4. The Union shall provide itself with the means necessary to attain its objectives and carry through its policies.

 

  

International Expert Panel

 

1.    Professor Auer Andreas, Switzerland

Professor of Constitutional Law, University of Geneva

 

2.    Professor Bossuyt Mark, Belgium

Professor of International Law, University of Antwerp

 

3.    Professor Burns Peter, Canada

Former Dean of the UBC Law Faculty,

Professor of Law, University of British Columbia, Vancouver

 

4.    Professor Dr. Alfred De Zayas, United States of America

Geneva School of Diplomacy

Former Secretary, UN Human Rights Committee

 

5.    Professor Helmons Silvio-Marcus, Belgium

Emeritus Professor of Universite Catholique de Louvain, Public International Law and Human Rights

 

6.    Professor George Kasimatis, Greece

Emeritus Professor of University of Athens, Constitutional Law

Honorary President of the International Association of Constitutional Law

 

7.    Professor Dr. Dr.h.c. Oberndoerfer Dieter, Germany

Professor Emeritus, Political Science, University of Freiburg

 

8.    Professor Malcolm N Shaw QC, United Kingdom

The Sir Robert Jennings Professor of International Law, University of Leicester

 

 


Endnotes

[1] See the European Commission of Human Rights which referred to Turkish violations of the European Convention on Human Rights in the first two Cyprus v Turkey applications, 10 July 1976 and  the third  application, 4 October 1983 (published by the Committee of Ministers in 1992) and the European Court of Human Rights giving judgment in the fourth Cyprus v Turkey  application,  10 May 2001. See also below para. 15.

[2] Referred to by the European Court of Human Rights as a subordinate local administration of Turkey, Loizidou v Turkey, decision of 23 February 1995, para. 62.

[3] See also the 1970 Declaration on Principles of International Law Concerning Friendly Relations, resolution 2625 (XXV) and the Manila Declaration on the Peaceful Settlement of International Disputes, resolution 37/590.

[4] See article 2 of the UN Charter and the 1970 Declaration on Principles of International Law Concerning Friendly Relations

[5] See Article 2 (4) of the UN Charter, Chapter VII of the UN Charter and resolution 3314 (XXIX) on the Definition of Aggression.

[6] See the Nuremberg Principles and the Statutes of the War Crimes Tribunals for the Former Yugoslavia and for Rwanda and the International Criminal Court.

[7] See also resolution 83 (13) of the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe and the decision of the European Court of Human Rights in the Cyprus v Turkey case, 10 May 2001.

[8] See the Advisory Opinion of the International Court of Justice on the Legal Consequences of the Construction of a Wall  in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, 9 July 2004, para. 119 and following.

[9] Most significantly, the decision of the European Court of Human Rights, Cyprus v Turkey, 10 May 2001.

[10] See the Rutili case, 1975, ECR 1219 and article 6 of the Treaty of European Union, 1999 (reproduced in the Appendix to this Report).

[11] This situation would also have been incompatible with numerous UN resolutions on the right to return, see especially the study of the UN Sub-Commission on the Promotion and Protection of Human Rights by Special Rapporteur Awn Shawkat Al Kassawneh on the Human Rights Dimensions of Population Transfers, E/CN.4/Sub.2/1997/23.

[12] See also the Charter of Paris, 1990.

[13] Reproduced in the Appendix to this Report.  See also the European Community Declaration on the Recognition of New States, 1991.

[14] See above para. 5.

[15] See above para. 8.

[16] For example the Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities, 1995, to which Cyprus is a party.

[17] But conducted so as to exclude the competence of Turkish settlers, see above, para. 14.

Back to Top
iskenderani View Drop Down
Baron
Baron
Avatar

Joined: 24-Mar-2005
Location: Greece
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 449
  Quote iskenderani Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18-Sep-2005 at 14:13

A principled basis for a just and lasting Cyprus settlement in the light of International and European Law

By the International Expert Panel convened by the Committee for a European Solution in Cyprus.

Panayiotis Ifestos

-------------------------------

(for electronic texts click for and back to the title)

1. background information, 2. Political theory, power, causes of war and international rule of law. 3. The final report of the International Expert Panel convened by the Committee for a European Solution in Cyprus. 4. Call for endorsement of the report.

-------------------------------

 1. Background information.

 

The report entitled A principled basis for a just and lasting Cyprus settlement in the light of International and European Law, attached herewith (two word files are attached, one in English and another in Greek), is the outcome of a collective endeavor which begun in 2004 after the rejection of the Anan plan by the majority of Cypriots and completed in early autumn 2005. This effort begun in the context of the deliberations of the Scientific Committee for a European solution of the Cyprus question created by the Panhellenic Association for a European Solution of the Cyprus question. The members of the Scientific Committee were Professor George Kassimatis who presided the deliberations, the professors of Panteion University Stelios Perrakis, Panayiotis Ifestos and Christodoulos Giallourides and Perikles Nearchou, former diplomatic adviser to the Prime Minister. Members of the International Association for the protection of Human Rights in Cyprus also cooperated with the Committee.

             Eventually, the Panhellenic Association for a European Solution of the Cyprus question convened the International Expert Panel comprised of experts in International law, constitutional law, European law, international relations and political science. Their report was finalized in August 2005 and handed over to the leadership of the two communities, to the President of the Republic of Cyprus and to the leaders of the political parties in Cyprus. The report was presented publicly in press conference in Nicosia on September 1st. It was also dispatched to the head of Governments of the EU, to the institutions of the EU and to many other potentially interested institutions in Europe.   

             At the outset, a primary objective was to confine the debates on the Cyprus question in scientific boundaries, thus excluding inputs of ideological, political, partisan and national or other value laden criteria. This could only be achieved if the Cyprus question is considered in terms of international and European rule of law, that is, in terms of mandatory-obligatory legal terms which if duly respected and fully implemented the Cyprus problem, it is believed, could be solved immediately and in the interests of all parties involved.

 

2. Political theory, power, causes of war and international rule of law

 

Given that elementary criteria of scientific objectivity are respected, a political scientist could easily define and delimit international and European rule of law. International and European rule of law is explicitly if not precisely recorded, inter alia, in international conventions, in the charters of the international institutions and in internal legal order of states. [The rule of law in international law provides that all official activities must be undertaken in a way that is consistent with legal principles. It further means that legal processes must be established and respected in order for legal principles to operate effectively, so that, for example, the principle of due process is critical. As previously noted (paragraph 15), both the Council of Europe and the European Union are founded upon inter alia the principle of the rule of law. 26. There can be no international rule of law in a territory illegally occupied by a foreign power. Indeed, the fact that a member state of the European Union is prevented from exercising its sovereignty over part of its internationally recognised territory challenges the reality of the European rule of law itself. See para. 25,26 of the attached report]

             Shortly stated, to the extend that almost all states entangled in the Cyprus question participate in numerous international organizations and signed various conventions whose clauses are incorporated as mandatory law in their internal judicial system, their governments are legally bounded in their behavior and decisions.

             At this point, it is important to draw the borderline unfortunately not always obvious for many between the issues of international politics which are conditioned by the aforementioned mandatory-(strictly obligatory) international legal agreements and other issues which are directly influenced by power and the many causes of war so well described and explained by authors of the analysts of the traditional Paradigm such as Thucydides, Gilpin, Aron and Waltz. In fact, the former, that is, the obligatory-mandatory legal commitments of states at the international level constitute what one may define as the acquisitions of humans political civilization at the international level whilst the latter are unfortunately conditioned by power and the cause of war and are by and large the principal source of great human hardships. Some additional points as regards this important distinction are necessary.

             Firstly, epistemologically speaking, it is a fact that many thinkers trained to be international politics specialists and a great number of invaders of adjacent scientific fields in the anarchically developing scientific field of international relations, often create a chaos of irrational political assessments springing from the overflowing of value laden judgments (pseudo-)scientifically disguised. In fact, the field could progress considerably if its specialists do not confuse what is obligatory in the involved states internal normative structures with other issues which are by and large influenced by interstate disagreements, by power politics and by the broader causes of war at the international level. Unless IR analysts comprehend fully the ontologically founded fundamental characteristics of the interstate system based on the principle of state sovereignty (and its corollary international anarchy) and the real nature of the causes of war, they are condemned to oscillate shakily and inconsistently between cosmopolitan nonsense, idealistic hegemonic rationalizations and sterile legalism. The publicly taken positions of many on the Anan plan reflect precisely this predominant pitiful state of affairs in the IR community of Greece (and certainly of the other scientific communities of Europe and elsewhere).

             Secondly, though Cypriots themselves, mainland Greeks, mainland Turks and British leaders are all directly concerned by the Anan plan, its adventures during the period 2001-2005 are of broader significance. Its drafting and presentation exemplify the deficiencies of international organizations, highlight the fact that the causes of war are alive and actively undermining the foundations of the interstate system and explain the reasons of the difficulties to implement fully the rule of law in international relations.

             Thirdly, the adventure of the Anan plan could prove the most appropriate case study as regards contemporary international relations, the state of the art of IR theory, the functioning of international institutions, the causes of war of the post-World War Two era and the changes in the post-Cold War era. It is certainly a severe testing ground of the state of affairs of contemporary political theory in Europe and elsewhere. Anan plan could prove the Waterloo of many political theorists if not of modern political theory itself, its proclaimed scientific ethics and its ability to explain the ontologically founded Paradigm of anarchy-sovereignty [Admirably described by Thucydides but still deprived of political philosophy of international relations and clear thinking as regards the dilemmas owing to the challenges of modern times, especially of the challenges of the societies ever deepening claim for political sovereignty (that is, the claim for national independence of those societies whose representatives respect rule of law in international relations)]. Lets be straight regarding this point: To the extend their writings were corrupted by value laden criteria resulting to an unacceptable bias in favor of the legally and politically speaking, monstrous Anan plan, the overwhelming majority of political scientists in Europe did not honor basic and elementary epistemic premises which could secure political theorys compatibility with the acquisitions of human civilization at the international level. Many applauded the violation of international and European rule of law and co-advocated claims of some western powers which tend to reverse political civilization back to the colonial age. At the same time, many normatively to my view owing to scientific-logical errors or political hypocrisy idealistically claim to serve Europe, human rights, international law, peace etc. As Edward H. Carr substantiated long ago, the one or the other way they are in the service of disguised hegemonic claims.

 

3. The final report of the International Expert Panel convened by the Committee for a European Solution in Cyprus             

 

The final report of the International Expert Panel convened by the Committee for a European Solution in Cyprus was indeed no easy task. I would like, however, to register the fact that my faith for scientific objectivity and the fundamentally ecumenical character of political science is strengthened. During the many scientific meetings that took place in 2004 and 2005 and to which I participated, it became clear that among political scientists engaged in the search of scientific truth, there is indeed a lot of common ground. Irrespective national, ideological, political or partisan criteria of the analysts when they attempt to describe interstate rule of law, it is indeed feasible to describe-define international normative structures as they were overtime agreed and established by the sovereign states. In fact, this was one more experience that strengthened my conviction that mandatory-obligatory normative structures at the international level could both provide a basis for productive international relations theory bridging the various branches of social sciences and a borderline of serious scientific as well as political debate on the problems owing to the cause of war. Certainly as it is stressed below, it could provide an ethical basis of IR analysis and political thinking.

             The attached report of the International Experts panel, on purely objective grounds owing to the legal-political commitments the states themselves made in the past, provides a realistic orientation for a viable solution of the Cyprus question in a way that benefits all its inhabitants and serves peace and stability in the area.

[NB. In earlier writings see for example my latest monograph http://www.ifestos.edu.gr/7.htm) this author, inter alia, attempted to establish i) that the Paradigm of Sovereignty-Anarchy is ontologically founded, ii) that the societies claim for collective political sovereignty is the nearest equivalent to freedom in international relations, iii) that as it is defined with precision by the fundamental principles of international law which are by their nature anti-hegemonic the claim for political sovereignty-collective freedom, is an overarching criterion of interstate relations, ontologically founded and for that reason morally irrebuttable, iv) that if international rule of law is respected for all peace loving societies-states as defined in the aforementioned study their statehood is their collective freedom institution ( -thesmos eleftherias) and v) that full respect of international rule of law and international peace and stability could only advance if the causes of war are eliminated or substantially moderated. Basically, value free IR studies of Traditionalist analysts differs from IL analysis only to the extend the former examine and consider appropriately the existence of the causes of war in contemporary international politics. Last but not least, as regards the debates on analytical ethics and international morality, all analysts and politicians could very well take into the account the existence of an ontologically founded overarching basis, that is, international rule of law as previously defined. Political sovereignty of peace loving states and its corollary socially defined international institutions (whose principal mission is the safeguard of the collective freedom of the sovereign societies) are the basis of both value free analysis whish is compatible to scientific ethics founded on interstate ontology. They also provide the ethical and political basis of peaceful resolution of international conflicts and peaceful interstate cooperation. Political sovereignty defined as collective freedom, in other words, is a sound value free ethical orientation in both IR analysis and interstate politics.]      

 

4. Call for endorsement of the report

 

Bilingual readers would notice that the English report and its Greek translation are identical. French and German language versions are under preparation. It is expected that many more specialists of international law, European law and international relations would add their names to the ones who finalized it and already signed it. Moreover, to the extend this report is the product of a collective effort and given that it is already published, it could be consider as an acquisition of political theory and as a reference text of everyone interested in the Cyprus question.

             In fact a list of scholars is created for everyone wishing to publicly endorse its scientific content [endorsements could be sent electronically to the address (click) I endorse the report A principled basis for a just and lasting Cyprus settlement in the light of International and European Law and it would be promptly appropriately forwarded]. At this point, may I make it clear that an endorsement of this kind has nothing to do with politically and ideologically loaded lists of heterogeneous signatories. Simply, it is an endorsement of the reports scientific content by all scholars who would agree with the validation and substantiation it provides.

 

Lastly, everyone agreeing with its content and disposing an electronic list, could circulate the report or forward it for publishing in web pages or in other available media.   

Back to Top
iskenderani View Drop Down
Baron
Baron
Avatar

Joined: 24-Mar-2005
Location: Greece
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 449
  Quote iskenderani Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18-Sep-2005 at 14:16

Originally posted by Mortaza

I didnt read all, I just looked and saw to much EU. This is not a good sign.

It is a scientific project .... not cheap politics....

Back to Top
Mortaza View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar
Avatar

Joined: 21-Jul-2005
Location: Turkey
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 3711
  Quote Mortaza Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18-Sep-2005 at 14:18

well we are talking about a politic problem, this is not math problem.

 

Back to Top
iskenderani View Drop Down
Baron
Baron
Avatar

Joined: 24-Mar-2005
Location: Greece
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 449
  Quote iskenderani Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18-Sep-2005 at 14:22
Originally posted by Mortaza

well we are talking about a politic problem, this is not math problem.

It is scientific from the point of International Law and U.N .... Math and Physics are NOT the onlu sciences ...

Back to Top
Mortaza View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar
Avatar

Joined: 21-Jul-2005
Location: Turkey
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 3711
  Quote Mortaza Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18-Sep-2005 at 14:26
Sure but politic problems have not a sciencific answer. This is not math.
Back to Top
Mortaza View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar
Avatar

Joined: 21-Jul-2005
Location: Turkey
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 3711
  Quote Mortaza Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18-Sep-2005 at 14:38

I dont think that EU is a sciencific reality.

If what TC want is only EU rules, They can already do it. As I said before too much EU and I cant say EU is a lover of Turkey.

And scienficaly EU is now ally of GC, so how can an institution who is ally of GC can be, a core point of agreement.

Instead of EU, Turks prefer UN. More neutral international institution and It is not ally of GC.

I dont know, If this is sciencific or not, but after all I dont know all of this sciencific research is also sciencific or not. I cant see any Turkic sciencist at this research, I can see a greek sciencist, and other are from EU.

t looks like this European solution, is realy a European solution. Not a solution for Turks, but Europeans.

 

 

 

Back to Top
iskenderani View Drop Down
Baron
Baron
Avatar

Joined: 24-Mar-2005
Location: Greece
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 449
  Quote iskenderani Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18-Sep-2005 at 14:44

The discussion with you , as expected , is pointless since u cannot understand the project , before passing a judgment ..

So , if u have anything to say AFTER you read it , ok... If NOT , then you can pass your time in other topics.

Back to Top
Alparslan View Drop Down
Colonel
Colonel


Joined: 07-Aug-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 517
  Quote Alparslan Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18-Sep-2005 at 14:45

 

This is not acceptable....

This is a solution for EU not a scientific solution.

The solution can be based upon the foundation treaty of Cyprus Republic in 1960. This is the scientific, lawful and fair solution.

Back to Top
Spartakus View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar
Avatar
terörist

Joined: 22-Nov-2004
Location: Greece/Hellas
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4489
  Quote Spartakus Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18-Sep-2005 at 14:50

Jesus!The same subject......Let's bomb the f**king island with nukes and chemicals.Then nobody will ever want it.

 

 

"There are worse crimes than burning books. One of them is not reading them. "
--- Joseph Alexandrovitch Brodsky, 1991, Russian-American poet, b. St. Petersburg and exiled 1972 (1940-1996)
Back to Top
Mortaza View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar
Avatar

Joined: 21-Jul-2005
Location: Turkey
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 3711
  Quote Mortaza Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18-Sep-2005 at 14:56

I read it some, but these ideas are general ideas, I can accept them. But in Cyprus, we have realy different situation, some types of restrictions are needed.

b) Annan Plan Deficiencies

8.         The terms of the Annan Plan would in fact have embedded instability into the heart of a Cyprus settlement and would inevitably have led to increasing friction and destabilisation. This is underlined by the provisions concerning the position of foreign nationals with effective control over key areas of governmental activities in Cyprus. Examples where non-Cypriots would (in the event of disagreement between the equal numbers of Greek and Turkish Cypriots) have effective control appeared to include the Reconciliation Commission; the Supreme Court invested with legislative and executive powers; the Central Bank; the Relocation Board; the Property Court and the organs of the Property Board. Further, the foreign nationals concerned would not be democratically accountable to the people of Cyprus.

For ex, for this. yes foreign nations intervering is against to democracy, but If we follow this type democracy, TC will not have any political power. 

Bearing in mind the experience of the period 1960-63, the need for stability in the ordering of governmental activities is critical.

Well, so what should we do If we have an even result between greeks and Turks.3 vote to 3 vote. Should we make a referandum means greek rule?

As I said you before, this is generaly true, but It is not specialy adaptable to cyprus.

 

Secondly, EU has no relation with TC. I accept they have relation with ROC and GC, but what is their relation with TC? Why should we believe they will protect TC interest? Infact Until now they didnt do anything for benefit of TC, but against TC. They are only one-sided organization, their laws and rules are for GC not TC. Why should TC also binded with this laws and rules.

If I believed good wish of EU, or Neutralness of EU, these ideas can have some merit.

 

 

Back to Top
Seko View Drop Down
Emperor
Emperor
Avatar
Spammer

Joined: 01-Sep-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 8595
  Quote Seko Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18-Sep-2005 at 14:57
I hear you Sparty, this topic has been raised so many times that it has more lives than a cat. Hopefully, all participants can manage within reasonable bounds while it is still open.

Edited by Seko
Back to Top
Mortaza View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar
Avatar

Joined: 21-Jul-2005
Location: Turkey
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 3711
  Quote Mortaza Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18-Sep-2005 at 14:59
I think when Komnenos see this topic, He will cry.
Back to Top
Yiannis View Drop Down
Sultan
Sultan
Avatar

Joined: 03-Aug-2004
Location: Neutral Zone
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2329
  Quote Yiannis Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18-Sep-2005 at 15:12

Originally posted by Mortaza

I think when Komnenos see this topic, He will cry.

Not if we keep it civil and refrain from provocation.

The basis of a democratic state is liberty. Aristotle, Politics

Those that can give up essential liberty to obtain a temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety. Benjamin Franklin
Back to Top
iskenderani View Drop Down
Baron
Baron
Avatar

Joined: 24-Mar-2005
Location: Greece
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 449
  Quote iskenderani Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18-Sep-2005 at 15:40

The Cyprus problem , was discussed in many topics , we all know that .

This topic , is about a serious and scientific , from the point of International Law and the U.N rules , proposal to solve this aged problem.

What we can accept as individuals , or not , is besides the point . The point here , is to keep up THE LAW...the International Law .

The proposed solution , does not blaim any one . It just says what are the U.N rules and what MUST be followed IF there is a will for a just solution , to this problem.

Nothing more , nothing less.

Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest
Guest
  Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19-Sep-2005 at 11:44

International Law and the U.N rules

So what about the Annan plan?

Back to Top
Mortaza View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar
Avatar

Joined: 21-Jul-2005
Location: Turkey
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 3711
  Quote Mortaza Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19-Sep-2005 at 13:36

It has nothing with UN. do it? Oh it is made by UN.

 

 

Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  12>

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Bulletin Board Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 9.56a [Free Express Edition]
Copyright ©2001-2009 Web Wiz

This page was generated in 0.094 seconds.