If we do not claim our occupied properties, we will simply lose them, said today the lawyer Achilleas Dimitriadis, when asked to comment on the statements of the chairman of the real estate commission that Turkey has set up in the occupied areas.
“Proof of this is the Loizidou case, with which we secured the right of ownership,” he pointed out, expressing the view that EVKAF will not be limited to Varosi, it will claim other properties.
In his statements today in the Morning Schedule in the Third Program of RIK he also said that by the end of the year the case pending before the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) in relation to the claims of EVKAF to become a party to appeals is completed. for their occupied properties because – as he claims – he owns his own property and in addition does not recognize the property titles issued by the Republic of Cyprus.
In fact, he explained, what is happening now is that we have to prove that EVKAF's allegations are untrue, recalling that this is the third time that the EBKAF issue has been brought before the ECtHR. In the two previous cases (Aresti and Lordou) the Court rejected the claims of EVKAF.
The involvement of KD is very important in this case before the ECtHR (KV Mediterranean v Turkey), he stressed, because he should give the historical data he has and prove that EVKAF got his money – 1.5 million pounds. Thus ended his claim and he can no longer claim.
The KD will have to submit its positions on what happened in 1960 to 15 February and explain to the Court why the Turkish Cypriots received εκα 1.5 million in full and final repayment of the claims to the British government.
Asked about the involvement of KD in appeals of E / K for their occupied properties before the ECHR, he stated that since 2016 there is a shift in KD which does not support E / K applicants, and strongly criticized this change in the policy of supporting Cypriots citizens before the ECtHR.
Specifically for the 3.5% of the enclosed city opened by the Turkish army, he wondered why the government does not ask for the implementation of the resolutions so that the UN can take possession of the specific area.
“Once the army is gone, then the UN should come in and take over. Here the Turkish army leaves Varosi. “What are we doing, apart from doing a misguided foreign policy that at the end of the day, to put it in Cypriot, we made a hole in the water in Varosi and they sell us seaweed for silk ribbons,” he added.
The issue will be resolved properly when the Cyprus issue is resolved, he pointed out. The legal ones give the right basis in the effort to solve the problem, he said, emphasizing that the property would not exist in the 6 points of Guterres if we did not have the Loizidou case.
As he explained, the pilot of the case that is pending before the ECtHR today is that the claim of EVKAF stems from a court decision of 2005 when this institution claimed that it belongs to Varosi, a position supported by the Turkish Cypriot administration of the occupied territories.
“We must reject this argument and if we reject it it will be of pilot importance and binding in all processes,” he stressed.
Our side claims that the permission given by EAI to EVKAF to intervene in the case before it is invalid (KV Mediterranean v Turkey) because they have no property rights in this property but we must prove this to the ECtHR.
The chairwoman of the Occupied Real Estate Commission told Cyprus that this is not the first time the commission has decided to involve EVKAF in a case pending before it, noting that it has done so in 12 cases since 2006.
He also stated that this decision is not final but temporary, clarifying that the issue of becoming a party involved concerns only the specific application, since each application is evaluated separately.
Achilles Dimitriadis
