Cyprus PIO: Turkish Cypriot Press and Other Media, 01-05-21

Cyprus Press and Information Office: Turkish Cypriot Press Review Directory - Previous Article - Next Article

From: The Republic of Cyprus Press and Information Office Server at <http://www.pio.gov.cy/>

[B] TOYÑÊÉÊA ÊAÉ TÏÕÑÊÏÊÕÐÑÉAÊA Ì.Ì.Å. TURKISH CYPRIOT PRESS AND OTHER

No. 94/01 -- 19-20-21

[A] NEWS ITEMS

[01] Rauf Denktash: Rather than risk war with Turkey, Greece to agree to two-state solution.

[02] Dentkash: Greek Cypriots lost because it is impossible to implement ECHR decision.

[03] Mustafa Akinci promises to reopen Famagusta Gate to help tourism.

[04] Turkish Foreign Ministry/s Under-Secretary views ECHR decision.

[05] Turkey/s Justice Minister discusses ECHR cases.

[06] Council of Europe Assembly President says rejecting ECHR decision will cause problems.

[07] Denktash sees ``Byzantine tricks'' in a Turkish Cypriot/s demand to vote in the 27 May elections.

[08] The Turkish Prime Minister alleges that the ECHR decision had no effect on Turkey.

[09] A new nationalist organisation was founded in the occupied areas.

[B] COMMENTS AND EDITORIALS

---

[A] NEWS ITEMS

[01] Columnist in SABAH criticizes Turkey for the treatment of the enclaved Greek Cypriots.

[04] YENIDUZEN/s columnist expresses fears for his life.

[A] NEWS ITEMS

[01] Rauf Denktash: Rather Than Risk War With Turkey, Greece To Agree to two-State Solution

The occupation Security Forces commander, Brigadier General Galip Mendi, also addressed the ceremony.

Addressing the ceremony Denktash said:

Unfortunately, many tricks are being played among us with the money of the Greek Cypriots, Britain, and the United States, and there are efforts to deceive our people. Alongside the Greek Cypriots, who poisoned the lives of the Turkish Cypriots from 1963 to 1974 and who attempted to annex Cyprus to Greece by destroying the partnership republic, there are those among the Turkish Cypriots who want to join the EU. There are those who risk acceding to the EU without an identity, personality, or status and who wish to deceive the people in this direction. Those who claim that the Turkish Cypriots can join unions in which Greek Cypriots are members only together with motherland Turkey that has stood by the side of the Turkish Cypriots on their most difficult days are being accused by these circles.

Referring to the latest ECHR decision on Cyprus, Denktash said: This court decision is valid in the Greek Cypriot side. It is not valid beyond the Ledra Palace, because this court has not taken into consideration the existence of the Turkish Cypriots, their rights, their origin, what they are, and what the Greek Cypriots are aiming to achieve. The Greek Cypriots have been given a new weapon by means of a political decision.

There is no option for the Turkish Cypriots now other than embracing their just cause with all their hearts, Denktash remarked, adding that together with the motherland the Turkish Cypriots will advance their cause further. Alleging that the pseudostate is in favour of good-neighbourly relations and friendship, but the ECHR has once again demonstrated that the other side is not of the same opinion, Denktash said that Turkey, which stood against them like a wall in 1959, still stands against them now in the same way, and the Greek Cypriots will crash against this wall. Denktash declared that rather than risk a war with Turkey, Greece will consent to a friendly two-state solution in Cyprus.

Finally Denktash said that accession to the EU can only take place alongside Turkey, adding that the Greek Cypriots can show that they want friendship by lifting the ``embargoes'' and accepting the realities in Cyprus. ``If, however, they are saying, we have the decision of the ECHR on our side and the UN resolutions behind us, and having deceived the EU we are well on our way, no one will be able to cross from the Ledra Palace crossing to this side'', Denktash concluded.

AVRUPA (21.5.01) criticizes the speeches of the Turkish Cypriot lelader Rauf Denktash and Brigadier General Galip Mendi during the ceremony of the newly recruited soldiers in occupied Famagusta.

The paper says that their speeches brought in the agenda suspicions of ``a new conspiracy''.

Denktash claimed that there are some who are paid agents amongst them with British, USA and Greek Cypriot money but then he stopped. He does not say who these people are, concludes AVRUPA.

[02] Denktash: Greek Cypriots Lost Because it is Impossible To Implement ECHR Decision

Denktash participated in the "Actuel" programme aired on illegal BRT 1 Television on Thursday night and commented on the various aspects of the ECHR decision.

Denktash asserted that he considers the decision to be invalid for the Turkish Cypriots. With this attitude, he said, the EU is exacerbating the Cyprus problem and eliminating the conditions for an agreement. He pointed out that the said decision has certain elements that are in favour of the Turkish Cypriots. The decision says, he noted: We do not recognize ``TRNC'' but it has its institutions, its administration, and valid courts. This means, Denktash alleged, that the ``TRNC'' is being recognized institutionally.

Denktash said that these elements contradict the argument that everything is over. He charged: The EU may have closed its eyes at times but not completely.

The basic mistake, Denktash said, was that, as in many other cases, only one of the sides was heard before the decision. As long as the Greek Cypriot Administration is recognized as the legitimate Cyprus government the same mistakes will be repeated, he said, and this will not help us reach an agreement.

Denktash claimed that the Greek Cypriots are overjoyed with the ECHR decision and that they say they have won the case. He added: They have lost the case and they do not know it. What do they need to do to implement this decision? They must take their arms and start a war. Is that their position? Is that possible? They say Turkey is going to be isolated. Turkey is strong enough to face that. Do they expect us to open our doors and tell Iannis or Nikolaos: welcome to your home, we will sleep in the street; it is all right, after all it is a court decision. Is that what they expect us to do? They are happy because the court declared the Turkish army an occupying force. However, there is not a single UN resolution that says that the Turkish army is an occupying force. Even the Athens Court ruled that the Turkish army did not occupy but intervened in the island. They seem to forget all this.

Denktash concluded by alleging that the most important result of the ECHR decision is that it proves that the dangers the Turkish Cypriots pointed to for so long are indeed real.

[03] Mustafa Akinci Promises To Reopen Famagusta Gate To Help Tourism According to ORTAM (18.5.01) Mustafa Akinci, so-called state minister and

Akinci received a delegation from the occupied Famagusta Chamber of Tradesmen and Artisans. They discussed the reopening of the 2.5-Mile gate which allows the passage of UN Peace Forces and their families from Famagusta to the occupied areas. The tradesmen and artisans asked for Akinci's support to have the gate reopened. They said that about 2,000 British family members cross to the occupied areas for daily trips and shopping. They added that they have incurred losses since the gate was closed. They also complained that certain travel agencies work only with certain stores and that guides do not allow the visitors to shop during the day trips.

Akinci received the tradesmen's demands positively. He said: At times, some of the measures we take hurt us. We must reassess them.

Akinci said an example was the 4 Pounds Sterling ``visa'' requirement imposed on tourists crossing from the Ledra Palace check-point ever since the EU's Luxembourg resolution. This requirement was subsequently canceled, he added.

Akinci said that reopening the 2.5-Mile gate will greatly help internal tourism and promised to do whatever is necessary.

In connection with their complaints about the travel agencies, Akinci suggested that the tradesmen and artisans discuss the matter with the Turkish Cypriot Travel Agencies Union.

[04] Turkish Foreign Ministry's Under-Secretary Views ECHR Decision Turkish Foreign Ministry Under-Secretary Faruk Logoglu on Sunday (20.5.01)

Question: The Turkish Government reacted very strongly to the decision of the European Court of Human Rights [ECHR] on Cyprus. Prime Minister Ecevit said that the government will not recognize this decision. My question is whether the government can refuse to recognize this decision given the fact that Turkey has signed the European Human Rights Convention. Isn't this decision binding?

Answer: Absolutely, all the ECHR decisions are binding. There is a very important point which should be remembered: Having signed the agreement and having recognized the right to apply to this court, Turkey has always fulfilled the requisites of all the ECHR decisions concerning Turkey. There have been no exceptions. Turkey has always abided by these decisions even if it has been displeased with them, because they are binding. However, the situation is a little different when it comes to this latest decision, because ultimately, as far as we are concerned, it does not legally concern Turkey. Turkey is not the interlocutor in this case. The address is wrong. The right interlocutor, the right address, is the ``TRNC'', not Turkey.

Why did the ECHR reach such a decision? The decision ignores the ``TRNC'' and its organs and holds Turkey responsible for everything that goes on in north Cyprus. What is the basis of this position? This is extremely important. First of all this is not the first but the fourth suit filed by the Greek Cypriot Administration. The ECHR and, before that, the Council of Europe [CoE] institutions, have always based their decisions on UN Security Council [UNSC] resolutions, particularly Resolution 541. This resolution was passed when the ``TRNC'' was declared. It refuses to recognize the TRNC and calls on the member countries to refuse to recognize it too.

The ECHR has based its decisions on this resolution. However, the UNSC resolutions are political resolutions, not legal ones, and they do not have a human rights aspect. The ECHR has taken the political UNSC resolution -- which in itself is an important resolution but a political one -- and reached a legal decision against Turkey.

Question: What can we do about that?

Answer: As Turkey has been saying, these decisions cannot be implemented. The responsibility to implement the ECHR decisions lies with the CoE Ministerial Committee, a political body. The issue is on the Committee's agenda. We are showing the necessary goodwill and are trying to be of help regarding the steps that can be taken. So far, especially due to the stand and insistent demands of the Greek Cypriot Administration, the CoE has been unable to come up with a beneficial solution.

Question: Probably, Rauf Denktash has an important duty to fulfill in this regard. Mr. Denktas left the proximity talks saying that the Greek Cypriots do not want an agreement and that there is nothing to be done. Should a step be taken backward? Should we persuade the Turkish Cypriots to return to the negotiating table?

Answer: The ECHR has no right to intervene in the Cyprus problem. The ECHR is an institution that deals in human rights. With this resolution, it has passed judgment on all the aspects of the Cyprus problem, from the issue of missing persons to the exchange of property.

Question: That is what we object to.

Answer: It has no right to do that. This should be done within the framework of the UN Secretary-general's mission of good offices.

Question: This is a political situation. Do you think Europe is placing this before us as another complementary factor at a time when preparations are being made to admit Cyprus to the EU in 2002?

Answer: This cannot be a complementary factor. The ECHR is putting itself in the place of the UN Secretary-General. If that is what the EU is trying to do, then as Denktash is saying, this eliminates the possibility of returning to the negotiating table within the framework of the UN Secretary- General's goodwill mission. As far as I am concerned, the ECHR has reached this decision in line with the views of the Greek and Greek Cypriot side, and it is as if it has broken all the legs of the negotiating table which the UN Secretary- General is trying to keep standing. Therefore Mr. Denktash is absolutely right in his views on the matter.

Question: As a diplomat it is probably difficult for you see things in black and white; you probably take all the colours in between into consideration. This week, on our way back from Hatay which was hit by the floods, we asked Prime Minister Ecevit to comment on this issue. He said that he rejects this decision, adding: At this stage, I do not even want to think about what happens next.

What I see is that Turkey naturally has a plan regarding this process. Are we moving toward an annexation of the ``TRNC'' and a situation where we do not make any concessions from our position?

Answer: No. The basic thing in Cyprus is still a solution. A solution which will be mutually negotiated by the two sides and which will be mutually acceptable to them continues to be the basic target of Turkey, of the ``TRNC'', and of Mr. Denktash.

Question: The EU is not supporting that.

Answer: The Europeans are not helping in that. In fact, that is one of the main reasons for the current difficulty. The EU and the CoE are not helping. As for the ECHR, let alone help, it is exacerbating the situation. Despite all that, however, Turkey and the ``TRNC'' will continue to do all they can for a solution. The UN Secretary-General's efforts will be revived, but even the Secretary- General himself will find it difficult to revive them because one of the basic issues in the Cyprus problem is the issue of property. The United Nations has always thought that this issue can be resolved through an exchange of property and compensation. However, with its latest decision, the ECHR has said: No, the issue will not be solved in this way; everyone will have his or her own property back and that is how the issue will be resolved.

Question: This means that the Greek Cypriots will go to the north.

Answer: The UN Secretary-General should also be disturbed by this situation. We hope that in the coming period, the UN Secretary-General will take into account the views posited and the work done during the negotiations last year, and that he will be able to put certain ideas on the negotiating table that can bring the two sides together on a new basis, on an equal basis. He can do that.

Question: Let us assume that in 2002 the EU admits the Greek Cypriot Administration as a member. What will Turkey do?

Answer: If the EU decides to admit the Greek Cypriot Administration when the Cyprus problem is still unsolved, then the EU can have no say over what Turkey and the ``TRNC'' decide to do between themselves.

Question: You mean there will be a unification.

Answer: A unification, integration, a larger integration. We do not have to put the label from now. Basically, the relations between Turkey and the ``TRNC'' will move toward a deeper integration. We are still saying that this is not a good alternative. The best alternative for all would be to reach a solution to the Cyprus problem. Everybody must work hard to achieve that. The EU must also make efforts and make its contribution. We are trying to persuade everyone about that.

[05] Turkey's Justice Minister Discusses ECHR Cases According to YENIDUZEN (21.5.01) Turkey/s Justice Minister Hikmet Sami Turk

Turk responded to a motion submitted to the parliament by Emre Kocaoglu, a deputy of the Motherland Party (ANAP) from Istanbul province about applications to the ECHR against Turkey, and the amount of compensation paid by Turkey.

Turk said: ``There are nearly five thousand applications to the ECHR against Turkey. Most of them are personal applications. Almost 2,500 of the applications have been made from the Greek Cypriot side and 1,500 by our citizens living in southeastern Anatolia. Except for personal applications, Denmark and the Greek Cypriot side have made a total of five state applications.``

``While 40 applications against Turkey were considered unacceptable, 45 others were deleted from the records. The ECHR announced its verdicts about 118 applications against Turkey. Of these 101 applications have come to a conclusion against Turkey while seven of them have been concluded in favour of Turkey. Meanwhile, two of these applications have been deleted from the records. Turkey has reached friendly settlement in 37 applications to the ECHR. The subject of seven applications which came to conclusion in favour of Turkey were `right to live`, `ownership`, `freedom of religious belief and conscience`, `detention period` and `maltreatment`,`` he said.

Turk noted: ``Applications from the Greek Cypriot side were ranked first in distribution of the applications in accordance with their subjects. Applications about `late payment of expropriation values`, `burning villages and evacuation`, `torture and detention period`, `unsolved homicides and right to live`, `freedom of thought and expression`, `right to fair trial`, `removal of officers from the Turkish Armed Forces upon decision of the Higher Military Board` followed them. Among subjects of the applications, there are also closure of political parties, state applications and implementation of invalid laws.``

``Turkey has paid 179 billion 560 million 885 Turkish liras, 171 thousand 124 British pounds, 139 thousand 249 U.S. dollars, and 890 thousand 281 French francs in compensation in cases which were concluded against it. Turkey will pay 764 thousand 112 British pounds, 1 million 528 thousand 281 U.S. dollars, 786 thousand 924 German marks and 9 billion Turkish liras in compensation in the future,`` he added.

[06] Council of Europe Assembly President Says Rejecting ECHR Decision Will Cause Problems

When asked whether he had put forward any proposal on the issue of death fasts, Johnston said that he could not propose to the government to hold negotiations with death-fasting prisoners.

Recalling that Turkey had been implementing a moratorium on the issue of capital punishment since 1984, Johnston quoted Turkish officials as telling him that if the economic crisis had not affected Turkey negatively, new penal code would have been adopted.

Referring to the freedom of expression, Johnston said that political and religious affairs had been separated from each other in Europe.

Noting that the issue of closure of political parties was brought onto agenda during his contacts in Ankara, Johnston said that the Council of Europe was not in favour of fundamentalism.

``Presence of some religious elements in the programme of a political party can be in question. But these elements should not threaten democracy. There are serious circles in Turkey defending both separatism and fundamentalism. The Council of Europe approaches the issue in line with its principles,`` he told reporters.

Pointing out that they had taken up the issue of Southeastern Anatolia, Johnston said that the Council of Europe did not accept terrorism whatever its reasons were.

He added that rights of minorities should not be jeopardized to take terrorism under control.

Responding to a question about the European Court of Human Rights` (ECHR) recent verdict about Cyprus Johnston said that Turkey`s rejecting the verdict of the ECHR could create serious problems.

Johnston said that COEPA`s Turkey rapporteurs Andras Barsony and Benno Zierer would visit Turkey in coming days to hold a series of contacts.

Lord Russel-Johnston added that a delegation from the Council of Europe Committee for Prevention of Torture would also visit Ankara soon.

[07] Denktash sees ``Byzantine tricks'' in a Turkish Cypriot's demand to vote in the 27 May elections

Talking at a ceremony of the ``Civil Defence Organisation'', Mr. Denktash said that the Greek Cypriot side ``is alleging'' that the reason Mr. Aziz is not being able to vote in the elections is the 1960 Constitution and thus the above mentioned Turkish Cypriot will be forced to appeal to the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR), which ``takes very good political decisions''.

[08] The Turkish Prime Minister alleges that the ECHR decision had no effect on Turkey

In an interview with NTV television late on Thursday, Ecevit replied to questions concerning Turkey/s foreign policy. He said Turkey was playing an active role in the Middle East peace process and efforts to end violence in FYROM.

When asked about Greek President Costis Stefanopoulos/s remarks that he did not believe problems will be solved through dialogue between Turkey and Greece, Ecevit replied that he was not accustomed to this kind of statement.

Stressing that there has been a dialogue process between Turkey and Greece in recent years Ecevit said: ``We have witnessed that certain problems have been discussed between our countries for two years. The two countries/ people take great happiness from these developments. But certain Greek politicians are keeping away from dialogue. I take great sorrow from this''.

When asked another question about the European Court of Human Rights verdict, condemning Turkey for abuses in Northern Cyprus, Ecevit said the case should be directed at the ``TRNC'', not at Turkey.

Ecevit also said the verdict had no effect whatsoever on Turkey.

``If they have accusations against Northern Cyprus they must first make then known on ``TRNC'' soil. They must recognize the existence of that state'', he said.

He said that if the court turned its attention to the ``TRNC'' ``They are going to find a state with an advanced degree of human rights. There is a very strong democracy in the TRNC, and it is a state with the utmost respect for human rights''.

Ecevit also claimed that it is out of the question for Turkey to make concessions in its foreign policy while it struggles to overcome the economic crisis.

[09] A new nationalist organisation was founded in the occupied areas

According to its first announcement, the aim of the Movement is to struggle ``using every legal means and all its power'' against those who attack Turkey, the Turkish army and the Turkish interests in the Eastern Mediterranean.

The Movement considers that it is its duty to struggle against ``the twin Greece - Greek Cypriots, the Western Imperialism and their collaborators'' in the Turkish Cypriot community, who are trying to turn the Turkish Cypriots into a minority.

The paper writes that the Movement has established its central offices in occupied Nicosia, but it also has representatives in all occupied towns and villages, as well as in Turkey, England, Australia and Eurasia.

Meanwhile, according to Ortam (21.5.01), the Movement issued yesterday a second announcement regarding the tearing of some of its posters, threatening that it ``will interfere''. Ortam notes that the founders of NPM, the names and the financial sources of whom are unknown, seemed to forget that they live in a so-called ``sate of law''.

It is noted that last week Avrupa wrote that such an organisation would be established, that its organiser is the former so-called Foreign Minister and counsellor of Rauf Denktash, Taner Etkin, that NPM is regarded as the continuation of underground TMT and that its activities would be turned against the progressive Turkish Cypriots who do not agree with the Denktash/s policy on the Cyprus problem.

[B] COMMENTS AND EDITORIALS

[01] Columnist in SABAH criticizes Turkey for the treatment of the enclaved Greek Cypirots

``The European Court of Human Rights, ECHR, has condemned Turkey for violating human rights in 14 different instances in Cyprus.

The ECHR decision was taken following the Greek Cypriot administration/s application. The Greek Cypriots, during the 1974 Peace Operation and after that for the last 25 years, condemned Turkey of violating the European Convention on Human Rights on several occasions in the island, that is acting in a manner not respecting the Human Rights. The court justified most of the accusations. In one of them we have been accused of ``Acting inhumanely'' and on some of them the charges were revoked.

The ECHR was established in Strasbourg, France in 1959, and in 1998 it became permanent. Its duty is to handle the Human Rights violations. Turkey is both a member and the best customer of this Court. If we do not change, and there is no sign towards that direction, rulings that will be taken against in this Court, which are like snowball that gets bigger and bigger, will cause a major headache to us.

Most of the cases of the Court rulings (which are the subject of this article) that the Greek Cypriots were vindicated, are the treatment meted out to the Greek Cypriots living in the Karpass Peninsula.

The Karpass Peninsula is like the handle of a frying sauce pan, that extends towards Turkey.

When in August, 1974, the Turkish army advanced towards Famagusta from the East of Nicosia and occupied Famagusta and its modern section, Varosha, the Greek Cypriots in villages in Karpass peninsula were enclaved. When the guns fell silent, Turks from the south went to north and Greek Cypriots from the north went to the south. However, the Greeks in Karpass peninsula were left outside this population exchange. However, the administration wanted the Greek Cypriots of Karpass Peninsula to leave Karpass. For this reason it did not treat them well. It applied measures that turned the life of these Greek Cypriots like living in a dangeon. They were unable to sow their fields, they were unable to visit their churches as they wished. Text books sent for study at the primary schools were subject to censorship.

Children were unable to inherit the property left by their dead parents. Greek Cypriots who went south and did not return back to the north had their property confiscated. Thus the Greek Cypriot population started diminishing slowly and what is left behind is a handful of people the majority of which are old people.

If one summerizes, what the Greek Cypriots have done to us prior to 1974 we have subjected them to something similar.

Who charted this policy that disgraced 65 million Turks, against unarmed and harmless Greek Cypriots?

Do you think that it is worth the territory that was acquired as a result of what is meted out there to the bad reputation we have been given? While we are dispatching troops to Bosnia and Somalia to defend the other people against inhumane treatment, why did not we treated in a civilized manner those civilian people who trusted themselves to our sense of justice?. Why didn/t we show the same kind hospitality to the Greek Cypriots of Karpass peninsula that we showed to the hundred of thousands of Iraqi Kurds?

I was ashamed and my face was blushed, when I read the decision of the ECHR.

Whatever the outcome is, noone has the right to present the Turks to the outside world as barbarians and disgrace them.

Please, be a little bit soft, 27 years have passed since the war ended''.

[71] Yeniduzen`s columnist expresses fears for his life Tema Irkad, columnist of Yeniduzen and former ``police'' officer, has

The so-called Prime Minister says in his statement that from now on the Turkish army and the so-called security forces would take ``legal measures'' against those who ``unfairly attack'' them.

Mr. Irkad notes that he makes known to the so-called ``Parliament'', ``the Police'' and to ``all the public opinion'' that his life is in danger after Mr. Eroglu`s statement and warns that if nothing is done to eliminate his fears then he will appeal to international judicial organs.

Mr. Irgad is a retired so-called ``police officer'' who now writes in Yeniduzen about matters relevant to his old profession.

Commenting on the issue Avrupa (20.5.01) writes that the most important events for which Mr. Irgad conducted investigations were the attack on St. Barnabas Monastery and the murder of Yeniduzen`s journalist Kutlu Adali.

Mr. Irgad with his articles has repeatedly expressed the view that the responsibility for these crimes belongs to the so-called Organisation of Civilian Defence, notes Avrupa reminding that the head of the above mentioned organisation at the time was Galip Mendi, who is now commander of the so-called Security forces.

``Tema (Irgad) believes that this statement (Eroglu`s statement) is a warning and a threat made on behalf of Galip Mendi and as far as we are concerned he is right'', adds Avrupa.

From the Republic of Cyprus Press and Information Office (PIO) Server at http://www.pio.gov.cy/

Cyprus Press and Information Office: Turkish Cypriot Press Review Directory - Previous Article - Next Article