Why did you
decide to file a petition about your property with the European Court of
Human Rights (ECHR)?
Well, I come
from Kyrenia, which is in the northern part of the Cyprus. It’s the town
where I grew up, where I have my family connections, and it’s the place that
I identify with. I was deprived of this place in 1974 [after the Turkish
invasion], and my application, I would say, symbolizes the fact that no one
has the right to deprive me of the place that I come from.
The decision to
file the petition was more than an issue of property. I felt that I was
deprived of all those experiences and all those people that I would have
liked to be with, and whoever was the aggressor, whoever deprived me of
these things, if I had the chance to do it, I would file the application.
Like anything
you do in life, there are pros and cons, however, I felt that I would try to
to use those mechanisms of the Council of Europe available to me as a
citizen of a member country of the Council. I was fortunate enough to be
able to make use of a system which is unique in the world, as it examines
violations of human rights on a regional basis.
What was your
primary goal in taking your case to the ECHR?
I think that
the primary objective was that an individual, whoever that person is, should
not be deprived of the basic human right to live where they want to live. I
think people should have the possibility to decide on their own where they
would like to be. I think it was a very important issue and it was
underlined in my application.
What was the
reaction from the community when you filedthecase?
First of all, I
had the full support of my family, my husband, my children, and, of course,
my father who was already in his seventies. He was very supportive. Some
people were skeptical because of the ongoing division and presence of
Turkish troops in Cyprus. However, when we had the firstdecisionand the
second decision, I think this gave hope to people that something could be
done on the legal level that will eventually help on the political level.
What do you
think about the process today given the fact that you still do not have
access to your property?
Yes, my rights
have not been fully restored, however, I feel that the property issue is so
important for the solution of the Cyprus problem. And I feel pleased in a
way that this case has set a precedent regardless of what plan is proposed
to the Cypriots. Property rights cannot be dismissed. So I feel that this
case has contributed to that.
The
relationship between your case a solution to the Cyprus conflict raises an
interesting discussion about whether law is an obstacle to a political
solution. How do you see the role of law?
I am not a
lawyer, I am an individual, I am a citizen of the Republic of Cyprus. I am a
person who has seen Cyprus divided, divided not only physically, but I have
also seen people divided. Turkish and Greek Cypriotsused to live together. I
feel that law can be supportive of a political decision not to discriminate
between people. It can give respect to people within the framework of human
rights. I am not saying this in a strict way, I am saying this in a wider
perspective, because without a system to promote and protect human rights, I
do not think things will develop well. I am talking about law in many
aspects, securing human rights in everyday life. I am not only talking about
the right to property. Law that will ensure respect between people, because
if there is no respect between people then human rights will be repressed
again.
Given the
rejection of the Anan Plan what are your predictions on how the property
issues for both Turkish Cypriots and Greece Cypriots will be resolved in the
future?
Well, I think
that people should have the right to decide about their properties. I think
the very complicated way that the Anan Plan proposed to deal with properties
did not take into account the fact that people were attached to their
properties sentimentally. Property was a way to identify themselves with the
places they came from. I believe that if the plan had been less restrictive
and given people more freedom to decide how to use their properties, people
would have been happier. I would have been happier myself.
People felt
that with the Anan Plan, although the politicians came together in order to
reach a solution, quite a lot of the people themselves were kept in the
dark. We have gone through very dramatic experiences which needed to be
resolved before facing a solution which the people did not know about or
knew that the politicians were discussing. People were taking stands for or
against it even though they did not know the elements of the solution, and
having developed a human rights consciousness, people did not feel that it
met their views.
What does
Kyrenia mean to you today, and in terms of the future of Cyprus itself?
Kyrenia is my
hometown, it’s Cyprus for me. I cannot really divide it from me. I always
see Cyprus as a whole. Of course, the situation in Kyrenia has changed
[since 1974]. I have no problems to go back to Kyrenia, to live in Kyrenia
with a Turkish Cypriot administration. For me it is still Kyrenia.
Obviously, the people that I relate to from before 1974 will not be there.
It will be a different situation, but I hope I will be able to help build a
new situation, and be a link, being one of the old of the older generation
now. This is how I would like things to turn out, to be able to share
Kyrenia with people who would go back and with people who are there and do
not want to leave. For me it still Kyrenia, it is still Cyprus without the
people that I loved and that I communicated with, but people are people, and
I am prepared to share Kyrenia with the Turkish Cypriots, and they are
Cypriots anyway.
