Recent decision of the European Court of Human Rights (July 29, 1998)

IN a case of "historic importance", the European Court of Human Rights has awarded Greek Cypriot Titina Loizidou compensation for Turkey's occupation of her lands in Kyrenia since 1974. The court ruling last night could be a landmark in opening up hundreds of similar cases against Turkey. Loizidou's lawyer said that if that did happen, compensation claims against Turkey could run into billions of pounds. Speaking at a press conference yesterday, soon after the court decision was announced, Cyprus Attorney General Alekos Markides said the decision was of "historic importance". He said the European court had decided Loizidou was entitled, for "prevention of enjoyment of her property", to CŁ300,000. In addition, he told a news conference, she was entitled to CŁ20,000 in moral damages and a further CŁ137,000 to cover her legal costs. "This is the end of a judicial process which began in 1989," said Markides. The European Court of Human Rights judgement stated: "In view of its earlier findings that the applicant had suffered an unjustified interference with her property rights, which was imputable to Turkey, the court considered that it should make an award under Article 50." Article 50 of the European Convention on Human Rights states: :Every natural or legal person is entitled to the peaceful enjoyment of his possessions." The Loizidou vs Republic of Turkey case was filed in 1989 and seven years later, in December 1996, the European Court of Human Rights ruled that Turkey had violated Loizidou's rights by denying her access to her property. Almost a year later, in November 1997, the court reserved its final decision on whether Turkey should pay compensation to Loizidou. Yesterday Markides described the 1996 ruling and the new court verdicts as "landmark decisions". "We now have practical compensation," he said. Loizidou's lawyer, Achilleas Demetriades, told the Cyprus Mail he felt Turkey would have a hard time not compensating his client. "In the event that Turkey does not pay, one will have to seriously consider taking legal action in a Council of Europe member state in order to enforce the court judgment," Demetriades said. He said that these steps would be directed at Turkish assets in the state and that "these assets should have no protection through diplomatic immunity and should be susceptible to execution." He also suggested that Turkish Airlines might be the "subject matter of this enforcement." Asked to evaluate the significance of the court ruling, Demetriades said he believed "the road is now open for everyone else in Loizidou's shoes to file a petition to the Council of Europe." Given that there are approximately 200,000 Greek Cypriot refugees from the 1974 war, Demetriades estimated the total cost of compensation for Turkey as "somewhere in billions of pounds". For his part, the Attorney General made clear that the ruling does not exonerate Turkey's continuing violation of Greek Cypriots' property rights in the north. "It's not the sort of compensation where the state gets the property... Turkey is still liable for Loizidou's continuing inability to enjoy her property," he stated. Markides pointed out that the European Union Council's ministerial committee was now obligated "to force Turkey to give Loizidou access to her property." The committee is set to convene in September. Asked whether Turkey would be forced to compensate Loizidou, the Attorney General simply said that "no state has so far managed to avoid conforming with an European Court of Human Rights decision... there is no precedent for this." The Attorney General also explained that the Ł300,000 compensation had been based on estimates of the property's land value since 1990 and not since 1974, since Turkey did not accept the European Court's jurisdiction until 1990. According to Markides, the European court attributed responsibility to Turkey and not the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus, which it does not recognise. The ruling is seen as giving the Cyprus government what is potentially considerable leverage in European diplomatic circles, particularly in the event that Turkey does not abide by the court's decision.