The European Court of Human Rights gave its largest compensation order in its history and ordered Turkey to pay \u00a0\u20ac90 million in damages for invading Cyprus in 1974. There will be long-term serious legal and political implications of this unusual judgment for Turkey.<\/p>\n
Why is the ruling<\/a> on 12 May 2014 so unusual?<\/p>\n First of all, it comes as a result of an interstate application by Cyprus directly challenging Turkey. It lasted longer than usual and ended up with a record sum.<\/p>\n The case of Cyprus v. Turkey was brought to the ECHR 20 years ago, in 1994. \u00a0On 10 May 2011, the court had ruled largely in Cyprus\u2019 favour but did not make a decision on the amount of compensation. \u00a0This is because Cyprus\u2019 claim for financial compensation on the basis of Article 41- just satisfaction- came later. Following the 2001 decision, it was not until 2007 that the Cyprus government told the court that they planned to submit a claim. On November 25, 2011 the application was submitted for financial compensation to be paid to the missing persons. In 2012, another claim for compensation concerning the violations committed against the Greek Cypriots living in the enclaved Karpas peninsula was added.<\/p>\n According to the ECHR ruling, 30 million euros will be distributed to the living relatives of the missing Greek Cypriots and 60 million euros will be paid to the Karpas peninsula residents.<\/p>\n The court, finding Turkey liable for damages 40 years after the invasion, decided that the passage of time did not erase responsibility.<\/p>\n The court\u2019s Grand Chamber, whose judgement is final and cannot be appealed, ordered Turkey to pay the compensation in 18 months.<\/p>\n The Cypriot government welcomed the judgement and said it expected an immediate compliance by Turkey. It also called for the court ruling concerning measures to stop sale of Greek Cypriot properties in Northern Cyprus to be implemented.<\/p>\n Turkey\u2019s first official reaction, calling the judgement unfair, inconsistent and lacking a legal ground was rather brief. The court\u2019s decision and its implications are clearly still being evaluated. The Foreign Ministry questioned its timing, coming at a time of intensified efforts to find a lasting solution to the Cyprus. Turkey\u2019s emphasis on\u00a0 its determination to continue the negotiations also points to a more considered reaction being on the way.<\/p>\n However, before the verdict was announced, Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet Davuto\u011flu had said that an ECHR ruling on the case would not be binding for Turkey. \u00a0After the verdict, Davuto\u011flu made it clear that they did not see it necessary to pay\u00a0 compensation to a country that\u00a0 Turkey did not recognize.<\/p>\n R\u0131za T\u00fcrmen, a former judge of the ECHR thought differently. Mr T\u00fcrmen told Reuters that Turkey would be legally required to comply with the ruling.<\/p>\n There is no question that Turkey has an international obligation to abide by the judgement. Article 46 of the European Convention on Human Rights makes it clear that Turkey as a signatory is committed to comply with the decisions of the court..<\/p>\n Compared to Turkey\u2019s overall financial commitment to Northern Cyprus, the sum ordered by the ECHR \u00a0is not that huge. Delaying the payment will only add to the final sum. \u00a0If the choice is between getting\u00a0 out of the Council of Europe and paying up, I suspect Turkey will choose the implementation option at the end.<\/p>\n In Turkey, the immediate concern seems to be the possible \u201cprecedence\u201d it will set for other compensation claims. As Turkey gets closer to the centenary of the 1915 Armenian mass killings, there is a fear that \u00a0similar legal challenges may follow. Predictably, the pro-government newspaper Yeni \u015eafak<\/a> suggested that the court decision was a \u201cpolitical\u201d one, making the way for future Armenian cases. \u00a0The newspaper also claimed that some judges at the ECHR were in contact with an Armenian organisation in France to find a way to bring such claims to the European Court.<\/p>\n There is plenty of confusion about the international law\u00a0 but I would not be surprised if both the government and some of the opposition would whip up these sentiments in the coming days.<\/p>\n The \u00a0widely made comment about the timing of the verdict is also indicative of a lack of information on the Cyprus issue.\u00a0 This is an old case which happened to produce a judgement coinciding with a particularly sensitive time.<\/p>\n Even without the ECHR verdict, Cyprus should have \u00a0been on Turkey\u2019s agenda. \u00a0US Vice President\u00a0 Joe Biden is due on the island next week.\u00a0 According to a press release by the White House, he will meet \u00a0political leaders from the Greek Cypriot and Turkish Cypriot communities, civil society representatives, and faith leaders. Among them the Turkish Cypriot president Dervis Ero\u011flu who first leaked the news of the visit to the Habert\u00fcrk columnist Muharrem Sarikaya. Ero\u011flu was quoted<\/a> as saying that up until now, the US has looked after the Greek Cypriot interests and did nothing for the Turkish side. Muharrem Sarikaya commented that there is an expectation for the US vice-president to push for a joint oil and natural gas company to be set up. The hope is that will lead to a joint administration.<\/p>\n I am not sure how accurate the Turkish Cypriot side\u2019s reading of the American intentions regarding the eastern Mediterranean energy politics is.<\/p>\n The scene in the region is changing all the time. For a start, sending the gas found in the Leviathan field via Cyprus or Turkey no longer seems to be the only option. Turkey\u2019s unpredictable foreign policy decisions helped turn Egypt into a more viable hub.<\/p>\n A self-deluding foreign policy has harmed Turkey\u2019s international standing. Furthermore, not spending more time and effort on its unresolved problems such as Cyprus has now turns out to be not only damaging but a costly mistake for Turkey.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" The European Court of Human Rights gave its largest compensation order in its history and ordered Turkey to pay \u00a0\u20ac90 million in damages for invading Cyprus in 1974. There will be long-term serious legal and political implications of this unusual judgment for Turkey. Why is the ruling on 12 May 2014 so unusual? First of […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":[],"categories":[1],"tags":[4],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.firdevstalkturkey.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/694"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.firdevstalkturkey.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.firdevstalkturkey.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.firdevstalkturkey.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.firdevstalkturkey.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=694"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.firdevstalkturkey.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/694\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.firdevstalkturkey.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=694"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.firdevstalkturkey.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=694"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.firdevstalkturkey.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=694"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}