THE EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS AND THE CYPRUS PROBLEM

Volume: 50 Number: 3 August 1, 2001
  • Yusuf Aksar
EN

THE EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS AND THE CYPRUS PROBLEM

Abstract

The European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) in its recent decisions regarding the Cyprus problem such as the Loizidou v. Turkey and Case of Cyprus v. Turkey finds Turkey responsible for the current situation in the Island. According to the Court, Turkey violates the rights of the Greek Cypriots were living in the northern part of Cyprus before the military intervention of Turkey took place in 1974. Such violations include inhuman treatment of the families of missing Greek Cypriots, denying some 180.000 Greek Cypriots the right to return to their homes, failure to compensate for loss of property and interference with freedom of religion. Finding Turkey responsible instead of the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus (TRNC) is based upon the fact that the TRNC was not an independent State and not even recognised by the international community. This way of application of the rules of international law by the ECHR can be strongly criticised on the ground that it does not give any weight to the causes and effects of the events which took place in Cyprus in 1963 to 1974, and also to the factors which lead the Turkish Cypriots to establish their own independent States. When the recent history of Cyprus is examined it can clearly be seen that the legal status of the TRNC is not any less legal than its Greek Cypriot counterpart with regard to its statehood and recognition in international law. This paper examines the judgements of the ECHR in the light of the historical background of the Cyprus problem, and of the legal status of the TRNC in relation to its statehood and its non-recognition in international law.

Keywords

Details

Primary Language

Turkish

Subjects

-

Journal Section

-

Authors

Yusuf Aksar This is me

Publication Date

August 1, 2001

Submission Date

August 1, 2001

Acceptance Date

-

Published in Issue

Year 2001 Volume: 50 Number: 3

APA
Aksar, Y. (2001). -. Ankara Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi, 50(3), 141-174. https://doi.org/10.1501/Hukfak_0000000590
AMA
1.Aksar Y. -. Ankara Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi. 2001;50(3):141-174. doi:10.1501/Hukfak_0000000590
Chicago
Aksar, Yusuf. 2001. “-”. Ankara Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi 50 (3): 141-74. https://doi.org/10.1501/Hukfak_0000000590.
EndNote
Aksar Y (August 1, 2001) -. Ankara Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi 50 3 141–174.
IEEE
[1]Y. Aksar, “-”, Ankara Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi, vol. 50, no. 3, pp. 141–174, Aug. 2001, doi: 10.1501/Hukfak_0000000590.
ISNAD
Aksar, Yusuf. “-”. Ankara Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi 50/3 (August 1, 2001): 141-174. https://doi.org/10.1501/Hukfak_0000000590.
JAMA
1.Aksar Y. -. Ankara Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi. 2001;50:141–174.
MLA
Aksar, Yusuf. “-”. Ankara Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi, vol. 50, no. 3, Aug. 2001, pp. 141-74, doi:10.1501/Hukfak_0000000590.
Vancouver
1.Yusuf Aksar. -. Ankara Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi. 2001 Aug. 1;50(3):141-74. doi:10.1501/Hukfak_0000000590

Cited By