Nicosia will try to keep up the supervision of the case of Titina Loizidou, a Greek Cypriot who owns property in Turkish-occupied Kyrenia, at the same time, however, Cyprus prepares for all possible outcomes during the next session of the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe. At the same time, Turkey insists in closing the supervision, in a bid to direct the applicant to the “Immovable Property Commission” (IPC) for her property claims.
 
In a landmark case in 1996, the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) ruled that Turkey had violated Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 for the denial of access to the applicant’s property and consequent loss of control thereof. Damages awarded by the Court compensated Loizidou for Turkey’s denial to use her property, nevertheless the restitution of her property is still pending.
 
Loizidou is not among the cases the Committee of Ministers is expected to supervise, during its September 23-25 session, in Strasbourg, but as diplomatic sources told CNA, they expect Turkey to try to include the item in the agenda.

The same sources note that the case is not an easy one, while preparations are underway in order to be able to respond appropriately, depending on the session’s outcome. “We will exert our efforts to prevent the closure of the case, as the Cypriot government believes that Turkey has not yet implemented the judgement of the European Court” they said.
 
The only Cyprus-related case that is on the September agenda has to do with the property rights of the enclaved Greek Cypriots in the in the northern, Turkish-occupied part of Cyprus. The item was included in the agenda during the session of the Committee of Ministers, last December.
 
Two more groups of cases in relation to Cyprus, “Xenides-Arestis” and “Varnava”, have been left out, due to the outcome of the meeting in June. In particular, Turkey was short a few votes last June, when it tried and failed to close the supervision of the Loizidou case. The efforts of the Permanent Representation of the Republic of Cyprus in Strasbourg and direct political contacts at higher political level, seemed to have averted the outcome Turkey was hoping for.
 
Due to this development, however, the Committee of Ministers was unable to take a decision for any of the Cyprus-related cases and was therefore unable to schedule a discussion about them – including the case of Loizidou – in one of its future meetings.

Already in July, Ankara asked for the Loizidou case to be included in the September agenda, a move which required unanimity. Nicosia disagreed and the item has been left out of the list of 29 cases which will be discussed next in Strasbourg.
 
Diplomatic sources expect that the Permanent Representative of Turkey will request the inclusion of the case, in a bid to close the supervision of the Committee of Ministers. In this eventuality – for which Nicosia is preparing, in order to manage the situation – the outcome is expected to have an impact on the argumentation regarding the property issue, as well as on the role of the ‘IPC’. The same sources note that Loizidou is the only Cyprus-related case where the ECHR makes explicit reference to property restitution.
 
The applicant maintains a similar position, arguing that the substance of her case concerns the restitution of her property, for which only the Committee of Ministers is competent to decide upon.

Cyprus has been divided since 1974 when Turkey invaded and occupied its northern third. The European Court of Human Rights sentenced Turkey in numerous cases, brought forward by Greek Cypriots, concerning the violation of their fundamental human rights, following the 1974 invasion.