In a speech entitled “Turkey’s defiant impunity after 50 years of invasion and illegal occupation of Cyprus”, during the event organized by the Association “Asia Minor Shelter of Corinth”, the former President of the Republic, Academician and Honorary Professor of the Faculty of Law EKPA Mr. Procopius Pavlopoulos pointed out, among others, the following:
“Prologue
It has been 50 years since Turkey’s barbaric invasion, in violation of all concepts of international law as well as all relevant decisions of UN bodies, of Martyr Cyprus and its defiant occupation of one third of the territory of the Republic of Cyprus continues. This unimaginable impunity by Turkey – when accompanied by its blatant refusal to accept a resolution of the Cyprus issue in a manner consistent with international law and European law – on behalf of the international community and the European Union is neither admissible nor tolerable to continue.
I. Turkey and Russia’s “complicity” in the serious violation of international law
This is now becoming more than obvious due to the current international situation. And I am referring primarily to the equally barbaric invasion of Ukraine by Russia, since no one has the right to ignore that the Turkish invasion and occupation of Cyprus and the above-mentioned indifference – to say the least – of the International Community and the European Union were the “pattern” that the Russian leadership did not hesitate to adopt to attack Ukraine and provoke the bloody war.
A. The war continues, with the “invisible” prospect of its end still “invisible” and with an impossible assessment of how far its further escalation can lead to Peace and Security throughout the world. Greece and Cyprus – in stark contrast to Turkey – have supported, hope to support and will continue to support, sincerely and in various ways, especially within the framework of the European Union, the suffering people of Ukraine. From now on, and especially once this horrible war is over and the guilty invader pays the high price for his crime, we must draw the necessary lessons, both at the level of the European Union and at the level of the International Community. And conclusions about its causes and effects.
B. In this spirit and as consistent defenders of European and international legitimacy, Greece and Cyprus – in essence, Hellenism as a whole – must demonstrate to the European Union, but also to the international community, especially the United States and NATO, how great their responsibilities are because they tolerated and continue to tolerate, for so many decades, the effects and achievements of the Turkish invasion and occupation of the territory of the Republic of Cyprus. The first gross violation of the territorial integrity and sovereignty of a Member State of the International Community since the Second World War. An invasion that claimed the lives of thousands of innocent victims, whose fates remain unknown to this day.
II. The conditions for resolving the Cyprus question in accordance with international and European law.
Unfortunately, to date, and despite the Republic of Cyprus completing two decades as a full Member State of the European Union, the Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP) has never been sufficiently activated – and par excellence under conditions that correspond to the Principle of Solidarity, especially the provisions of the aforementioned Article 42, paragraph 7, of the TEU – in favour of Cyprus and against Turkey. CFSP sanctions against Turkey for the flagrant violation of European and international law at the expense of the Republic of Cyprus are demonstrably absent, although at no time has that country been pressured, essentially, to settle the Cyprus question conditionally under European and European Union law. Legitimacy. That is, under the conditions of a federal-type representative democracy, as required by the European acquis. At this point, it should be stressed that, according to the aforementioned, a solution to the Cyprus question is only understood under the following seven conditions, as a minimum:
A. Firstly, the Republic of Cyprus should at most have the form of a federal state, in accordance with international and especially European standards. No form of confederation, direct or covert, is tolerated. And this is mainly due to the fact that, apart from the fact that such a “solution” is, by definition, “fatal” and serves only the aspirations and interests of Turkey, leading to the essential disintegration of the state of the Republic of Cyprus, it is in total opposition to the “core” of primary European law. Above all, with the provisions of the EEC, as regards the form of state and the sovereignty of its Member States. In fact, it is a legal and political “common ground” that a confederate state cannot be a Member State of the European Union, since it cannot, by its very nature, fulfil, among other things, the requirements for proper compliance with the European acquis.
B. Secondly, the Republic of Cyprus must be based, in its entirety, on the fundamental principles of Representative Democracy, as an institutional guarantee of Freedom in the world. Therefore, as an institutional guarantee of Fundamental Human Rights, not only in accordance with National Law, but also in accordance with International and European Law.
C. Thirdly, the Republic of Cyprus must have, as a member of the International Community and the European Union, an International Legal Personality.
D. Fourthly, in the Republic of Cyprus there is one, and only one, Citizenship.
E. Fifthly, the Sovereignty of the Republic of Cyprus must be complete, with equally complete respect for all, without exception, the provisions of International and European Law. This means completeness of the Domain stricto sensu – e.g. with regard to its territorial integrity, its borders, its coastal zone, etc. – and its Sovereignty lato sensu, therefore the full exercise of all, without any distinction, its Sovereign Rights, in particular the Rights of all its Maritime Zones under the International Law of the Sea (Montego Bay Convention of 1982), e.g. on its continental shelf and in its exclusive economic zone. The fact that Turkey has not acceded to the said International Convention has no bearing on this, since, according to the case law of the International Court of Justice in The Hague, it produces internationally accepted rules of International Law, which apply erga omnes.
F. Sixthly – and as a consequence – the Republic of Cyprus is not allowed to remain in any way as an occupying force, nor to apply, in any way, guarantees from third parties. And these “guarantees” also include potential “guarantees” from Great Britain, especially after Brexit.
G. And seventh, the above implies that the “settlers”, who were illegally colonized by Turkey, according to the case law of the European Court of Human Rights, must leave the Republic of Cyprus, unconditionally, and return the refugees who were forced to leave their homes due to the Turkish invasion, fully recovering all their rights according to the European Convention on Human Rights and also according to the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union.
Epilogue
As for the International Community and the UN, the resulting “equal” treatment of Turkey and Cyprus – that is, the “author” and the “victim” of the Turkish invasion and occupation – according to the logic of tolerating endless and empty discussions between two parties, shows how today International Law, under the exclusive responsibility of the International Community itself and the UN, is composed not so much of leges perfectae, but in many cases of leges minus quam perfectae or even leges imperfectae. Greece and Cyprus, in sending the message that they are not prepared to accept this quasi-“hibernation” of the CFSP and international legitimacy, must, as Member States of the European Union and the international community, place their responsibilities before the European institutions and the international community, pointing out, without any reversals, retreats or retreats, the following: As we all stand today alongside Ukraine, condemning Russia’s war crime without words and in practice, in the same line of defence of Europe and international legitimacy, we must condemn – using the veto, if necessary, in future decisions of the European Union and NATO – that Turkey’s current criminal tactics against the martyrdom of Cyprus be condemned unequivocally and in practice. Because the selective application of international and European legality leads, unfortunately, to its substantial nullification.”