It took centuries of hard struggles to have the fundamental rights of all members of the human family and the inherent dignity and worth of the human person solemnly recognized and safeguarded.

Though the feeling of-self-preservation, the passion for liberty and freedom and the resistance to personal aggression, oppression and exploitation are inbred in every human being and date back to dawn of history and though even at the time when man was living in a state of nature and before the formation of political societies the protection of his life, the maintenance of his liberty and the enjoyment of his property were his main preoccupations, nevertheless we cannot speak about human rights until after the formation of the society and the emergence of the state.

Man according to Aristotle is by nature " - political animal"1) and cannot live but in a society organised in a state. But a state cannot exist and function unless governed by certain rules of social behaviour. It is then that the legal relationship between members of the society constituting the state and the society itself is created and rights to such members are granted.2) A right, irrespectively of whether it is a power of the will or a protected interest or a power of the capable of protecting an interest,3) is always granted by law.4) The law is always created by the state and cannot pre-exist its establishment; the members of a state cannot enjoy a right allegedly vested in them either by nature or by what was called "natural law" and brought by them on joining the state.5)

On the creation of the various forms of the state the individual rights and freedoms started to be recognized and protected by the legal systems of the various states, though to a variable extent depending on the social structure and order prevailing in each particular state.

At the same time the clash between the state and the individual regarding their respective rights appeared. As observed by John Stuart Mill6) "the struggle between Liberty and Authority is the most conspicuous feature in the portions of history with which we are earlist familiar particularly in that of Greece, Rome and England".

In the Greek city-state all recognized freedoms were enclosed in the concept of civil rights belonging to the citizens only and consisting in their participation in the exercise of the political power whilist the greater part of the population was not enjoying eight full freedom or any freedom at all like the slaves.

"The foundation of the democratic state is liberty" says Aristotle in Book 6 Ch. I. "This is often said that it is only in this state that there exists any share in liberty at all; every democracy they say has liberty for its aim. Ruling and being ruled in turn is one element of liberty".

So it appears that Aristotle had the conception of political liberty only and not that of individual liberty only and not that of individual liberty and ancient Greeks confused liberty with democracy. Such confusion is adversely critised by Montesquieu.7)

In ancient Rome slavery existed as well. Certain liberties, in the from of civil rights such as the right to contact, the right to marry, the right to property, the right to dispose of property by will, were recognized and protected but there existed no individual freedoms.8)

From the East came then the influence of the Christian doctrine of equality under which "there is neither Greek nor Jew, circumcision not unciecumcision, Barbarian, Scythian, bond not free".9)

With the fall, however, of the Roman Empire and the adoptation of the feudal system every idea of freedom was almost wiped out and the man was at the mercy of his ruler. It was quite natural that there would be outbursts against the oppression by the holders of power in the medieval Europe, who eventually had to give way.

Thus one day in the year 1215 at Runnemede where the revolting barons were gathered, King John had to seal with his seal (as, being illiterate, he could not sign) the Magna Charta which laid the foundation of modern liberties.

Its famous clause against arbitrary arrest and for the proper administration of justice is worth citing:

"No freeman shall be taken or imprisoned, or be disseised of his freehold, or liberties, or free customs, or be outlawed, or exiled, or any other wise destroyed; not will we not pass upon him, not condemn him but by lawful judgment or his peers, or by the law of the land. We will sell to no man, we will not deny or defer to any man either justice or right."

It is so observed that such freedoms were granted only to "freemen" and not to every individual.

In this respect three further documents should be mentioned, the Petition of Rights of 1628,10) which is enrolled in the statute book as 3 Car 1 c. 1 whereby the King yielded to certain protests of the Lords and the Commons regarding taxation without the consent of Parliament, arbitrary imprisonment and the use of commission of material law in time of peace, the Bill of Rights, 1688,11) whereby further restrictions were put on the use of the royal prerogative, particularly with regard to dispensing with, or suspending the operating of law, the raising of money without the consent of Parliament, the requiring of excessive bail or the inflicting of cruel and unusual punishments, and the Act of Settlement, 1700,12) which not only provided for the Succesion to the Throne but added certain important provisions complementary to those contained in the Bill of Rights and dealt, particularly, with the holding of office by Judges quamdiu bene se gesserint.

The Bill of Rights and the Act of Settlement mark the victory of Parliament against the King and secured certain historical rights and freedoms of the Englishman as against the monarch.13)

Under the common law of England, however, these freedoms were enlarged and extended to every person and through the means of the powerful writ of habeas corpus the personal liberty of every individual was secured and protected to an extent never koown in any other country.

Thus, since 1771 Lord Mansfield in Letting free the coloured slave James Sommersett, who was held in irons on board a ship bound for Jamaica, has declared that "the air of England is too pure for any slave to breathe."14)

In America through the Virginia Bill of Rights of the 12th June, 1776, the first Constitution of Massachusetts of 1780 and the Declaration of Independence of the 4th July, 1776, the political creed of the American People was proclaimed that "all men are created equal and that they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights and that amongst those are Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness."

Such statements reflect the then prevailing ideas of the school of natural law. It was Grotius, the founder of such school, who first expounded the theory of natural rights. According to Grotius15) there exists an immutable right, like nature itself, which is congenital which the human being and is inherent in the dignity of man. Such right guarantees the liberty of man and so human power can offend it as it would be against the laws of nature.

Similar views were expressed by Blackstone more than a century later.

"The principal aim of society" said Black-stone in his Commentaries (Blok I Chapter I) "is to protect individuals in the enjoyment of those absolote rights which were vested in them by the immutable laws of nature ... hence it follows that the first and primary end of human laws is to maintain and regulate these absolute rights of individuals".

Thirteen years after the American Declarations, by the Immortal French "Declaration des droits de l'homme et du citoyen" of 1789 en end was put to the heroic and feudal times and freedom of thought, expression and declared that "tous les hommes naissent et demeurent libres et egaux en droit", a full equality before the law thus being established.

That declaration and the ensuring declarations of 1793 and 1795, influenced by the political philosophy of the eighteenth century and especially by the Contract Social of Rousseau, proclaim in a general, absolute and dogmatic manner, the natural, inalienable, imprescriptible and sacred rights of man, not of the man living in a particular country at a particular time, but of man in the abstract of all countries and of all ages.

Mirabeau was telling the Constitutante at its session of the 17th August, 1789, that -

And that is what distinguishes the French declarations from the American declarations, Whilst the former are more general, absolute and dogmatic the latter are more relative, accurate and practical.

As observed by Bootmy,17) the American declaration of 1776 is mainly an address of a counsel for the purpose of persuading the court of public opinion on the justness of the claims of the American colonists against the King of England.

On the other hand in his reply to George Jellinek regarding the comparison of the American and French declarations Bootmy rightly observed -

Similar lines were following the constitutions voted by the Greek National Assemblies during the period on Insurrection in the nineteenth century.18a)

But though the principles of such declarations were rapidly spread over the whole world and as "idees forces" exercised a great influence on the legislature of various countries, nevertheless it cannot be said that they affored per se any legal protection to this rights they proclaim. Being more declarations, they cannot be enforced unless the municipal legislation provides adequate remedies.19)

As observed by the Simon Commision in its Report on the Indian Constitution (1930)20) -

For this purpose it was found necessary in the United State inspite of the Declarations to make specific provisions in their Constitution itself by effecting certain amendments to it.

The first eight of these amendments (proposed by Congress on the 25th September 1789 and ratified by the States by the 15th December 1792) contain the Bill of Rights whereby the specific rights provided therein are protected. These amendments prohibit Congress from making any laws respecting the establishment of religion or abridging the freedom of speech or press or the right of the people pecably to assemble and to petition Government. They prohibit violation of the right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers and effects against unreasonable search and seizure. They preserve certain rights in connection with criminal proceedings and they prevent the deprivation of life, liberty and propetry without due process of law.21)

After the Civil War, the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendaments to the Constitution provided for constitutional protection for the citizen against State Government as well.

States are thus preluded from making orenforcing any law "which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; not shall any State deprive anu person of life, liberty or property without due process of law, not deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of law."22) Also the right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United State or by any State on account of race, colour or prevoius condition of servitude.23)

As observed by Mr. Justice Black in his dissenting judgement in Adamson v. California 91 L. Ed. 1903 (1907), the Bill of Rights was aimed at curbing all the branches of the Federal Government in the fields touched by the amendments - Legislative, Executive and Judicial.

The Guardian of the civil rights guaranteed by the Bill of Rights is the Supreme Court which has the power of declaring any law offending against the constitutional provisions as invalid. Since the classical case of Marbury v. Madison (5 U.S. (1 Cranch 137, LL Ed 60 1803)) in which Chief Justice Marshall laid down the principale that the Supreme Court is the arbiter of whether a law is repugnant to the Constitution and, therefore, void, the practice has been firmly established that the Supreme Court can strike down legislative enactments which violate the Constitution.

Another important constitutional safeguard of the individual rights guaranteed under the Bill of Right is the provision that no deprivation of them can be effected without "due process of law."27) That expression has on many occasions been judicially considered, but no satisfactory definition of it could be found. Mr. Justice Frankfurter wrote for the Supreme Court in 1959 -

In France until the Constitution of 1946 the Declarations of Individual Rights were not considered as having legal force or as forming part of the positive law (droit positif).31) In the Preamble to the Constitution of 1946, however, the rights and freedoms of man and the citizen consecrated by the Declaration of Rights of 1789 were solemnly reaffirmed. The same was done in the Preamble to the 1958 Constitution whereby "le peuple francais proclame solennement son attachement aux Droits de l'jomme ... tels qu'ils ont ete definis par la Declaration de 1789, confirmee et completee par la preambule de la Constitution de 1946." What is the nature and legal effect of those preambles is not yet settled.32)

Almost all the Constitutions33) now contain provision relating to fundamental rights and freedoms. Most of those Constitutions provide for the mode of enforcement of such rights, but even in the absence of such provisions a safeguard for the enforcement of such rights exists in the powers of the Cpurts to examine the constitutionality of laws, where there exists a written rigid constitution, and in the right of recourse for annulment of an administrative act as being contrary to law.34)

But human rights have not remained within the province of domestic jurisdiction of states only. Even during the second half of the nineteenth century British state practice was invoking customary international law for the protection of rights and interests of individual British subjects and on numerous occasions of non-British nationals on broad humanitarian grounds.35) And though international law was a law regulating the rights and duties of states inter se and creating no rights and imposing no duties on individuals, nevertheless during the twentieth century with the creation of new international organisations the individual was proceeding, in the words of de la Pradelle,36) "au premier rang de la vie internationale."

It was however, after the end of the Forst World War that human rights started to be internationalised. With the establishment of the League of Nations, the rigidity of the conception of sovereignty was relaxed and the need for protection of the minorities contributed to bringing forward the question of international protection of human rights. Certain individual freedoms and social rights of the workmen and generally of employed persons were recognised and put under the protection of international organisations, such as the International Labour Organisation and the International Labour Office.

After the Second World War the internationalisation of human rights was extended.36a) The important steps towards this direction were taken through (a) the Charter of the United Nations; (b) the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and (c) the Convention of Rome of the Council of Europe.

The Charter of the United Nations intimates by numerous provisions the possibility of international recognition of human rights. In the Preamble the Peoples of the United Nations expressed their determination "to reaffirm faith in fundamental human rights, in the dignity and worth of the human person, in the equal rights of men and women and of nations large and small" (Paragraph 2).

The Charter lays down as one of the purposes of the United Nations "to achieve international co-operation ... in promoting and encouraging respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms for all without distinction as to race, sex, language or religion".37) The General Assembly shall initiate studies and make recommendations for the purpose, amongst other, "... of assisting in the realisation of human rights and fundamental freedoms for all without distinction as to race, sex, language or religion".38) One of the objects of the United Nations in the sphere of international economic and social co-operation is the promotion of "universal respect for, and observance of, human rights and freedons for all without distinction as to race, sex, language or religion."39) In this respect the Economic and Social Council may "make recommendations for the purpose of promoting respect for, and observance of, human rights and fundamental freedoms for all"40) and shall set up a commission for the promotion of human rights.41) All Members pledge themselves to take joint action in co-operation with the Organisation for the achievement of the purposes laid down in Article 55, one of which is the promotion of universal respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms.42)

It is true that there is no express provision in the Charter imposing a legal obligation on the Members to observe human rights and fundamental freedoms and such rights are neither enumerated not specified in the Charter. But from the abovementioned provisions of the Charter, which is an international treaty adopted and ratified by the Member States, it follows that the observance of human rights ceased to be one of the exclusive domestic jurisdiction and became a matter of concern for the United nations.

Whether any legal obligation is imposed on the Members by the aforementioned provisions is a moot point. Lauterpacht is of the opinion that "though imperfect from the point of view of enforcement, the relevant provisions of the Charter constitute legal obligations of the Members of the United Nations and of the Organisation as a Whole",43) whilst Kelsen44) is of the opinion that no such obligation is created. But the members pledged themselves under Article 56 to take joint and separate action for the achievement of the purpose of the promotion of universal respect for, and observance of, human rights and freedoms for all without distinction as to race, sex, language or religion; it could therefore, be argued that the Member States undertook an obligation to bring their municipal law into line with the above principles. Furthermore, inspite of the absence of any enumeration of the human rights contemplated by the Charter, at least for one, that is to say, the avoidance of any racial or other discrimination, there is an express provision in the Charter. Taking into consideration that special organs of the United Nations were created and function for this purpose it may be maintained that in case of any violation such organs may enquire in the matter without such action being considered as an interference with internal affairs of the state involved.45)

All the aforesaid difficulties have led into the adoption of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, passed by the General Assembly at Paris on the 10th December, 1948.

The Declaration codifies to a considerable extent the classical human rights of the "old catalogue", such as liberty and security of correspondance, freedom of conscience, of thought and expression, freedom of assembly and association and protection of individual property and certain political rights of participation to the exercise of political power. It further contains certain new rights, such as the right of recognition as a person before the law, the protection of privacy and home life and many social rights (Articles 22 to 28). It also provides vaguely about the duties of the individual to the community (article 29.1). Certain safeguards and limitations of the rights are also provided (articles 29 and 30).

The Universal Declaration is not an international treaty and, therefore, does not create legal obligation.46) But in the words of the Belgian Delegate on the occasion of the adoption of the Declaration it was intended to have "a moral value and authority which is without precedent in the history of the world."47) The Declaration give expression to what, in the fulness of time, ought to become principles of law generally recognised and acted upon by State Members of the United Nations."48) Actually it has been consulted and in many respects followed in the drafting of many modern Constitutions.

The Convention for the protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedom signed at Rome on the 4th November, 1950, by the members of the Council of Europe constitutes the European Bill of Rights. It contains more precise definitions of the human rights and provides a machinery for implemebting the obligations undertaken by the Convention.

In the Preamble to the Convention reference is made to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights of the United Nations, to the Profound belief in the Fundamental Freedoms "which are the foundation of justice and peace in the world" and to the resolution of the Government of European countries which "have a common heritage of political tradition. ideals, freedom and the rule of law to take the first steps for collective enforcement of certain of the Rights stated in the Universal Declarations."

With regard to the human rights protected by the Convention there is no enumeration of general principles as in the Universal Declaration, but such rights are defined more or less with precision and the occasion for their limitation are clearly provided. The Rome Convention was supplemented by Five Protocols. By the First rights are added to those provided by the Convention. All such rights are of the "old catalogue" and do not cover all the rights enumerated in the Universal Declaration.

Such rights comprise the right to life, the prohibition of inhuman or degrading treatment or punidhment, the prohibition of slavery, servitude or forced or compulsory labour, the right to liberty and security of person, the fair and public hearing and other safeguards in civil and criminal trials, respect of private and family life, freedom of thought, consecience and religion, freedom of peaceful assembly and association, the right to marry and found a family according to the national laws and the right to an affective remedy before a national authority. It is provided that the enjoyment of the rights set out in the Convention shall be free from discrimination on any ground such as sex, race, solour, language, religion, political or other opinion or social origin, association with a national minority, property, birth or other status. The Convention permits derogation from the obligations undertaken thereunder in case of emergency threatening the life of the nation.

In the First Protocol to the Convention the right to the peaceful enjoyment of possessions, the rught to education and the right to be governed by a freely elected legislature were added. Furthermore, by the Fourth Protocol prohibition of deprivation of liberty on the groung of inability to fulfil a contractual obligation, the right to free movement and to leave the country, prohibition of expulsion of nationals and prohibition of collective expulsion of aliens were added.

It is to be observed that the Convention ignores the social rights and many of the new rights provided by the Universal Declaration and by the new Constitution. But, unlike the Universal Declaration, the rights provided by the Convention and its Protocols constitute "hard enforceable law."49)

By the Convention two organs are created for the purpose of providing the machinery for the enforcement of the obligations undertaken under the Convention. They are the European Commission of Human Rights, which is elected by the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe on the proposal of the national delegations to the Consultative Assembly, and the European Court of Human Rights, the members of which are elected by the Consultative Assembly from a list of Members of the Council of Europe, each one of which shall nominate three candidates.

The jurisdiction of the Commission is obligatory in cases where one of the Parties refers to it a case of an alleged breach of the Convention by another Perty, or optional where any person, non-governmental organisation or group of persons brings a complait against one of the Parties to the Convention. This occurs in case the Party against whom the complait is made has accepted by a declaratin the jurisdiction of the Commission.

The Commission investigates anu complait made, if all local remedies have been exhausted. If a friendly settlement is achieved, a brief reports is prepared and published. If the attempt of a friendly settlement fails, the Commission as a whole draws up a report stating its opinion as to whether the facts disclose any breach of the Convention and submits it to the Committee of Ministers or brings it before the Court (Article 48) if the Party concerned has submitted to the compulsory jurisdiction to the Court, the Committee of Ministers decide by a majority of two-thirds whether there has been a violation of the Convention and the parties undertaken to consider any decision of the Committee of Ministers as binding upon them. The Court decides on any case refferred or submitted to it either by the Commission or by anu Contracting Party if the Contracting Party concerned has declared that it accept the compulsory jurisdiction of the Court. The Court also decides or any matter concerning the interpretation of the Convention. The decision of the Court shall be final.

By Article 63 of the Convention any of the Contracting States may by notification given under the Article extended the Convention to all or any of the territories for whose international relations she is responsible. Under that Article the Convention was extended to many then dependent countries.50)

From what it is said it appears that the individual became, to a certain extent, a subject of international law. He may have individual recourse, under the aforesaid conditions, to the Commission against the State and stands with her on any equal bassis. In this way there exists a certain "personnalisation" of the international law, in as much as the individual remains the final object for protection under the Convention.51)

As pointed out by Montesquieu "il n'y a point de mot qui ait recu plus de differentes significations et qui est frappe les esprit de tant de manieres que celui de liberte."52)

Article 4 of the Declaration des Droits de l'homme et du citoyen of 1789 gives a definition of liberty in its Article 4:

There is, however, another facet of liberty which consists in the opportunity of the individual to participate in the government of his country and formulate the rules under which he is to be governmed. The individual liberty cannot be secured unless the individual has got the means to participate in the exercise of the political power. Yet, this last form of liberty tends to lose its individual character and become a collective liberty. Under modern conditions the individual cannot enjoy his political liberty in isolation but as a member of certain groups interposing between himself and the state, such as the various associations, trade unions and political parties. There is, in this respect, a "socialisation de la liberte."55) This is the political liberty, the "liberte-participation", and not only is it strictly connected with the first form of liberty but it also affords the means for its enforcement. According to the formula of Benjamin Constant "La liberte individuelle voila la veritable liberte moderne. La liberte politique en est la guarantie; la liberte politique est par consequant indispensable."56) But the conception of liberty and generally the conception of individual rights has undergone a radical transformation.

The domain of such rights has been expanded so as to include new forms of individual rights, the "economic and social rights" which secure the material enjoiment of the traditional rights or the rights of the "old catalogue." Right to work guarantee of "existenz minimum" social security are some forms of the new economic or social rights. In this way we pass from the "Parasite State" to the "Welfare State."57) Also parallel duties are now imposed upon the individual58) (such as taxing obligation, obligation to serve in certain services without any renumeration,59) obligation of parents to maintain their children,60) the disposal of one's natural and intellectual capacities for the benefit of the society).61)

It must be emphasized that the legal nature of certain individual rights has also radically changed from that of right to a social function.62)

The Republic of Cyprus was established on the 16th August, 1960.

Cyprus, however, when a colony was not unconnected with human rights. Under Article 63(1) of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Funcamental Freedom the United Kingdom by declaration of 23rd October 1953 extended the Convention to Cyprus.1)

Part II of the Constitution of the Republic contains a Chapter of "Fundamental2) Right and Liberties."

Such rights are guaranteed not only for the citizens of the Republic but for every person "without any direct or indirect discrimination against any person on the ground of his community, race, religion, language, sex, political or other convictions, national or social descent, birth, colour, wealth, social or any ground whatsoever unless there is express provision to the contrary in this Constitution."3)

Such exceptions are provided in the Constitution itself. Thus under Article 11.1 extraction is allowed only for aliens but not for citizens.4)

The constitutional protection against benishment or exclusion from the Republic is given only to citizens and not to aliens as well.5)

Regarding the freedom to marry certain specific provisions apply to persons belonging to the Greek Orthodox Church or to one of the religious groups of the Maronites, Armenians or Roman Catholics. If the law relating to marriage applicable to the parties6) is not the same the parties may elect to have their marriage governed by the law applicable to one of them. If the parties are neither members of the above Churches not members of the Turkish community the law of the marriage shall be a law of the Republic provided that such law shall not contain any restrictions other than those relating to age, health, proximity of relationship and prohibition of polygamy. If one of the parties is a member of any of the above Chruches or belongs to the Turkish community the marriage shall equally be governed by any such law of the Republic.7)

Finally there is nothing precluding the Republic from regulating any matter relating to the rights and freedoms of aliens otherwise than as provided in Part II of the Constitution on condition that such regulation is made in accordance with International Law.8)

Whith regard to the right of property special treatment is given to property belonging to Christian Churches, Mosques or Vakf property (Moslem Religious Property). No such peoperty can be acquired compulsorily or requisitioned, not any other restriction or limitation, save those for the purpose of town and country planning, can be imposed in respect thereof except with the written consent of the appropriate ecclesiastical authority or other authority having the control of such property and in case of Vakf of the Turkish Communal Chamber.9)

The range of fundamental rights and liberties guaranteed under the Constitution of the Republic is much wider than that of other Constitutions or that of the European Convention of Human Rights.

Regarding the civil and personal relations all the eighteen rights provided by the European Convention and its Protocols are included.

The rights to life,10) prohibition of torture or inhuman or degrading treatment or punichment,11) prohibition of slavery or servitude or forced or compulsory labour,12) the right to respect for the family or private life, his home and correspondence,13) the right to marry14) with certain variations and amplifications are provided in the Constitution in the same way as in the European Convention.

The right to liberty and security of person is guaranteed by Article 11 of the Constitution15) corresponding to Article 5 of the European Convention to Article of the Constitution is wider than the European Convention in that

The Constitution also provides for all the consequential juridical safeguards.

Article 12 and 30.2 and 3 of the Constitution correspond to Article 5 and 7 of the Convention.

Apart from the right to a public and fair trial23) together with all other rights incidental thereto the Constitution provides that no person shall be tried or punished twice for the same offence (Article 12.2) and that no law shall provide for a punishment disproportiona'e to the gravity of the offence (ibid 3). A serious restricting is put on the legislative power in this respect. The Supreme Constitutional Court and the Supreme Court found that the provisions in statutes whereby mandatory demolition orders in case of contravention of building regulations,24) or other contravention or for removal of works25) or for filling up of wells26) or mandatory forfeiture of firearms27) or goats28) or vessels29) in case of contraventions of the respective statues whereby no discretion was left to the Court were contrary to that constitutional provision.

Also the protection of the constitutional provision is expressly extended to companies and other associations functioning for profit (paragraph 6).

The right to access to the Courts assigned under the Constitution is also guaranteed. The establishment of juridical committees or exceptional courts under any name whatsoever is prohibited.30) Such committees or courts were considered as including any court not provided and constitued by law before-hand but established ex-facto for the trial at hoc of particular persons or particular kind of cases.31)

Special courts of courts of special jurisdiction such as those provided by Article 101(2) of the Basic Law of Western Germany are not "exceptional" courts.

There is nothing, however, in that Article precluding the provision by law that the determination of disputes arising out between members of co-operative societies and the co-operative societies will be made by the Registrar of such societies32) or the trial of disciplinary offences under the Police (Disciplinary) Regulations 1958 by disciplinary councils33) or the administrative review of administrative acts or decisions.34)

The right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion is guaranteed under Article 18 of the Constitution corresponding to Article 9 of the Convention.

But Article 18 of the Constitution provides further for the freedom of all religions whose doctrines or rites are not secret (para. 2) and for the quality of all religions before the law and prohibition of any discrimination against any religious institution or religion (para. 3). No person shall be compelled to pay any tax or duty the proceeds of which are specially allocated for the purpose of a religion other than his own (para. 8) and until a person attains the age of sixteen the religion to be professed by him shall be taken to be the religion of the person having his lawful guard (para. 7).

Finally this Article in para. 5 provided for what is called "proselytism".

"The use of phisycal or moral compulsion for the purposes pf making a person change or preventing him from changing his religion is prohibited" (para. 5). That provision was taken from Article 1 of the Constitution of Greece 35) But in Cyprus unlike Greece proselytism is prohibited in respect of any religion and not only against the "prevalent" religion. However, there has been no legal sanction of such prohibition so far.

The right to freedom of speech and expression is provided by Article 19 of the Constitution corresponding to Article 10 of the Roman Convention. That Article of the Constitution contains also a provision relating to seizure of newspaper (para. 3) which is allowed with the permission of the Attorney-General of the Republic confirmed within a period of seventy-two hours by an order of a competent court, otherwise it has to be lifted.36)

The right to freedom of peaceful assembly and of association is guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution corresponding to Article 11 of the European Convention. In the Constitution there is, However, a provision that no person shall be compelled to join any association or to continue to be a member therefore (para. 2).

The right to education is guaranteed under Article 20 of the Constitution which corresponds to Article 2 of the First Protocol. By that Article of the Constitution a duty is imposed on the State to afford through its Communal Chambers free primary education for all citizens and to make available education other than primary in deserving cases under such conditions as may be provided by law.

The right to vote is guaranteed by Article 31 of the Constitution.37)

The right to property as guaranteed by Article 23 of the Constitution38) reflects the individualistic conception prevailing in the neineteenth century. Our Constitution though in other respects adopted the now prevailing views of the "socialisation" of the individual rights in this respect lagged behind following the provisions of the Constitution of Greece which was based on that of 1864.

With the exception of underground water, minerals and antiquities in respect of which the rights of the State are preserved39) every person has the right to acquire, own, enjoy, possess or dispose of any movable or immovable property and the rights to respect for such right. The right of property thus guaranteed is not an abstract right but a right as defined and regulated by law relating to civil rights to property.40)

No deprivation, restriction or limitation of any such right shall be made except as provided in Article 23 (ibid paragraph 2). The restrictions or limitations thus provided are those which are absolutely necessary in the interest of public safety or public health or public morals or the town and country planning or the development and utilization of property to the promotion of the public benefit or fot the protection of the rights of other and should be provided by law.

Thus the restriction of goat-grazing under the Goats Law (Cap. 66) was found to be necessary for the protection of others,41) restrictions put under the Betting and Gaming Houses and Prevention of Gambling Law (Cap. 151) were found to necessary for the protection of public morals42) and restrictions in respect of the display of advertisments to be necessary in the interest of town and country planning.43) Also provisions of bye-laws regulating traffic were found to be necessary for public safety and for the protection of the rights of others.44) Restrictions imposed in respect of laying up or division of property are necessary for town and planning purposes.45)

For any such restrictions or limitations46) which materially decrease the economic value of the property ompensation shall promptly be paid.47)

The constitutional provision regarding restrictions or limitations of the right to property appears to be stricter than prevailing princciples in Administrative Law relating to general public law restrictions of property or public or administrative servitudes which are based on the view that the individual interest should yield to the public interest.48)

Deprivation of a right to property can take place either by compulsory acquisition of such property or by its requisition.

Detailed provisions are contained for both in paragraph 4 or 8 that Article, most of which could have found their way in ordinary legislation and not in constitutional provisions. It may be noted that the constitutional requirement for payment of compensation for acquisition in cash and in advance has created many practical difficulties and delayed or prevented the carrying out of many indispensable works of public utility.49)

The manner of special treatment of ecclessiastical corporations and the Evcaf in matters relating to the right of property has already been explained.

The Constitution of the Republic, like many post-war, constitutions,50) could not ignore the social rights of man arising out of his new multifarious and especially economic relations in modern society. Such rights are closely connected with the individual rights belonging to man as an abstract human being and are considered as a prolongation of liberty - "prolongation de liberte".51)

particular attention is given to the working people. Under Article 9 of the Constitution every person has the right to a decent existence and to social security. A law shall provide for the protection of the workers, assistance to the poor and for a system of social insurance.52)

The right to form a trade union is guaranteed and the right to strike is recognized subject to its regulation by law for the prescribed purposes.53)

The right to work practese any profession or carry on any occupation, trade or business is guaranteed under Article 25.54)

The right to contract55) is also guaranteed under Article 26 of the Constitution which makes provision that a law shall proide for the prevention of exploitation by persons wwho are commanding economic power and that the matter of collective labour contracts of obligatiory fulfilment by employees and workers with adequate protection of the rights of any person, whether represented ot not at the conclusion of the contract, shall also be provided by law.

Finally the equality before the law and the administration of justice is guaranteed to all persons who are entitled to equal protection and treatment.56)

But the principle of equality safeguarded under this Article does not convey the notion of arithmetical equality but safeguard against arbitrary discrimination without excluding reasonable distinctions.57) In the epigrammatic expression of Jennings (Law and Constitution 1952 p. 59) equality means "that among equals the law should ne equal and should be equally administered, that like should be treated alike".58)

The Constitution of the Republic provides for the righth to address written requests or complaints to any competent public authority59) and to have them attended to and decided expediously. Though S.A. de Smith60) finds this fundamental right a "novel and interesting" one, nevertheless it dates back to the Bill of Rights, 1689 (art. 5) and to the Declarations of Rights of the eighteenth century. It is now provided by many constitutions.61) An immediate notice of any decision taken on any such reqquest or complaint, duly reasoned, shall be given to the person making it and in any event not beyond thirty days. Any person aggrieved by any such decision may have a resource to a competent court. Any decision means a decision which has capable of being reached having regard to the circumstances of the particular case within thirty days.62)

But the Constitution of the Republic, like many modern Constitutions,63) provides not only for individual rights and liberties but also for duties of the individual.

Thus under Article 24.1 every person is bound to contribute according to his means towards the public burdens. That paragraph does not only impose a duty on the individual but contains also a rule of substantive law, binding the legislature, adopting the principles of equality in the sphere ot taxation.64) Some further principles are also adopted with regard to taxation. The principle has no tax shall be imposed save by or under a law, which cannot have a retrospective effect and shall not be of a destructive nature (ibid paras 2 to 4).

A duty is also imposed by Article 10.3(b) to serve on a service of military character or service in case of cinscientious objectors, subject or their recognition by a law, exacted instead of compulsory military service or in any service exacted in case of an emergency threatening the life or well-being of the inhabitants.

The fundamental rights so guaranteed cannot remain as absolute abstract principles which in no way can be regulated. The existence of the state itself and requirements of good government presuppose their regulation.65)

As pointed out by the Joint Parliamentary Committee of the Indian Constitutional Reform66) -

Any such restrictions or limitations of the human rights guaranteed under the Constitution have to be provided by law and have to be absolutely necessary,68) only "in the interests of the security of the Republic, or the constitutional order or the public safety69) or the public order or the public health or the public morals70) or for the protection of the rights guaranteed by the Constitution to any person".71) For certain fundamental rights some further riteria apply. For instance, for the right to freedom of speech and expresion (under Article 19) it is provided that the law shall be absolutely necessary apart from the above "for the protection of the reputation or rights of others or for preventing the disclosure of information received in confidence or for maintaining the authority and impartiality of the judiciary." For the right to property under Article 23 considerations of town and ountry planning72) may constitute a ground for its restricion. For the right to practise or exercise a profesion73) or carrying on a business under Article 25 grounds of public interest may justify a estriction of such right.74)

The constitutional provisions relating to limitations or restrictions of the fundamental rights shall be interpreted strictly and shall bot be applied for any purpose other than those for which they have been prescribed.75) As decided by the Supreme Constitutional Court "legislation involving interference with the Fundamental Fights and Liberties safeguard under the Constitution ... and their construction is governed by the settled principle that such provisions should be constructed in case of doubt in favour of the said Rights and Liberties."76)

Apart from the obligation of the state to abstain from any interference within the domain of the Fundamental Rights and Liberties guaranteed by the Constitution there exists an obligation for positive action by the State as regards certain of such fundamental rights, especially the social rights, for their better protection. Reference may be made to the right to a decent existence, to social security and social insurance77) and to the enactment of law in respect of mixed marriages,78) for compulsory primary education,79) for compulsory and requisition of property80) and for the prevention of exploitation by persons who are commanding economic power.80) In some cases a law has accordingly been enacted82) but in other cases this has not yet been done. The question arises as to whether such constitutional provisions constitute substantive constitutional law binding the legislature or are merely directing principles of state policy containing a legislative programme.83) I am inclined to the view that from the wording of such provisions it follows that they are binding on the Republic and its appropiate organs are bound to enact within a reasonable time the legislation contemplated.84)

As elsewhere, in case of war or public danger threating the life of the Republic or any part thereof certain of the fundamental rights guaranteed under the Constitution are suspended during the period of the emergency.85)

But apart from these effective remedies under municipal law the human rights in Cyprus may be brought on the international sphere.

The European Convention on Human Rights was not unknown to Cyprus. Even at the time when it was a colony the Convention was applicable to Cyprus as it was extended to it by the United Kingdom.86) Actually its provisions were invoked by greece against the United Kingdom in recourses Nos. 176/56 and 299/57 in respect of alleged violations of the Convention in Cyprus.87)

When Cyprus became a Republic it acceded to the Convention and the First Protocol,88) which were approved under Article 169(2) of the Constitution by Human Rights (Ratification) Law of 1962. That Law (in a schedule to which the text of the Convention is set out) was published under No. 39 of 1962 in the official Gazette of the Republic of the 24th May, 1962, and the Convention has, under paragraph (3) of Article 169 of the Constitution superior force to any municipal law.

The Constitution of Cyprus not only defines the fundamental rights and liberties in clear legal language but provided also effective remedies for their enforcement.

The legislative, executive and juridical authorities of the Republic shall be bound to secure, within the limits of their respective competence, the efficient application of the provisions relating to fundamental rights and liberties.89)

If a law violates in any way any of such provisions, that law may be declared by the Supreme Court to be unconstitutional. Any party to any juridical proceeding may raise the unconstitutionality of any law and thereupon the question shall be reserved for the opinion of the Supreme Court.90) If the Supreme Court declares such law to be unconstitutional then it becomes inapplicable to the proceeding in which the person is affected. Such decision of the Supreme Court is begining on all courts, organs, authorities and person in the Republic.91)

If the fundamental rights of a person are violated by any administrative act, that person may apply to the administrative authority for redress under Article 29 of the Constitution and if he does not get satisfaction he may have a recourse to the Supreme Court92) for the annulment of such act as being contrary to law or made in excess or abuse of powers and the Supreme Court may declare such act as null and void and of no effect whatsoever. Furthmore the person aggrieved may resort to the Supreme Court for any of the prerogative orders of habeas corpus, mandamus, quo warranto or prohibition for which there exists express provision in the Constitution.93) The person aggrieved by any juridical act may applel to the Supreme Court and further may apply for an order of certiorari.

So long as almost all the rights guaranteed by the Convention were written in the Cyprus Constitution extended and amplified,94) it was not necessary for the local Courts to apply the provisions of the Convention, as in cases affecting human rights the provisions of the Constitution were amply adequate. The Convention, however, was invoked in may cases in aid of interpretation of the constitutional and other legislative provisions.95)

The observation of Professor Buergenthal96) that "In view of the existing civil war in Cyprus and the de facto suspension of its Constitution it is unfortunately abundantly clear that in that ccountry the Convention has so far remained a document devoid of any significance" does not appear to be a correct factual statement.

Part II of the Constitution relating to Fundamental Rights and Liberties has never been suspended97) and in spite of the abnormal situation created since December, 1963, the Courts continue to grant effective remedies in case of violation of any human right.

The Supreme Court of Cyprus98) as far back as November, 1964, almost one year after the disturbances, in its full composition presided over by its Turkish President and with the participation of the Turkish Justice took for granted that part of the Constitution was still in force and proceeded to its interpretation.99) Also in a series of cases since, the Supreme Courts has applied the provisions of Part II of the Constitution relating to Human Rights.100)

It is true that Cyprus, like Greece, italy and Turkey, has not yet declared under Article 25 of the Convention that she recognises the rights of individual resources to the Commission or that she recognises as compulsory the jurisdiction of the European Court of Human Rights under Article 46. But this does not preclude the applicable of the Convention to the other countries which are in a similar position as Cyprus. The Cyprus member of the Commission and of the Court continue to participate in their respective functions.

Irrspectively of recent proposal for further safeguard of the human rights in Cyprus through an international machimery,101) the actual working of the human rights constitutional provisions during the six years of the life of the Republic has proved to be extremely satisfactiory.

The juridical has been over zealous to give sufficient and quick protection of such rights and the people proved to be too conscious of them. It would not be far from the truth to say that, as elsewhere, the people are more conscious of their rights than of their duties.