PROCEDURE
JUDGEMENT DELIVERED BY A CHAMBER (23.3.95) 
(1) This summary by the Registry does not bind the Court 

contents 

SUMMARY 

PROCEDURE 

AS TO THE FACTS 
I. The particular circumstances of the case 

    A Turkey's declaration of 28 January 1987 under Article 25 of the Convention  
    B. Exchange of correspondence between the Secretary General of the Council of Europe and the Permanent Representative of Turkey 
    C. Reactions of various Contracting Parties to Turkey's Article 25 declaration 
    D. Turkey's subsequent Article 25 declarations 
    E. Turkish declaration of 22 January 1990 under Article 46 of the Convention 
II. Cypriot declaration under Article 25  
III. The declaration of the United Kingdom under Article 25 

PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE COMMISSION 

FINAL SUBMISSIONS TO THE COURT 

AS TO THE LAW 
I. THE STANDING OF THE APPLICANT GOVERNMENT 
II. ALLEGED ABUSE OF PROCESS 
III. THE TURKISH GOVERNMENT'S ROLE IN THE PROCEEDINGS 
IV. SCOPE OF THE CASE 
V. OBJECTIONS RATIONE LOCI 

    A. Whether the facts alleged by the applicant are capable of falling within the jurisdiction of Turkey under Article 1 of the Convention 
      1. Submissions of those appearing before the Court 
      2. The Court's examination of the issue
    B. The validity of the territorial restrictions attached to Turkey's Article 25 and 46 declarations. 

    C. Validity of the Turkish declarations under Articles 25 and 46 

VI. OBJECTION RATIONE TEMPORIS 
    JOINT DISSENTING OPINION OF MR GOLCUKLU AND MR PETTITI 
    With regard to the validity of the Turkish Government's declaration
APPENDICES 
Declaration by France 
Declaration by the United Kingdom 
Declaration by the Netherlands 
Chart of signatures and ratifications of the Convention (at 31 December 1994)  
INDIVIDUAL DISSENTING OPINION OF MR GOLCUKLU  
INDIVIDUAL DISSENTING OPINION OF MR PETTITI  

PROCEDURE  

1. The case was referred to the Court by the Government of the Republic of Cyprus ("the applicant Government") on 9 November 1993, within the three-month period laid down by Article 32 S 1 and Article 47 of the Convention. It originated in an application (no. 15318/89) against the Republic of Turkey (see paragraphs 48-53 below) lodged with the Commission under Article 25 on 22 July 1989 by a Cypriot national, Mrs Titina Loizidou.  

The applicant Government's application referred to Article 48 (b) of the Convention. The object of the application of the Government was to obtain a decision as to whether the facts of the case concerning the applicant's property disclosed a breach by Turkey of its obligations under Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 and Article 8 of the Convention.  

2. In response to the enquiry made in accordance with Rule 33 S 3 (d) of the Rules of Court A, the applicant stated that she wished to take part in the proceedings and designated the lawyer who would represent her (Rule 30). 

3. The Chamber to be constituted included ex officio Mr F. Golcuklu and Mr A.N. Loizou, the elected judges of Turkish and Cypriot nationality (Article 43 of the Convention), and Mr R. Ryssdal, the President of the Court (Rule 21 S 3 (b)). On 23 November 1993, in the presence of the Registrar, the President drew by lot the names of the other six members, namely, Mr A. Spielmann, Mr. N. Valticos, Mr R. Pekkanen, Mr A.B. Baka, Mr. L. Wildhaber and Mr P. Jambrek, (Article 43 in fine of the Convention and Rule 21 S 4).  

4. In a letter of 26 November 1993 the Agent of the Turkish Government stated that his Government considered that the case fell outside the Court's jurisdiction on the grounds that it related to events which occurred before Turkey's declaration of acceptance of the compulsory jurisdiction of the Court dated 22 January 1990 and did not concern matters arising within the territory covered by this declaration. 

5. On 29 November 1993 the President of the Court submitted to the plenary Court for decision, pursuant to Rule 34, the question whether the Government of the Republic of Cyprus had a right under Article 48 to bring the case before the Court. 

6. As President of the Chamber (Rule 21 S 5) Mr Ryssdal, through the Registrar, consulted the Agents of the Governments, the applicant's lawyer and the Delegate of the Commission on the organisation of the proceedings (Rules 37 S 1 and 38) in relation to the preliminary objections raised by Turkey. Pursuant to the order made in consequence, the Registrar received on 17 January 1994, 24 February and 28 February the memorials of the Turkish Government, the applicant and the applicant Government respectively. The Delegate's observations on these memorials were submitted on 14 March 1994. 

7. On 21 April 1994 the plenary Court considered the issue submitted to it by the President under Rule 34 and decided, without prejudice to the preliminary objections raised by Turkey and to the merits of the case, that the applicant Government had the right to refer the case to the Court under Article 48 (b) of the Convention and that the Chamber should resume consideration of the case. 

8. The Chamber subsequently relinquished jurisdiction in favour of a Grand Chamber on 27 May 1994 (Rule 51). By virtue of Rule 51 S 2 (a) and (b) the President and the Vice-President of the Court (Mr Ryssdal and Mr Bernhardt) as well as the other members of the original Chamber are members of the Grand Chamber. On 28 May 1994 the names of the additional judges were drawn by lot by the President, in the presence of the Registrar, namely Mr L.-E. Pettiti, Mr B. Walsh, Mr R. Macdonald, Mr S.K. Martens, Mrs E. Palm, Mr. F. Bigi, Mr M.A. Lopes Rocha, Mr G. Mifsud Bonnici and Mr U. Lohmus. 

Subsequently, Mr Valticos, being prevented from taking part in the proceedings, was replaced by Mr J.M. Morenilla (Rules 24 S 1 and 51 S 6). In addition Mr Bigi, being unable to participate in the Court's deliberations on 22 August and 23 September 1994, took no further part in the proceedings. 

9. In accordance with the President's decision, the hearing of the preliminary objections took place in public in the Human Rights Building, Strasbourg, on 22 June 1994. The Court had held a preparatory meeting beforehand. 

There appeared before the Court: 

(a). for the Turkish Government  

    Mr B. Caglar, Agent,  
    Mr H. Golsong, Counsel,  
    Mr M. Ozmen, Ministry of Foreign Affairs,  
    Mrs D. Akcay, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Advisers; 
(b). for the Cypriot Government  
    Mr M. Triantafyllides, Attorney-General, Agent,   
    Miss P. Polychronidou, Barrister-at-Law, Counsel; 
(d). for the Commission  
    Mr S. Trechsel, Delegate; 
(e) for the Applicant  
    Mr A. Demetriades, Barrister-at-Law,  
    Mr I. Brownlie, Q.C.,  
    Ms J. Loizidou, Barrister-at-Law, Counsel. 
The Court heard addresses by Mr Trechsel, Mr Caglar, Mr Golsong, Mr Demetriades, Mr Brownlie and Mr Triantafyllides and also replies to a question put by one of its members individually. 

email:
human-rights@cyprus.com.cy