"judgment of Louise against Turkey"

- CONTENT -
Loizidou v Turkey is a 1996 ruling by the European Court of Human Rights. The Court discussed a situation in which human rights violations were made by a non-state entity (North Cyprus), supported by a state (Turkey). The court ruled that Turkey was responsible for harming the property of the Petitioner. The judgment has important hypocrisy regarding the European Convention on Human Rights and recognition of the country under international law.

General background
Cyprus is a country in the Mediterranean. The population of the country is in a Christian part of Greek origin, and in part a Muslim of Turkish descent. In 1974, a military coup attempt by Greek Cypriots took place in the hands of the Greek government. Turkey invaded the northern part of the island. During the war, most Greek Cypriots who lived in the northern part of the island fled to the southern part of the island and Cypriots of Turkish descent who lived in the southern part fled to the northern part. Since 1974, Turkey has dominated the North Island. In 1983, the Cypriot-Turkish population declared that the north of the island on the establishment of the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus. With the exception of Turkey, the international community does not recognize this country, and the Republic of Cyprus is considered the only sovereign state in all areas of the island.

The UN Security Council Resolution in 1983, following the Declaration of Independence, states that the existence of the state is illegal and calls on the countries of the world not to recognize it as a state, but to recognize the integrity of the Republic of Cyprus.

Facts of the Case
Today, many Greek Cypriots demand their properties in the northern part of the island.

The Petitioner is a Cypriot citizen of Greek origin called Titina Louiseado Titina Loizidou, who was in 1972 for the southern part of the island. She claims that she owns nine properties in the northern part of the island. She started building a home for her family. Since Turkey invaded Cyprus in 1974, Malasio has refrained from access to its property in the northern island. In 1989, Louiseado participated in the march of the Women Walk Home Movement to exercise the right of the Greek Cypriot refugees to return to their home in the northern island. Since the march crossed the border, the petition was arrested by the Northern Police.

The Constitution of the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus of 1985 threatened the land abandoned during the war.

The Legal Procedure

Complaints generally
The Petitioner Dr. Louiseado and the Government of the Republic of Cyprus (the Greek) claim that since the Turkish occupation of Northern Cyprus any request for the Petition to access its property has been rejected, as a result, any control over its assets has lost what constitutes ongoing and unlawful interference to exercise the right of property, anchored in section 1 of the Protocol accompanying the European Convention on Human Rights. In addition, the Petitioner claims that the right to the privacy of the protected home in Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights. The Petitioner sees Turkey as solely responsible for the violations and Alicia to bear responsibility.

Discussion of Turkey's Responsibility

Complaints
The responsibility falls on the Turkish government for the following reasons:
Since the area is illegally conquered, using force, which is a violation of international law. Therefore, the local government is illegal and is a puppet government of the Turks.
There is an activity of Turkish officials inside the local government, as well as the Turks put large military forces in the northern Cyprus area.
If and when Turkey is not responsible for this territory, a vacuum is created in the laws of the IDF for the responsibility for human rights violations. Since the government in northern Cyprus is not considered legitimate rule in the eyes of the world, the Republic of Cyprus cannot take responsibility for territory