You are currently viewing Επιστολή προς γραφείο IP (2014)

To whom it may concern,

We are writing to you regarding the information provided in your website in relation to Intellectual rights
protection in the Republic of Cyprus. Specifically, instead of explaining that 37% of the island is illegally
occupied by Turkey as a result of the 1974 military invasion, you present Cyprus as being a “divided state”,
giving the impression that the island is made up of two separate entities. You distinguish erroneously
between “the Republic of Cyprus in the South and the Turkish republic of Northern Cyprus in the North”,
ignoring the fact that the only legal entity which exists on the island and is representative of the whole
island, is the Republic of Cyprus, while the so-called Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus is only
recognised by Turkey. By supporting and promoting the “TRNC”, an illegal pseudo-state which is result of
the brutal Turkish military invasion, you are in conflict with many UN resolutions and the International
law. In addition, your actions ignore the extensive and on-going violations of human rights which occur
from the day Turkey invaded Cyprus, a country which is a full member of the European Union since 2004.
The pseudo-state that you promote represents nothing more but four decades of pain and suffering of the
200,000 refugees, the families of the 1619 missing persons and the descendants of the thousands of
brutally murdered soldiers and civilians.

UN Resolution 550 (1984), “Reaffirms the call upon all States not to recognise the purported state of the
“Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus” set up by secessionist acts and calls upon them not to facilitate or
in any way assist this the aforesaid secessionist entity.” The Council of Europe, responding to Cyprus΄
Interstate Applications, has found Turkey, through the relevant reports of the European Commission of
Human Rights, responsible for serious violations of the European Convention for the Protection of Human
Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, in the part of Cyprus occupied by Turkey (Cyprus v. Turkey, Joint
Apps. 6789/74 and 6950/75, 26 May 1975; Cyprus v. Turkey, App. 8007/77, 10 July 1978). In addition,
the European Court of Human Rights in its decision regarding the Fourth Interstate Application by the
Cyprus Government against Turkey, (Cyprus v. Turkey, App.25781/94, Judgment of 10 May 2001), finds
Turkey guilty of gross violations of human rights in Cyprus and in continuing violation of a number of
articles of the ECHR (Articles 3, 8, 9, 10, 13 of the Convention and Article 1 of Protocol 1 to the
Convention). Furthermore, in the landmark case of Titina Loizidou, a Greek-Cypriot refugee from Kyrenia,
the European Court of Human Rights held that the denial to the applicant of access to her home in the
occupied by Turkey territories of Cyprus and the loss of control of her property was imputable to Turkey
and its subordinate local administration. The Court ruled that Loizidou remains the legal owner of her
property in Kyrenia, and that Turkey is in violation of the European Convention not allowing her to access
her property (Loizidou v. Turkey, (Merits), Case no. 40/1993/435/514, Judgment of 18 December 1996).

Upon these facts, we request some explanations by the office authorities as to the reasons why this
misguided information about Cyprus was allowed to be published in your website and whether the
Department for Business Innovation and Skills has approved of this.

Thank you in advance for your co-operation and understanding.

Yours sincerely,

Andreas Pantelides
on behalf of Metopo Cypriot Student Movement UK