On April 29, 2009, the leaders of the political parties represented in parliament gathered at the Presidential Palace and discussed the ECJ’s interpretation of the Orams case. The photograph sent out to the news agencies after this meeting reflected a scene we had all longed to see and were pleased to welcome.
In the photograph, all the leaders—including the President—who accused one another at every opportunity had come together and shown the whole world, especially the Turkish Cypriot people, that they could speak with one voice and stand united if they wished.
As I said above, we had longed to see this scene, and now it had come to pass.
The leaders spent 3 hours and 20 minutes discussing the ECJ’s interpretation and had agreed on a joint statement.
In the end, the President announced this joint statement: “The ECJ’s decision has also seriously harmed the ongoing negotiation process in Cyprus. If, in the legal proceedings in the Orams case, which have not yet concluded, the English Court of Appeal reaches a decision without taking the realities in Cyprus into account, as the ECJ has done, the negotiation process will be damaged in a way that cannot be repaired.”
The President expressed the decision in these words, but it had taken a full 3 hours and 20 minutes to reach it.
But why did it take 3 hours and 20 minutes?
During the meeting, the public waited with keen interest for the statement that would emerge from the talks at the Presidential Palace. Those outside were wondering: “Will Talat walk away from the table or not?”
In fact, the same question was being debated inside at that very moment! Who was saying what, and what were they arguing for?
My guest on Öğlen Ajansı the other day was TDP General Chairman Mehmet Çakıcı.
Mr. Çakıcı described the behind-the-scenes story of this meeting live on air.
At the meeting, UBP and DP argued that if the English Court of Appeal’s decision aligned with the ECJ’s interpretation, they should walk away from the table immediately, while CTP and ÖRP were more receptive to this proposal. As the issue was being debated, the President, too, said at one point that he might walk away from the table. TDP was firmly opposed to walking away.
Ultimately, the point under discussion was the final sentence of the decision!
They were debating the final sentence inside.
Should it end with “The negotiation process will be suspended,” or with “The negotiation process will be damaged in a way that cannot be repaired”?
In the end, it seems that, following TDP’s insistence, they produced a decision that served as a warning without containing definitive judgments.
It is no surprise that UBP and DP, and even ÖRP, urged them to walk away from the table!
But it is quite telling that CTP and, consequently, Mr. Talat were inclined to walk away from the table.
In my view, the European Union should think again about what brought the CTP side—which has consistently supported and sought a solution on the island—to this point.
Another thing that caught my attention in the photograph was how the party leaders representing the left sat to the President’s left, while those representing the right sat to his right. That was quite telling.
I don’t know whether this happened by chance, but the scene seemed to show that, if we include the President, the decision had been reached by a 3-to-3 tie.
Hope to see you on Friday…
Pay attention to your surroundings, keep them clean, and please be courteous in traffic!