Print
See related documents
Appendix - Programme of the visit to Gökçeada (Imbros),
Tenedos (Bozcaaeda) and Ankaraof Mr Andreas Gross, rapporteur
(open)
Report | Doc. 11629 | 06 June 2008
Gökçeada (Imbros) and Bozcaada (Tenedos): preserving the bicultural character of the two Turkish islands as a model for co-operation between Turkey and Greece in the interest of the people concerned
Committee on Legal Affairs and Human Rights
Summary
The two Turkish islands of Gökçeada (Imbros) and Bozcaada (Tenedos), situated at the entrance of the Dardanelles, have been inhabited mostly by ethnic Greeks since antiquity, whilst they were governed over the centuries essentially by Venitian and Ottoman rulers, and, since 1922, by the Turkish Republic.
The Committee on Legal Affairs and Human Rights regrets that as a consequence of various measures taken by the authorities in the second half of the 20th century (closure of all Greek community schools on the islands, large-scale expropriations, various forms of harassment), but also for economic reasons, the vast majority of the original inhabitants of the islands have emigrated, leaving only about 250 mostly elderly members of the ethnic Greek community on Gökçeada (Imbros) and 25 on Bozcaada (Tenedos). At the same time, many thousands of exiled islanders and their offspring have demonstrated their desire to maintain close links with their homeland.
The committee makes a number of specific proposals for urgent positive measures needed in order to stem or at least partly reverse the departure of the ethnic Greek population from the islands so that their bicultural character can be preserved.
It finds that such positive action by the Turkish authorities will not only be a tangible sign of Turkey’s respect for the rights of her own citizens, but could also serve as a model for cooperation between Turkey and Greece.
A positive attitude towards the ethnic Greek islanders and their descendants would also be an excellent example of Turkey’s willingness to overcome outdated nationalist attitudes and to embrace European values of good neighbourliness.
A. Draft resolution
(open)1. The Parliamentary Assembly warmly welcomes the recent
improvement in the relations between Turkey and Greece which have
stimulated a strong increase in economic and cultural exchanges
between the two states.
2. These improved relations have made it possible for the former
heads of the Greek and Turkish Assembly delegations, Elsa Papademetriou
and Murat Mercan, to undertake, in 2005, a historic visit to the
islands of Gökçeada (Imbros) and Bozcaada (Tenedos), whose population
has suffered too long also from the consequences of different crises
in relations between the two states.
3. The 2005 visit was followed by the joint presentation of the
motion which is at the origin of the present resolution. The small
size of the islands and of their population makes it possible to
extricate them from the wider context of bilateral Greco-Turkish
minority issues, which will be the subject of another report of
the Assembly.
4. The Assembly finds that positive action by the Turkish authorities
to preserve the bicultural character of the two small Turkish islands
will not only be a tangible sign of Turkey’s respect for the rights
of her own citizens, but could also serve as a model for cooperation
between Turkey and Greece in the sole interest of the people concerned.
5. A positive attitude towards the ethnic Greek islanders and
their descendants would also be an excellent example of Turkey’s
willingness to overcome outdated nationalist attitudes and to embrace
European values of good neighbourliness.
6. The Assembly regrets that as a consequence of various measures
taken by the authorities at that time (closure of all Greek community
schools on the islands, large-scale expropriations, various forms
of harassment), but also for economic reasons, the vast majority
of the original (ethnic Greek) inhabitants of the islands have emigrated,
leaving only about 250 mostly elderly members of this community
on Gökçeada (Imbros) and 25 on Bozcaada (Tenedos). At the same time,
many thousands of exiled islanders and their offspring have demonstrated
their desire to maintain close links with their homeland by returning
regularly to their ancestral home for traditional feasts, family
reunions and holidays and a number of them are seriously considering
resettling there either as retirees or as entrepreneurs. Members
of the diaspora associations play an important role in assisting
the permanent residents in coping with the objective difficulties
they face.
7. Positive measures are now urgently needed in order to stem
or at least partly reverse the departure of the ethnic Greek population
from the islands so that their bicultural character can be sustainably
preserved.
8. The Assembly welcomes the fact that the Turkish authorities
have recently made a number of positive gestures, including:
8.1. the reconstruction of the bell
tower of the Greek community church of Bozcaada (Tenedos), following
the visit of the Turkish Prime Minister and his dedicated will;
8.2. the recent refurbishment of the Agios Nikolaos church
in Kaleköy (Kastro) on Gökçeada (Imbros);
8.3. the imminent (already approved and funded) restoration
of the island’s former cathedral church, Agia Marina, in the same
town;
8.4. the much-noted reassuring and helpful attitude of both
local sub-prefects (“Kaymakams”) towards the ethnic Greek population.
9. In order to increase the positive momentum, the following
additional measures are particularly urgent:
9.1. to permit the re-opening of at least one Greek community
school on Gökçeada (Imbros), along the lines of the Greek Orthodox
community schools in Istanbul or the Muslim community schools in Western
Thrace, as soon as a sufficient number of ethnic Greek families
with school-age children have committed themselves to resettling
on the island. The new school shall promote bi-culturalism and offer Greek
language and culture classes also for the children of ethnic Turkish
residents;
9.2. to return expropriated land and buildings to their previous
owners, whenever the land is not, or no longer, used for the public
purposes for which it was expropriated. When the land cannot reasonably be
returned because it has been transferred to new inhabitants, the
previous owners should be offered equitable compensation, preferably
in the form of other state-owned land on the same island;
9.3. to adopt specific measures that would ensure the return
(in areas where the cadastral process has been completed) or the
proper recording of community and family properties, including the
following:
9.3.1. to provide for the practical accessibility,
to all inhabitants of the islands and their descendents, of the
Ottoman-era cadastral archives and the results of the survey made
for property tax purposes in 1936 and to admit such documents as
proof of ownership in the ongoing cadastral process;
9.3.2. to abolish the practice followed by the islands’ cadastral
officers and courts according to which ethnic Greek residents do
not only have to prove – by witness – that they were in possession
of the land for at least 20 years, but that they also still “exploit”
the fields or houses at the time of application although they were
obliged to leave them “unexploited” for reasons that are beyond
their control;
9.3.3. to withhold the cadastral process that began on the islands
in 1996 until the adoption of the measures mentioned in paragraphs
9.3.1. and 9.3.2. above, thereby sparing inhabitants the expensive,
time-consuming and aleatory court proceedings needed to rectify
an inaccurate administrative decision;
9.3.4. to provide for a period of ten years during which all
claims that were dismissed, whether by administrative process or
in court, will be reviewed under the new regime following simple, cost-effective
administrative procedures;
9.4. to apply the recent judgments of the European Court of
Human Rights upholding the inheritance rights of non-citizens to
all pending and future cases involving inhabitants of the islands
and their descendants, and to refrain from applying new restrictions
based on the perceived military-strategic importance of the islands
with respect to exiled islanders who have lost their Turkish citizenship,
and whose presence cannot conceivably have “strategic” significance;
9.5. to repair in due course the damage already done to the
natural and cultural heritage of the islands, in particular by:
9.5.1. simplifying and speeding up the procedure for owners of
protected historical buildings on both islands to obtain the required
permits for their restoration and reconstruction;
9.5.2. speedily granting the Greek Orthodox parish of Bozcaada
(Tenedos) the permit required for the restoration of the chapel
of Agia Paraskevi and issuing proper ownership titles both in respect
of the particular chapel and all other property of this religious
foundation;
9.5.3. reviewing the permit given to the “Wind-Surf Club” built
in the sensitive natural habitat zone between the salt lake and
the Agean Sea on the south-eastern coast of Gökçeada (Imbros);
9.5.4. banning any further excavations at the natural monument
of “Kaskavalia Rocks” near the harbour of Kuzulimani (Agios Kyrikos)
at Gökçeada (Imbros) and repairing the damage already done;
9.5.5. removing the unused, ruined concrete shack built by the
military on the scenic site of the former festivities area of the
village of Tepeköy (Agridia) known as Pinarbasi (Spilia) on Gökçeada
(Imbros) and making the whole area available again for traditional
festivities and funding the reconstruction of the Agia Marina chapel;
9.5.6. restoring, to the extent possible, the classical-era port
of Kaleköy (Kastro) on Gökçeada (Imbros) destroyed during the recent
construction of a modern marina on this site, and preserving the
remnants of the ancient Venetian/Byzantine-era castle overlooking
the same village;
9.5.7. maintaining the original religious purpose of the newly
restored church of Agios Nikolaos in Kaleköy (Kastro);
9.6. to return the Turkish citizenship to those of the islanders
who lost it in the past and their descendants;
9.7. to establish a direct link, by sea, between Gökçeada (Imbros)
and Bozcaada (Tenedos), and between Gökçeada and Greece, taking
into consideration also its commercial viability;
9.8. to improve infrastructure facilities for the villages
on Gökçeada (Imbros) that are still settled by significant numbers
of ethnic Greek inhabitants – in particular, in Tepeköy (Agridia),
Dereköy (Schinoudi), Zeytinliköy (Aghii Theodori), and Eski Bademli
(Glyky).
10. In order to assist in the implementation of the measures recommended
above, and to promote the early detection of any other issues needing
to be addressed, the Assembly recommends the instauration of an informal
mechanism for regular dialogue (“round table”) involving the local
Turkish authorities and representatives of the two communities.
11. The Assembly invites its Monitoring Committee to include the
follow-up of the proposed measures (paragraph 9 above) in its post-monitoring
dialogue with Turkey.
B. Explanatory memorandum by Mr Andreas Gross, rapporteur
(open)1. Introduction
1. Let me begin by explaining why this is an unusual
topic, with an unusual background, which therefore deserves unusual
attention from this Committee.
2. Gökçeada (Imbros) and Bozcaada (Tenedos) are two small Northern
Aegean islands, which have been inhabited since time immemorial
mostly by ethnic Greeks, and which have been governed throughout
their history by numerous rulers, including for many centuries the
Ottomans, and, since 1923, the Turkish Republic. The islanders have
always been hostages of the ups and downs of relations between Turkey
and Greece and they have suffered terribly especially from 1964
through the 1980s, when the islands were almost emptied of their
original inhabitants. Thanks to the personal initiative of Elsa
Papademetriou and Murat Mercan, then heads of the Greek and Turkish
delegations to the Parliamentary Assembly, who had undertaken a
historic visit to the islands in 2005 on behalf of the Assembly’s
Bureau and who had co-sponsored the motion underlying this report,
hopes are now very high on the islands and beyond that this issue
may become an example of mutually beneficial cooperation between
Greece and Turkey.
3. The very fact that these islands are so insignificant – even
their “strategic” location at the mouth of the Dardanelles has no
military importance any more in the day and age of long-range missiles
and satellites – should really make it possible to overcome old
nationalistic reflexes and negotiate a fair deal in the sole interest of
the people concerned, namely the old and the new inhabitants of
the islands as well as the exiled islanders who have maintained
a loving relationship with their old homeland in different ways,
and Turkish citizens who have discovered the beauty of the islands
in recent times and who like to spend time and possibly retire there. Gökçeada
(Imbros) and Bozcaada (Tenedos) could serve in a way as a “litmus
test” for Turkey’s willingness and ability to generously right past
wrongs. The positive role which Mrs Papademetriou and Mr Mercan
have played together, and the concrete action taken by Prime Minister
Erdogan after his own visit to the islands in April 2005 
have
raised many hopes among the islanders and among those in the Council
of Europe who believe that old rivalries like those between Greeks
and Turks can give way to true partnership and cooperation.
have
raised many hopes among the islanders and among those in the Council
of Europe who believe that old rivalries like those between Greeks
and Turks can give way to true partnership and cooperation. 4. I want to make it perfectly clear from the very start that
nobody among the ethnic Greek islanders, the diaspora, let alone
the Greek authorities, and certainly not myself or anyone else in
the Council of Europe, harbours any “territorial” agenda: the islands
are under full Turkish sovereignty, since 1923 as far as the Turkish
Republic is concerned, and for many centuries before under Ottoman
rule, with only very short interruptions of British and Greek rule
at the beginning of the last century. Any “land” or property issues
concern private individuals – Turkish citizens, albeit of Greek
culture, or their direct descendants – and foundations only and
have no bearing whatsoever on national sovereignty over the territories
in question.
5. In the same way, I should like to acknowledge from the beginning
that I am fully aware of the fact that the sufferings of the ethnic
Greek inhabitants of Gökçeada (Imbros) and Bozcaada (Tenedos) did
not happen in isolation – the measures taken in 1964 were linked
to earlier attacks on Turkish Cypriots, other measures coincided
with the flare-up of the Cypriot crisis in 1974. Turkish policies
towards the islanders may also have been influenced by the problems
experienced by the ethnic Turkish minority in Western Thrace, in
Greece. These will be the subject of the report by our colleague
Michel Hunault, whose mandate covers more generally the problems
of the ethnic Greek minority in Turkey and of the ethnic Turkish
minority in Greece. But this report is not intended to “judge” the
behaviour of the Turkish authorities towards the islanders. If that
were the case, it might indeed be necessary to take into account
the perceived “provocations” from the Greek side in order to reach
a “balanced” judgment. But it is my intention – and that of the
Committee, which decided to keep this topic separate from Mr Hunault’s
mandate – to propose practical solutions for the problems encountered
by the islanders, including their descendants living abroad, outside
the vicious circle of “tit for tat” reactions to perceived injustices
committed by the other side.
6. In order to understand the present situation, and to propose
fair solutions, it is unavoidable to look at the way this situation
has come to be, in the most objective manner. If this can be interpreted
as implying some criticism of certain measures taken by the (historical)
authorities, so be it – we need to learn the lessons of history,
or else we are condemned to repeat past errors. And let us also
not forget that the victims of the violations that I will not be
able to avoid mentioning, as a matter of my own credibility and
that of the Council of Europe as a whole, were all and still are
in their vast majority Turkish citizens; and that the islands, whose situation
our proposals are intended to improve, are Turkish islands. If this
report can help turn the two islands into a positive example for
tolerance, mutual respect and prosperity, it will be a very “pro-Turkish”
report. This is my sincere intention, as a friend of Turkey and
clear supporter of its European ambitions.
7. In this spirit, I should like to appeal to our Turkish friends
to do everything in their power in order to avoid that the fate
of the inhabitants of the two small islands becomes hostage to the
ongoing struggle for influence between “nationalist” political forces
and those who are labouring in favour of a decisively “European” orientation
of Turkish politics. The strategic ‘insignificance’ of these two
small islands should make it easier to allow basic fairness to prevail
for the benefit of all inhabitants without worrying about any danger
for national security. As I said during my fact-finding visit to
Turkey : the more powerful partner can afford to show its wisdom
by taking the first step towards the other side.
8. My own interest in this topic is related to the report I prepared
for the Committee on Political Affairs in 2003 on “Positive experiences
of autonomous regions as a source of inspiration for conflict resolution
in Europe” .
I am still fascinated by the positive way in which the Åland Islands
in the Baltic Sea, whilst undisputedly under Finnish sovereignty,
have been able to maintain their original Swedish culture. However,
I am aware that the international context makes the case of the
two Turkish islands very different from the Finnish ones.
.
I am still fascinated by the positive way in which the Åland Islands
in the Baltic Sea, whilst undisputedly under Finnish sovereignty,
have been able to maintain their original Swedish culture. However,
I am aware that the international context makes the case of the
two Turkish islands very different from the Finnish ones.9. Proceedings to date include the tabling of the motion (Doc
10536 of 29 April 2005), which was forwarded to the Committee on
Legal Affairs and Human Rights for report on 27 January 2006. At
its meeting on 13 March 2006, the Committee appointed me as Rapporteur,
and on 15 September 2006, it authorised me to undertake fact-finding
visits to the region. I undertook a brief visit to Athens on 22
November 2006 meeting with representatives of the Greek Ministry
of Foreign Affairs and representatives of the Diaspora originating
from Gökçeada (Imbros) and Bozcaada (Tenedos), I met the Ecumenical
Patriarch of Istanbul, who is a native of Gökçeada (Imbros), on
17 May 2007, after which I also had talks with the Turkish authorities
in Ankara. Finally, I have visited the islands themselves, followed
by fresh talks in Ankara from 28 April until 2 May 2008
2. A short historical overview
10. As you can see from the introduction, it is not the
aim of this report to investigate past human rights violations and
to “name and shame” the perpetrators. In order to develop and propose
a fair and reasonable solution for the future, it is nevertheless
necessary to understand the historical background of the present situation
– even if this background is not so flattering for the authorities
that were in power back in the 1960s, 70s and 80s, and also for
the historic Greek Governments and the wider international community,
which allowed these policies to proceed practically unopposed, for
reasons of cold war strategy, wider national or economic interests,
or simply for not caring a lot about the fate of such a small community.
11. The previously Byzantine islands were annexed by the Ottoman
Empire in 1455/56, whilst their ethnic, religious and cultural make-up
remained largely unchanged under the mostly tolerant regime of the
Ottomans. In 1912, the Imvriot population of 9,456 inhabitants was
composed of 9,357 ethnic Greeks and 99 Turks, whereas Bozcaada (Tenedos)
had a more balanced mix of 5,420 Greeks and 1,200 Turks, for a total
of 6,620 inhabitants.
12. Between 1912 and 1923, the islands were drawn into the Greco-Turkish
conflict as well as into World War I, and changed hands several
times. Whilst the 1920 Treaty of Sèvres, never ratified by Turkey,
granted sovereignty over the islands to Greece, the 1923 Treaty
of Lausanne, negotiated after the Turkish military successes in
the so-called Anatolian war, gave the islands back to Turkey. But
article 14 of the Treaty of Lausanne stipulated a strong regime
of local autonomy in favour of the traditional inhabitants:
“The islands of Imbros and Tenedos, remaining under Turkish sovereignty, shall enjoy a special administrative organisation composed of local elements and furnishing every guarantee for the native non-Moslem population in so far as concerns local administration and the protection of person and property. The maintenance of order will be assured therein by a police force recruited from amongst the local population by the local administration above provided for and placed under its orders. The agreements which have been, or maybe, concluded between Greece and Turkey relating to the exchange of the Greek and Turkish populations will not be applied to the inhabitants of the islands of Imbros and Tenedos.”
13. After 1923, as the islanders had feared, the Turkish Government
was reluctant to fulfil the undertaking of article 14 of the Lausanne
Treaty .
Indeed, Article 14 of Law No 1151 of 1927 establishing the “special status”
of the islands abolished public Greek-language education.
.
Indeed, Article 14 of Law No 1151 of 1927 establishing the “special status”
of the islands abolished public Greek-language education. 14. In 1946, the first group of Muslim Turkish citizens were brought
to the island by the Turkish government. The 1950s, with the Democratic
Party in power in Turkey, are seen by ethnic Greek Imvriots and
Tenedians as a period of tranquillity and liberty. Article 14 of
law No 1151 (1927) was abrogated by virtue of law No. 5713 (1952)
and education on the islands regained a semi-autonomous status.
15. After the military coup in Turkey in 1960, the situation worsened
dramatically for the islanders. In 1964, coinciding with inter-communitarian
clashes in Cyprus, article 14 of law No 1151 was put in force again
by virtue of law 502/1964 and the Greek-language schools were closed.
Most of the viable agricultural lands were expropriated, for the
construction of an airport and a military base, the establishment
of an “open prison” (agricultural prison) on the southwest coast
of Gökçeada (Imbros) in 1965, and for the establishment of a state-owned
agricultural production enterprise (TIGEM) in 1966. According to
testimonies collected by a Turkish researcher , and by some of the islanders
themselves whom I met during my on-site visit, the inmates of the “open
prison” committed many criminal acts against the (then still mostly
ethnic Greek) inhabitants to the point of driving many to emigration,
whilst the authorities did not intervene effectively. Representatives
of the local Turkish authorities stressed that the inmates of the
prison had been suitably supervised and denied that such criminal
acts occurred during the later years of the existence of the prisons,
without being able to exclude that some such acts were committed
in the first years of the existence of the prison.
, and by some of the islanders
themselves whom I met during my on-site visit, the inmates of the “open
prison” committed many criminal acts against the (then still mostly
ethnic Greek) inhabitants to the point of driving many to emigration,
whilst the authorities did not intervene effectively. Representatives
of the local Turkish authorities stressed that the inmates of the
prison had been suitably supervised and denied that such criminal
acts occurred during the later years of the existence of the prisons,
without being able to exclude that some such acts were committed
in the first years of the existence of the prison.16. Other factors motivating the emigration of most of the ethnic
Greek islanders were economic: the Turkish authorities rightly pointed
out that during the same period, many island dwellers living on
Aegean islands under Greek sovereignty had also left their homes
and sought better fortunes in Athens, or even as “guest workers” outside
of Greece, as did many Turkish citizens from the mainland.
17. But the emigration of almost all ethnic Greek inhabitants
in such a short period of time cannot be explained, in my view,
by the general migratory “pull” factors prevailing at the time.
The islanders of Gökçeada (Imbros) and Bozcaada (Tenedos) were clearly
subjected to local “push” factors created by the policies put into place
since 1964, which must have suggested to most ethnic Greek islanders
that they and their children had no future on the islands.
18. The main “push factor” cited by representatives of the ethnic
Greek community was the closure of the Greek-speaking schools in
1964, which, combined with the other factors referred to in paragraphs
19-21 below, lead to the immediate departure of most inhabitants
with school-age children. The Turkish authorities questioned the
importance of this factor, as a similar measure in 1927 had not
provoked a mass exodus. But representatives of the Greek diaspora
pointed out that the importance the islanders attached to the education of
their children had much increased between the 1920s and the 1960s.
19. Most islanders were traditionally either fishermen or farmers,
who were also engaging in animal husbandry. In 1964, fishing was
generally banned all around Gökçeada (Imbros), for environmental
reasons, whose credibility is doubtful as fishing continued in neighbouring
waters, including around Bozcaada (Tenedos), where ethnic Turkish
fishermen would also have been hit by a ban.
20. At roughly the same time, farming was made de facto impossible by the expropriation
for the above-mentioned purposes (agricultural prison, state farm,
and airport and military facilities), of the most fertile agricultural
lands – in particular, the three large plains we saw on Gökçeada
(Imbros), the rest of the island being mountainous and rocky and
surely more difficult to farm, although we were told that many hillsides
were planted with vines.
21. Again at about the same time, the then flourishing export
of meat to the mainland was prohibited for sanitary reasons.
22. In my view, these local migratory “push factors”, whether
or not they were created by the authorities of the time by design , or by inadvertence,
were objectively very powerful and the consequence was – again, whether
intended or not – the departure of the vast majority of the original
ethnic Greek inhabitants from the islands.
, or by inadvertence,
were objectively very powerful and the consequence was – again, whether
intended or not – the departure of the vast majority of the original
ethnic Greek inhabitants from the islands.23. By a decree of 29 July 1970 , Imbros (Imroz in Turkish) was renamed
Gökçeada, and Greek place names were replaced by Turkish ones. In
the following years, the population of entire villages was transferred from
the Anatolian mainland to the islands (in 1973, from the Black Sea
(Trabzon) region, in 1984 from Isparta, Budur and Mukla, and in
2000 from Canakkale and Biga), often in the wake of natural disasters
or as part of hydro dam projects involving the flooding of villages
on the mainland.
, Imbros (Imroz in Turkish) was renamed
Gökçeada, and Greek place names were replaced by Turkish ones. In
the following years, the population of entire villages was transferred from
the Anatolian mainland to the islands (in 1973, from the Black Sea
(Trabzon) region, in 1984 from Isparta, Budur and Mukla, and in
2000 from Canakkale and Biga), often in the wake of natural disasters
or as part of hydro dam projects involving the flooding of villages
on the mainland. 24. The “open prison” was closed in December 1991, after most
of the ethnic Greeks had left the island. Whilst the ethnic Greek
islanders believe that this was done because the new inhabitants
from Anatolia had also suffered from harassment by inmates, the
Turkish authorities insist that the closure, as well as the opening of
the prison in 1965, was in line with the carceral policies applied
throughout Turkey.
25. The peak of the exodus of the ethnic Greek islanders was in
1974, following new disturbances triggered by a fresh round of conflict
in Cyprus. The numbers speak for themselves: in 1960, 5,487 ethnic
Greeks and 289 ethnic Turks lived on the island of Gökçeada (Imbros);
in 1970, the numbers were 2,571 and 4,020; in 1985, 472 and 7,138;
in 1990, 300 and 7,200 respectively . At present, as the authorities
as well as the ethnic Greek community agree, about 250 mostly elderly
ethnic Greek islanders live on the island year-round, whereas between
2000 and 4000 spend some time in their ancestral homeland as seasonal
visitors, in particular around the religious festivals at Christmas,
Easter and in mid-August for the Assumption of Holy Mary (Panayia).
. At present, as the authorities
as well as the ethnic Greek community agree, about 250 mostly elderly
ethnic Greek islanders live on the island year-round, whereas between
2000 and 4000 spend some time in their ancestral homeland as seasonal
visitors, in particular around the religious festivals at Christmas,
Easter and in mid-August for the Assumption of Holy Mary (Panayia). 26. On Bozcaada (Tenedos), 25 mostly elderly ethnic Greeks are
still living permanently on the island (total population: 2274).
Greek community representatives said that in the 1950s, their number
was around 1,700, with over 240 children in the Greek school at
the time of its closure in 1964. The Turkish prefect could not cite any
official figures but thought, following talks he had with aged inhabitants,
that there were about 600 ethnic Greeks in 1960, out of a total
of 1350 inhabitants at the time. He pointed out that it is difficult
for the authorities at present to maintain the population on the
island. The Turkish school on Bozcaada (Tenedos) presently has only
34 students in the 1st, 2nd and 3rd grades combined.
27. Most exiled ethnic Greek islanders have ended up living in
Greece but considerable numbers emigrated to places as far away
as the United States, Australia and South Africa. As I could see
for myself during my visit to Athens, when I met with many representatives
of different groups of diaspora representatives, the exiled Imvriots
and Tenedians are making a great effort to distinguish themselves
from other Greek and Turkish diaspora groups, retaining a specific
Imbriot and Tenedian identity. I am impressed by their dedication
and affection for their homeland, which helps them maintain the
links with the islands over the generations. Many members of the
diaspora were present on the islands and participated actively in
the meetings we had during my visit, which took place just after
the Greek Orthodox Easter weekend.
28. The year 1993 brought a new shift in policy towards the islands.
Special visa requirements for travelling to Gökçeada (Imbros), which
had effectively prevented exiles from returning to visit their homeland,
were abrogated, and the Government provided funding for the development
of tourism. Since 1993, in increasing numbers each year, exiled
Imbriots and their offspring come back to their native lands in
the summer, especially during Panayia . The new policy recasts
former inhabitants as tourists, welcoming as such those who had
once been made to leave. They are joined by a group of wealthy and
cultured Istanbulites who come to the islands in search of a culturally
authentic vacation spot, and who tend to be critical vis-à-vis the destruction
wrought on the original culture by earlier policies much in the
same way as the exiled islanders themselves.
. The new policy recasts
former inhabitants as tourists, welcoming as such those who had
once been made to leave. They are joined by a group of wealthy and
cultured Istanbulites who come to the islands in search of a culturally
authentic vacation spot, and who tend to be critical vis-à-vis the destruction
wrought on the original culture by earlier policies much in the
same way as the exiled islanders themselves. 3. The situation on the islands at the present time: what are the problems that need to be addressed today?
29. The situation – as it presents itself today as well
as its historical development – differs considerably between the
two islands. On Gökçeada (Imbros), an almost exclusively ethnic
Greek population has been all but replaced by fairly recent arrivals of ethnic Turkish
inhabitants from the mainland. On Bozcaada (Tenedos), a sizeable
ethnic Turkish population with its own centuries-old cultural traditions
has always cohabited with ethnic Greeks, although most of these
have now departed for similar reasons as their cousins on Gökçeada
(Imbros). I will try to take the differences between the two islands
into account for the three issues to be developed below: the preservation
of the islands’ cultural and natural heritage (i.), as well as the protection
of the ethnic Greeks’ property rights and their transmission to
the following generations (ii.), and finally the islands’ infrastructure
problems (iii.).
of ethnic Turkish
inhabitants from the mainland. On Bozcaada (Tenedos), a sizeable
ethnic Turkish population with its own centuries-old cultural traditions
has always cohabited with ethnic Greeks, although most of these
have now departed for similar reasons as their cousins on Gökçeada
(Imbros). I will try to take the differences between the two islands
into account for the three issues to be developed below: the preservation
of the islands’ cultural and natural heritage (i.), as well as the protection
of the ethnic Greeks’ property rights and their transmission to
the following generations (ii.), and finally the islands’ infrastructure
problems (iii.).3.1. Protection of the islands’ cultural and natural heritage
3.1.1. Cultural heritage
30. The islands’ cultural heritage is the product of
their historical development. On Gökçeada (Imbros), whose population
had been over many centuries almost exclusively ethnic Greek, historic
buildings, churches etc. are all “Greek”. The historic villages,
whilst in a depressingly bad state of repair, must have once housed thriving
communities. We were shown the former houses of rich merchants,
doctors, pharmacists, shops, large farm and vintner’s houses. The
historic island capital of Kaleköy (Kastro) features the remains
of a large Venetian/Byzantine fortress built on an ancient Athenian
acropolis (ancient Athens had settled a colony on the island since
the 5th century B.C.), a harbour also dating back to the classic
Greek period, and the island’s former cathedral church of Agia Marina,
which was vandalised in 1974 but, but whose rehabilitation has recently
been approved. The villages of Zeytinliköy (Aghii Theodori) – the
birth place of the present Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew and
of the former Archbishop of the Americas Iakovos –, Eski Bademli
(Glyky), Tepeköy (Agridia), Dereköy (Schinoudi) and Yeni Mahalle
(Eulampion) all have beautifully maintained Greek orthodox churches.
31. Bozcaada (Tenedos) with its historically mixed population
logically also features a Greco-Turkish cultural “mix”. The well-preserved
Venetian/Byzantine/Ottoman fortress at the harbour, the recently
restored bell tower
of the Greek community church coexist harmoniously with wineries
and town and farm houses in Greek and Turkish style. The atmosphere
on the island is generally pleasant – a living bi-cultural community,
in which very few buildings are derelict and in which the atmosphere
between the two population groups is relaxed and positive – as was
confirmed both by the few remaining elderly ethnic Greek inhabitants
and by the representatives of the diaspora present during our visit.
bell tower
of the Greek community church coexist harmoniously with wineries
and town and farm houses in Greek and Turkish style. The atmosphere
on the island is generally pleasant – a living bi-cultural community,
in which very few buildings are derelict and in which the atmosphere
between the two population groups is relaxed and positive – as was
confirmed both by the few remaining elderly ethnic Greek inhabitants
and by the representatives of the diaspora present during our visit.32. During my visit on the islands, I have observed that a number
of important “Greek” cultural sites are either quite run-down, or
have been put to uses that appear to be quite incompatible with
their status as cultural or religious monuments.
33. The destruction of the antique harbour of Kaleköy (Kastro)
on Gökçeada (Imbros) for the construction of a modern concrete marina
is an outrage that my official Turkish interlocutors (the Governor
as well as the Mayor) regretted as much any other lovers of the
island.
34. The alleged destruction of the old Greek village of Pyrgos
for the construction of a Ministry of Justice resort has given rise
to conflicting versions: ethnic Greek representatives say that on
5 March 1966, villagers were ordered to hand over the keys of their
houses and leave with what they were able to carry, the rest to
be thrown into the sea. They have delivered a number of documents
and pictures showing that the 35 houses as well as the church of
St. Anna and the customs house were bulldozed in the early 1980s
to make room for the resort. According to the Turkish authorities,
the Ministry of Justice resort was built in 1985 above the site
of an ancient sunken village, and some observers hinted to me that
both versions constitute in fact the whole truth i.e. both an ancient
and a more recent settlement were affected by the construction of
that resort.
35. The old primary school of Zeytinliköy (Aghii Teodori), whose
construction had been completed by the ethnic Greek community just
before Greek schools were prohibited on the islands, is now in ruins.
The former primary school of Dereköy (Schinoudi) was in the meantime
reportedly converted into a disco (though at the time of our visit,
fresh paint was hiding the commercial insignia). The former primary
school of Eski Bademli (Glyky) was also converted into a hotel and
restaurant. The same is true for the former Greek community school and
kindergarten on the island of Bozcaada (Tenedos).
36. The ruined villages on Gökçeada (Imbros) I mentioned are a
depressing sight. Their deplorable state is the result not only
of the departure of most of their inhabitants, but also of the bureaucratic
and, frankly speaking, counter-productive rules governing the granting
of permits for the restoration of these houses under the so-called
SIT regime (protection of the cultural and natural heritage). Almost
the entire surface of the islands is placed under this regime, which
involves expert committees on the mainland deciding on each repair or
restoration project. The procedure often lasts more than two years,
and the application can only be made once the owners have had their
legal title recognised in the slow-moving property registration
process (below paras. 55 pp.). The authorities have recognised the
problem and indicated that the SIT committee’s capacity has recently
been increased so that the length of the procedures should come
closer, in future, of the time limit of six months foreseen in law.
The inhabitants are understandably frustrated, as the passage of
time makes the renovation of their houses ever more costly, and
they observe that the protection of the cultural and natural heritage
on the islands does not seem to be a priority of the authorities
on many other occasions.
37. During my visit, I have also seen several examples of the
successful preservation of cultural monuments. The well-kept churches
on Gökçeada (Imbros) I mentioned above (para. 29 in fine) along
with the island’s present cathedral in the capital and the adjacent
building which is the seat of the Metropolitan are as many witnesses
of respect for the religious traditions of the ethnic Greek minority.
The St. Nicolas (Agios Nikolaos) church in the harbour area of Kaleköy
(Kastro) has been recently restored with government funds, but the Metropolitan
fears that it may be transformed into a museum – something he strongly
opposes. I trust that the already decided and imminent restoration
of the former cathedral church of Agia Marina in Kaleköy (Kastro), again
with Turkish Government funds, is a future example of the successful
preservation of cultural monuments. The positive steps leading to
the preservation of both these monuments should be coupled with resolving
their property status as well as the property and administrative
status of the rest of the property of the Kaleköy (Kastro) Greek
orthodox religious foundation.
38. Another future example will be the renovation of the chapel
of Agia Paraskevi on Bozcaada (Tenedos). This chapel is particularly
close to the heart of the small ethnic Greek community there, as
it is the site of their traditional summer festival in July. They
have applied for a permit for restoration work, which they will
be able to fund themselves. The already-mentioned renovation of
the bell tower of the Greek community church in Bozcaada (Tenedos)
was even funded by the Turkish Government, thanks to the personal
initiative of the Prime Minister.
39. If the historic cultural heritage shall be viable, it must
also be transmitted to the following generation. The cultural autonomy
granted in Article 14 of the Treaty of Lausanne therefore presupposes the possibility
for the ethnic Greek inhabitants to school their children also in
their native tongue. As we have seen, the closure in 1964, by the
military regime, of the Greek-language schools that had been allowed
to flourish during the 1950’s has surely been an important “push”
factor for ethnic Greeks with school-age children. If the Turkish authorities
are serious about allowing the islands’ original cultural heritage
to flourish again, they should provide for effective access to Greek-language
schooling, either by allow the ethnic Greek community to re-open
a school of their own on each of the islands, or by providing for
high-quality Greek-language schooling in the existing public schools
on the islands.
therefore presupposes the possibility
for the ethnic Greek inhabitants to school their children also in
their native tongue. As we have seen, the closure in 1964, by the
military regime, of the Greek-language schools that had been allowed
to flourish during the 1950’s has surely been an important “push”
factor for ethnic Greeks with school-age children. If the Turkish authorities
are serious about allowing the islands’ original cultural heritage
to flourish again, they should provide for effective access to Greek-language
schooling, either by allow the ethnic Greek community to re-open
a school of their own on each of the islands, or by providing for
high-quality Greek-language schooling in the existing public schools
on the islands.40. Representatives of the ethnic Greek community assured me that
they would be able to fund Greek community schools on the islands
in the same way as is presently done in Istanbul, without support
from the Turkish Government.
41. Representatives of the Turkish authorities (both local prefects,
and the representatives of the Ministry of Education I met in Ankara)
assured me that they would be prepared to open a school for the
ethnic Greek islanders if and when at least 10 children would be
in need of schooling on each of the islands. The Metropolitan of
the islands insisted that he could find the requisite number of
families with children willing to resettle there as soon as they
were assured that there would be a school for their children.
42. As I was under the impression that the representatives of
the Ministry of Education might have been unaware of the law of
1964 abolishing the Greek community schools on the island , I asked whether there were
any legal obstacles against opening such a school now. As the answer
was that there is indeed no obstacle, I can only conclude that the
law of 1964 no longer applies. That would be an important and most welcome
development indeed.
, I asked whether there were
any legal obstacles against opening such a school now. As the answer
was that there is indeed no obstacle, I can only conclude that the
law of 1964 no longer applies. That would be an important and most welcome
development indeed. 43. With good will on both sides, it should also be possible to
solve the problem of the “chicken and the egg”: understandably,
parents will only move to the island when they are fully assured
that appropriate schooling for their children is guaranteed upon
their arrival. The authorities should therefore agree to treat the
application before the actual move takes place, and make a firm
commitment for the opening of a school on the strength of a list
of names to be provided by the Metropolitan of families that are
ready to move if and when a school is opened.
44. An appropriate Greek-language schooling offer on the islands
would also greatly benefit the more recently arrived ethnic Turkish
residents of Gökçeada (Imbros), as well as the long-established
ethnic Turkish population on Bozcaada (Tenedos). Giving their children
the opportunity to learn Greek as well as Turkish, alongside ethnic
Greek children, would give rise to a truly bilingual population
that would be ideally placed to seize the job opportunities that
would be generated by the development of tourism around the attractive
cultural and natural heritage of the islands. Such a bilingual population,
prosperous and open to the world, could also serve as a bridge between
Turkey and Greece and Europe as a whole.
3.1.2. Natural heritage
45. As I was able to see for myself during my visit on
the islands, their natural heritage – a stunning coastline, beautiful
beaches, mountains with breath-taking views – is a world-class attraction.
Together with its historic and cultural heritage, it should enable
the islanders to develop tourism in a sustainable way.
46. Unfortunately, I have also seen four “building sins” on Gökçeada
(Imbros) that ought to be remedied as soon as possible:
47. The first is the so-called “Wind-Surf-Club” in the south-eastern
corner of the island, which is a monstrous concrete block placed
right on a narrow patch of land between the beach and a shallow
salt lake, which is an important bird sanctuary, right in the middle
of a large nature protection zone. We actually saw people surfing on
the salt lake, towards a group of flamingos. The owner of the club,
whom I asked how he had obtained the extraordinary permit to build
in this particularly sensitive zone, reacted very aggressively.
He showed me a picture of a similar monstrosity on a neighbouring
Greek island and accused me of wanting to destroy the economic basis
of the Turkish community on the island. The authorities were aware
of the equally critical findings of the 2005 mission of Mr Mercan
and Mrs Papademetriou. They acknowledged that “tourist facilities” were
not allowed in this zone, but argued that this was not a tourist
facility, but an educational establishment (a surfing and diving
school) and that the permit was therefore legal. Frankly speaking,
I am not convinced.
48. The second is the construction, by the military, of a small,
fenced-in concrete shack right on top of a stunningly beautiful
hillside which serves as the summer festivities area of the village
of Tepeköy (Agridia) known as Pinarbasi (Spilia). The shack is obviously
no longer in use (according to local inhabitants, since 2003), its
roof is partly fallen in. It should be removed as soon as possible,
or transformed into a small ecological café open for all, the chapel
of Agia Marina should be reconstructed and the expropriated land handed
back to the local community, so that the area can be restored in
its original splendour for the traditional festivities in August
that attract both the ethnic Greek and Turkish inhabitants of the
island and their summer guests.
49. The third is the destruction of the entire settlement of Pyrgos including the church of Agia Anna
and the deplorable condition of the pre-classic tower on this site.
Both these monuments should be restored and at least part of the
area where the resort is located should be made accessible to the
public.
including the church of Agia Anna
and the deplorable condition of the pre-classic tower on this site.
Both these monuments should be restored and at least part of the
area where the resort is located should be made accessible to the
public.50. The fourth are the excavations on the back side of the “Kaskavalia
Rocks”, a monument of nature off the harbour of Gökçeada (Imbros),
which has begun to tumble down. Excavation work should be stopped
and necessary measures taken to restore the landscape.
3.2. Property issues
51. Clearly, a harmonious development of the islands
including both ethnic groups presupposes a fair settlement of property
issues. I am not directing any accusations at the present Turkish
authorities, and I do not even wish to speculate about the intentions
of the authorities at the time. I will limit myself to describing
the objective outcomes of the past and present policies, legislation
and administrative practice, assessing these outcomes in the light
of the political objectives pursued by this report, and making practical
proposals on how to achieve any desirable corrections of these outcomes.
52. The above-mentioned historical “push” factors (schools closure,
confiscation of agricultural lands, prohibition of fishing and meat
exports, open prison), together with the economic “pull” factors
of better-off regions and countries have created a situation in
which only a few hundred mostly elderly ethnic Greeks live on the
islands permanently whilst entire villages have been deserted by
their inhabitants. Some of the agricultural lands expropriated for
the purposes of the TIGEM and the open prison are now cultivated
by more recently arrived ethnic Turkish inhabitants, to whom these
lands were given in compensation for expropriations they suffered
themselves on the mainland, for example because of the construction
of a power plant. On the other hand, the olive grove surrounding
the village of Zeytinliköy (Agii Theodori) which was expropriated
for the TIGEM state farm has now been leased to a businessman from
the mainland against a nominal consideration while other plots of
expropriated land are still being tendered for long-term leases
under similar terms. According to the diaspora representatives,
all the ethnic Turkish settlements on Gökçeada (Imbros) were constructed
on expropriated land: Yeni Bademli on the land expropriated for
the state farm, Sahinkaya, Sirinköy and Ugurlu on that expropriated
for the prison, and Eselek on land expropriated in the area of Aydincik (Kefalos) .
.53. Much of the expropriated land has remained unused for many
years, up to the present time. Satellite pictures we were given
by diaspora representatives show
in impressive detail how the three expropriated fertile plains had
been cultivated intensively – in small plots using every available
piece of land – in 1963, just before the expropriations, and how
the same plains were deserted and no longer cultivated ten years
later, after the expropriations. Even today, during our visit, we
had the impression that much of the fertile land was still not being
used, even by the new settlers.
show
in impressive detail how the three expropriated fertile plains had
been cultivated intensively – in small plots using every available
piece of land – in 1963, just before the expropriations, and how
the same plains were deserted and no longer cultivated ten years
later, after the expropriations. Even today, during our visit, we
had the impression that much of the fertile land was still not being
used, even by the new settlers. 54. Ethnic Greek inhabitants complained bitterly about the “humiliating”
compensation they were paid for the expropriated land: 0.14 TL per
square meter of fertile land at a time when an egg cost 0.12 TL.
The Turkish authorities insisted that the expropriations were done
in accordance with the law and that the land on the island had in
fact little value due to the lack of accessibility. They also pointed
out that the expropriated farms had legal remedies before the Turkish
courts at their disposal in order to challenge the relevant administrative decisions.
55. Even most of the property that was not officially expropriated
is likely to be lost for the original owners and their descendants,
through the workings of three separate mechanisms, which are described
in the following paragraphs. Again, it is not my intention to make
any accusations that these property losses which I would tend to
call de facto expropriations
were intended by the authorities. The rules in question apply to
the whole of Turkey and do not target the islands specifically,
but in view of the specific historic situation, they have a disproportionate
effect on the islanders.
56. The first such mechanism is created by Turkish land law, which
has negative and probably unforeseen and unintended effects on Gökçeada
(Imbros) and, to a lesser extent, on Bozcaada (Tenedos). Land titles
had been kept in the past by the Ottoman authorities, in Arabic
script, which few officials are nowadays able to read. In order
to modernise the cadastral system, Law 2644 of 1934 (“Cadastral
Law”) required that all land owners (including home owners) re-establish
their titles by proving, by witnesses, that they have been in undisputed possession
of a given property over 20 years. Strangely, the cadastral process
started on the islands only in 1993, i.e. almost sixty years after
the adoption of the Cadastral Law, when most potential witnesses
had either left the island or were deceased. In two ethnic Greek
villages, the cadastral process is still not concluded, although
the authorities assured me that this would be the case by the end
of 2008. The present and former ethnic Greek inhabitants of Gökçeada
(Imbros) have a particularly difficult time proving their ownership
under these rules because they often do not have neighbours or other
witnesses who can testify that they were in possession of the land
over such a long period of time. They are nevertheless required
to produce witnesses identifying their property and its boundaries
even when they are in possession of previous ownership titles or when
they can prove that they have paid the property taxes on the land
in question over many decades, on the basis of a property tax survey
carried out on the islands in 1936.
57. Even when they succeed in proving continuous possession of
their property for a period of 20 years , and even when no other person claims
possession of the same property, their application is dismissed
by the authorities when the property is found not to be “exploited”
at the time of the submission of the claim – without taking into
account the circumstances which obliged most inhabitants to leave
the island so that they could hardly be expected to regularly maintain
or exploit their property.
, and even when no other person claims
possession of the same property, their application is dismissed
by the authorities when the property is found not to be “exploited”
at the time of the submission of the claim – without taking into
account the circumstances which obliged most inhabitants to leave
the island so that they could hardly be expected to regularly maintain
or exploit their property.58. The Ottoman-era cadastral archives cannot, in practice, be
relied upon for establishing ownership in the cadastral process,
as they have not been translated into modern Turkish, and the cadastral
authorities require the date of issue of the title and the serial
number as well as written proof of the relation between the applicant and
the registered owner in order to grant access to the archives. The
issue of the accessibility of the Ottoman archives seems to be also
a matter of concern for the European Union.
The
issue of the accessibility of the Ottoman archives seems to be also
a matter of concern for the European Union.59. The practical unavailability of the Ottoman archives, in conjunction
with a rule brought in by Law 5226/2004 amending Law 2863/1983 on
“Preservation of Natural and Cultural Wealth”, which excluded usucaption (proof
of 20-year unopposed possession as a method to obtain title) for
land covered by the 1983 law’s protection regime – i.e. 80% of the
island – has caused many properties of ethnic Greeks on Gökçeada (Imbros)
to be registered in the name of the State. Law 5663/2007 has brought
back the possibility of usucaption for a number of properties covered
by the protection regime, but it is unclear to what extent the effects
of the 2004 law will be reversed – e.g. individual houses which
have been qualified as “protected monuments” may still not be recognised
as belonging to their original owners or their descendants even
if they can prove by witnesses that they built them themselves.
60. When a putative owner’s title is not recognised by the cadastral
office, the land is registered in the name of the State. The decision
can be challenged in court, but the proceedings are often slow and
disproportionately costly, in view of the small size of the plots
of land concerned. I was told of one case dragging on for 38 years in
court, and of many more in which the putative owners were forced
to re-start the proceedings all over again several times, just before
they were completed. But I also learnt – separately from the prefect
and from the person concerned – of a case in which an ethnic Greek
woman wishing to resettle in her family home that had been “squatted”
in the meantime by others was helped by the prefect to regain possession
of her house.
61. The authorities provided statistical data according to which
the applicants won the vast majority of their cases in court .
The ethnic Greek islanders countered that the cases that were taken
to court were only the tip of the iceberg, as most owners can simply
not afford to pursue their rights in the courts. The same statistics, which
were contradicted by some individual cases ,
also showed that the vast majority of cadastral decisions were wrong,
to the detriment of ethnic Greek owners. I heard many complaints
about lawyers charging exorbitant fees, in relation to the value
of the land in question, and insisting on payment up front, and
heard testimony of persons complaining about high-handed treatment
from the courts. I was told that many islanders have their cases
pending before the court for years due to the fact that the witness
procedure (kesif) is adjourned continuously. An inhabitant of the
capital town of Merkez (Panaghia) told me that her property, as well
as that of all her ethnic Greek neighbours, had been registered
in the name of the State, whilst “squatters” from the Black Sea
region who had simply taken over deserted houses of ethnic Greeks
were given their titles without any problems. I raised these issues
in the Ministry of Justice, whose representatives stressed that Turkish
courts are independent and that they apply the law to all regardless
of their ethnic origins. Individual judges who made comments that
could make them appear biased would be disciplined and could be repudiated
by the aggrieved party.
.
The ethnic Greek islanders countered that the cases that were taken
to court were only the tip of the iceberg, as most owners can simply
not afford to pursue their rights in the courts. The same statistics, which
were contradicted by some individual cases ,
also showed that the vast majority of cadastral decisions were wrong,
to the detriment of ethnic Greek owners. I heard many complaints
about lawyers charging exorbitant fees, in relation to the value
of the land in question, and insisting on payment up front, and
heard testimony of persons complaining about high-handed treatment
from the courts. I was told that many islanders have their cases
pending before the court for years due to the fact that the witness
procedure (kesif) is adjourned continuously. An inhabitant of the
capital town of Merkez (Panaghia) told me that her property, as well
as that of all her ethnic Greek neighbours, had been registered
in the name of the State, whilst “squatters” from the Black Sea
region who had simply taken over deserted houses of ethnic Greeks
were given their titles without any problems. I raised these issues
in the Ministry of Justice, whose representatives stressed that Turkish
courts are independent and that they apply the law to all regardless
of their ethnic origins. Individual judges who made comments that
could make them appear biased would be disciplined and could be repudiated
by the aggrieved party.62. To sum up, the cadastral procedure, if it is not attenuated
for the benefit of the islanders, is likely to lead to the loss
of the vast majority of those properties of the current and former
ethnic Greek inhabitants of Gökçeada (Imbros) which were not covered
by the past expropriations.
63. This particular issue appears to be less acute on Bozcaada
(Tenedos), as the ethnic Greeks who left the island during the height
of the tensions stoked by the authorities at the time, in the 1960s,
had (ethnic Turkish) neighbours to whom they often sold their properties,
albeit at particularly low prices, which may well have reflected
the situation of duress under which these persons felt they had
to leave. By contrast, ethnic Greeks leaving Gökçeada (Imbros) simply
left their properties behind, as there was at the time no one to
whom they could sell them. But those who did not sell their land
appear to face similar problems as their cousins on Gökçeada (Imbros).
64. The second mechanism contributing to the loss of property
by the original owners and their descendants is the law on inheritance
requiring that only Turkish citizens can inherit property in Turkey.
The exiled islanders’ next generation has largely lost its Turkish
citizenship, not least because of the requirement for young men
to fulfil their military obligations as a precondition to maintaining
citizenship. Two recent judgments of the European Court of Human
Rights have
clarified the situation in the sense that inheritance laws shall
not discriminate against non-citizens. I hope that the cases concerning
exiled islanders that are still pending before the Turkish courts
will be decided in the light of the clear rulings of the European
Court of Human Rights, which should also govern future administrative
practice. Otherwise, the passage of property from one generation
to the next and by implication the maintenance of the links of the
ethnic Greek community with their homeland will be seriously impeded
in future. This would also be the case if foreign nationals inheriting
land on the islands would be obliged to sell it again, because of
the classification of the islands as “national security zones”.
It is difficult to see how, in the 21st century, the ownership of
houses or plots of agricultural land on one of these islands by
private individuals of whatever nationality can have any effect
on the safety of shipping through the Dardanelles, or on any other
military-strategic consideration.
have
clarified the situation in the sense that inheritance laws shall
not discriminate against non-citizens. I hope that the cases concerning
exiled islanders that are still pending before the Turkish courts
will be decided in the light of the clear rulings of the European
Court of Human Rights, which should also govern future administrative
practice. Otherwise, the passage of property from one generation
to the next and by implication the maintenance of the links of the
ethnic Greek community with their homeland will be seriously impeded
in future. This would also be the case if foreign nationals inheriting
land on the islands would be obliged to sell it again, because of
the classification of the islands as “national security zones”.
It is difficult to see how, in the 21st century, the ownership of
houses or plots of agricultural land on one of these islands by
private individuals of whatever nationality can have any effect
on the safety of shipping through the Dardanelles, or on any other
military-strategic consideration.65. The third mechanism that works objectively against the ethnic
Greek islanders’ property rights is the practice followed by the
authorities to consider religious or minority foundations as “mazbut”
– i.e. to place them under the direct administration of the Directorate
General of Vakifs – on various grounds. This applies not only to
church buildings, but to all property belonging to a parish (including
churches, school buildings, houses, and fields). On Gökçeada (Imbros),
the religious foundation of Kaleköy (Kastro) was declared “mazbut”
after all its Greek Orthodox inhabitants were forced to leave in
1974. Moreover, the religious foundation of Yeni Mahalle (Eulampio)
was also declared “mazbut”, whilst this village never ceased to
have Christian inhabitants .
. 66. The combined effect of the three mechanisms described above
is that the property situation of the ethnic Greek inhabitants of
Gökçeada (Imbros) and, to a lesser extent, of Bozcaada (Tenedos)
is bleak, unless urgent remedial action is taken by the competent
authorities. This applies both to those who still live on the islands and
to the members of the diaspora who wish to hold on to their family
property either for holiday or (future) retirement purposes or because
they wish to resettle permanently on the islands.
3.3. Infrastructure problems
67. As I found out for myself, the absence of a direct
link between Gökçeada (Imbros) and Bozcaada (Tenedos) is a serious
impediment for the maintenance and development of links between
the two islands united by a common destiny and cultural specificity.
On my fact-finding visit, the trip between the two islands (which
are within easy eyeshot from each other) took 7 hours and involved
taking three different ferryboats. The positive signals I heard
from the prefect of Bozcaada (Tenedos) give rise to hopes that such
a link may indeed soon be realised, the schedule over the seasons
depending on considerations of commercial viability.
68. There is also no link between any of the two islands and any
Greek harbours. The Turkish authorities have convinced me that this
is not their responsibility. Turkey has practically completed the
construction of a customs building at the port of Ugurlu (Livounia)
on Gökçeada (Imbros), which would be necessary in order to open
an international link. Both the ethnic Greek and Turkish communities
on the islands agree on the usefulness of a direct link with a Greek
port, but according to the Turkish interlocutors on the island,
the Greek authorities have so far refused to allow its establishment,
citing problems with the Schengen rules as a reason. But the Schengen
rules have not prevented the establishment of other boat links between
Greek and Turkish ports.
69. The ethnic Greek islanders of Gökçeada (Imbros) have also
complained about the lack of infrastructure facilities in the villages
inhabited primarily by them, including roads, public transport,
and garbage disposal . This
made everyday life quite harsh, especially in winter. The prefect
pointed out the limited resources at his disposal and stressed his
policy of treating all citizens alike. This included payment of
social assistance (YTL 250 per trimester )
to needy citizens over 65 years, including those of Greek origin.
Both prefects stressed their will to protect their ethnic Greek
citizens against any threats. The ethnic Greek islanders and the representatives
of the diaspora confirmed to me that they have indeed felt a positive
change in the attitude of the local authorities towards them over
the past years and that relations between the different communities were
very good.
. This
made everyday life quite harsh, especially in winter. The prefect
pointed out the limited resources at his disposal and stressed his
policy of treating all citizens alike. This included payment of
social assistance (YTL 250 per trimester )
to needy citizens over 65 years, including those of Greek origin.
Both prefects stressed their will to protect their ethnic Greek
citizens against any threats. The ethnic Greek islanders and the representatives
of the diaspora confirmed to me that they have indeed felt a positive
change in the attitude of the local authorities towards them over
the past years and that relations between the different communities were
very good.4. Conclusions
70. If the bicultural character of Gökçeada (Imbros)
and Bozcaada (Tenedos) shall be saved in
extremis, the situation requires urgent action. The key
to success lies with the competent Turkish authorities: if they
wish to turn these two Turkish islands into the showcase example
of what open-minded, honest cooperation among European partners
can achieve, they still have the opportunity to create a real “win-win”
situation in the interest of all citizens of the islands whatever
ethnic background they might have.
71. If the necessary measures are taken, the former and present
ethnic Greek inhabitants of the islands could still be able to hold
on to their collective cultural heritage and to their individual
family inheritances. This would stimulate the return of a significant
number of ethnic Greeks, as tourists, retirees, or entrepreneurs, especially
those from the younger generation. The money they would spend and
the investments they would make in the local economy would contribute
to an economic upswing that would provide jobs and income, and a
more stimulating cultural environment also for the benefit of the
ethnic Turkish inhabitants, and last but not least, significant
increases in the tax revenues for the Turkish state.
72. In order for such a “win-win” scenario to be actually realised,
it would be necessary first of all for the Turkish authorities at
the central level to send a clear political message to the islanders
and the diaspora communities that this is indeed their intention.
Such a message from the highest political level would encourage the
local and regional authorities to use their powers and administrative
discretion in the sense of facilitating matters for all inhabitants
of the islands, including the remaining ethnic Greek islanders and
the diaspora.
73. The political message should be underpinned by a package of
concrete measures aimed at realising such a common project.
74. In particular, quality education in Greek should be made available
on the islands, preferably by allowing the ethnic Greek community
to re-establish a school of their own, as they existed on the islands
before 1964 and as they still exist in Istanbul. As long as the
number of families with school-age children prepared to move to
the islands is insufficient, high-quality Greek language and culture
classes, taught by native Greek speakers, should be made available
in Turkish state schools on the islands. In any event, all Turkish
children on the islands should be given the opportunity to benefit
from high-quality Greek language classes.
75. Some of the public buildings previously owned by the ethnic
Greek community (religious foundations and municipalities) should
be returned to their previous owners as cultural centres and meeting
rooms.
76. Special measures should urgently be taken to compensate for
the specific difficulties with which many ethnic Greek islanders
have been confronted in re-establishing the legal title for their
family properties under the cadastral rules . These difficulties are due to
the departure of a large number of them between the 1960’s and the
1990’s due to the policies put into place by the authorities of
the time .
Granting easy access to the Ottoman-era cadastral archives and the
1936 property tax survey in order to facilitate proof of ownership, facilitating
proof of possession, reviewing cases of obviously unfair treatment
(thus minimising the need of recourse to court proceedings) would
demonstrate convincingly that it is not the intention of the present-day authorities
to dispossess the ethnic Greek islanders of their houses and land.
. These difficulties are due to
the departure of a large number of them between the 1960’s and the
1990’s due to the policies put into place by the authorities of
the time .
Granting easy access to the Ottoman-era cadastral archives and the
1936 property tax survey in order to facilitate proof of ownership, facilitating
proof of possession, reviewing cases of obviously unfair treatment
(thus minimising the need of recourse to court proceedings) would
demonstrate convincingly that it is not the intention of the present-day authorities
to dispossess the ethnic Greek islanders of their houses and land.77. In the same spirit, lands expropriated in the 1960s for the
purposes of the model state farm (TIGEM), the former agricultural
prison or the construction of the airport or certain military facilities
should be returned to their original owners insofar as they are
not, or no longer, needed for the public purposes for which they
were expropriated. If actual return is no longer possible, because
the land has in the meantime been transferred by the State to new
inhabitants, the State should adequately compensate the original
owners, preferably in the form of other state-owned land on the
same island .
.78. The transfer of family property to the next generation should
be facilitated, as a matter of urgency, by dropping nationality
requirements for inheritance, in line with the recent judgments
of the European Court of Human Rights , without obliging foreign nationals inheriting
property on the islands to sell their land for reasons of “national
security”.
, without obliging foreign nationals inheriting
property on the islands to sell their land for reasons of “national
security”.79. A further positive measure and a clear political message for
re-integrating the exiled islanders – especially the younger generation
– would be the return of the Turkish citizenship to those of the
islanders who lost it in the past and to their descendants.
80. The islands’ natural heritage should be protected in such
a way that sustainable development of tourism, agriculture and fisheries
is made possible for the benefit of all inhabitants and their guests.
This would imply the demolition of the “Wind-Surf-Club” situated
in a most delicate natural habitat on the south-eastern coast of Gökçeada
(Imbros) and the prohibition of excavation works at “Kaskavalia
Rocks” next to the island’s harbour.
81. Links by boat should be opened as soon as possible between
the two islands, and with Greek ports.
82. The follow-up of these measures and the resolution of any
problems concerning local issues would greatly benefit from the
establishment of a regular informal dialogue, which should include
representatives of the Turkish authorities and of the islands’ ethnic
Turkish and Greek communities.
83. The Parliamentary Assembly could follow up the implementation
of its proposals in the framework of the ongoing post-monitoring
dialogue with Turkey.
Appendix - Programme of the visit to Gökçeada (Imbros),
Tenedos (Bozcaaeda) and Ankaraof Mr Andreas Gross, rapporteur
(open)28 April – 2 May 2008
Monday 28 April 2008
06 h 00 Departure from Istanbul to Gökçeada (Imbros)
13 h 00 Arrival at Kuzulimanı (Agios Kyrikos) port
13 h 30 Working lunch with the Island’s Sub-Prefect (Kaymakam), Mr Kemalettin Sakin, and the Mayor, Mr Halil Rust Akgun
15 h 00 Merkez (Panaghia) – meeting with the Island’s Sub-Prefect (Kaymakam), the Mayor and the Director of the local Cadastral Office
17 h 00 Meeting with the Islands’ Orthodox Metropolitan, His Eminence Kyrillos
18 h 00 Zeytinliköy (Agii Theodori): Visit to the former kindergarten – the only Greek community building registered in the name of the local commune, now used as the seat of the local association “Imroz/Gökçeada”, opposite the ruins of the former primary school
18 h 30 Eski Bademli (Glyky): Visit to the former primary school, now converted into a hotel and restaurant
19 h 00 Kaleköy (Kastro): Visit to the Island’s former cathedral Agia Marina, the old castle, the new marina and the newly restored Chapel of Agios Nikolaos
Tuesday 29 April 2008
09 h 00 Departure to Tepeköy (Agridia), the only village still inhabited exclusively by Greeks
Visits to the ruins of the former primary school, the village’s kindergarten, church and artisanal school; the festivities area of the village of Pinarbası (Spilia)
11 h 00 Departure to Dereköy (Schinoudi)
Visit to the former primary school converted into a disco, the village’s two main churches and a cultural centre
13 h 00 Return to Merkez via the south road
Visit to the “open prison” and the expropriated plain; the new settlement Uğurlu and the customs facilities; the former Greek settlement of Pyrgos converted into a Ministry of Justice holiday resort; the natural site of Aydıncık (Kefalos) and the “Wind-surf Club”
15 h 30 Visit to Yeni Mahalle (Eulampion) and the Agia Varvara Parish Church
16 h 15 Second meeting with the local authorities (Kaymakam and the Mayor)
Press conference
17 h 30 Meetings with representatives of the ethnic Greek community
Wednesday 30 April 2008
07 h 00 Departure by ferry from Gökçeada (Imbros)
15 h 00 Arrival at Tenedos (Bozcaaeda)
Meeting with the local Sub-Prefect (Kaymakam), Mr İbrahim Çenet
Visit to the newly restored bell house of the Greek Community Church
Visit to the Greek community’s three former schools (the high school converted into a hospital; the primary school converted into a hotel; the kindergarten converted into a restaurant)
17 h 00 Meeting with ethnic Greek Tenedians at the Greek Community Church
19 h 30 Working dinner with the local authorities
Thursday 1 May 2008
07 h 00 Departure from Tenedos (Bozcaada) to Ankara
20 h 00 Arrival in Ankara
Friday 2 May 2008
09 h 30 Meeting at the Ministry of the Interior, with the Undersecretary and the Director of International Relations
10 h 45 Meeting at the Ministry of Education
13 h 30 Working lunch with members of the Turkish Delegation to the PACE, hosted by Mr Mevlüt Çavuşoğlu, Head of the Delegation
15 h 15 Meeting at the Ministry of Justice, with the Deputy Undersecretary and the Director of International Relations
16 h 30 Meeting at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, with Mr Ertuğrul Apakan, Undersecretary
20 h 00 Dinner hosted by Mr Murat Mercan, Chairperson of the Foreign Affairs Committee of the Turkish Parliament
Reporting committee: Committee on Legal Affairs and Human Rights
Reference to committee: Doc. 10536, Reference No. 3171 of 27 January 2006
Draft resolution unanimously adopted by the committee on 2 June 2008
Members of the committee: Mrs Herta Däubler-Gmelin (Chairperson), Mr Christos Pourgourides, Mr Pietro Marcenaro, Mrs Nino Nakashidzé, (Vice-Chairpersons), Mr Miguel Arias, Mr José Luis Arnaut, Mrs Meritxell Batet, Mrs Marie-Louise Bemelmans-Videc, Mrs Anna Benaki, Mr Erol Aslan Cebeci, Mrs Ingrīda Circene (alternate: Mr Boriss Cilevičs), Mrs Alma Čolo, Mr Joe Costello (alternate: Mr Terry Leyden), Mrs Lydie Err, Mr Valeriy Fedorov, Mrs Mirjana Ferić-Vac, Mr Aniello Formisano, Mr György Frunda, Mr Jean-Charles Gardetto, Mr Jószef Gedei, Mrs Svetlana Goryacheva (alternate: Mr Alexey Aleksandrov), Mrs Carina Hägg, Mr Holger Haibach, Mrs Gultakin Hajiyeva, Mrs Karin Hakl, Mr Andres Herkel, Mr Serhiy Holovaty, Mr Michel Hunault, Mr Rafael Huseynov, Mrs Fatme Ilyaz, Mr Kastriot Islami, Mr Želiko Ivanji, Mrs Iglica Ivanova, Mrs Kateřina Jacques, Mr Karol Karski, Mr András Kelemen, Mrs Kateřina Konečná, Mr Eduard Kukan, Mr Oleksandr Lavrynovych, Mrs Darja Lavtižar-Bebler, Mrs Sabine Leutheusser-Schnarrenberger, Mr Humfrey Malins (alternate: Mr Christopher Chope), Mr Andrija Mandic, Mr Alberto Martins, Mr Dick Marty (alternate: Mr Andreas Gross), Mrs Assunta Meloni, Mr Morten Messerschmidt, Mrs Ilinka Mitreva, Mr Philippe Monfils, Mr Felix Müri, Mr Philippe Nachbar, Mr Fritz Neugebauer, Mr Tomislav Nikolić, Mr Anastassios Papaligouras (alternate: Mr Miltiadis Varvitsiotis), Mr Ángel Pérez Martínez, Mrs Maria Postoico, Mrs Marietta de Pourbaix-Lundin, Mr John Prescott, Mr Jeffrey Pullicino Orlando, Mr Valeriy Pysarenko (alternate: Mr Hryhoriy Omelchenko), Mrs Marie-Line Reynaud, Mr François Rochebloine, Mr Francesco Saverio Romano, Mr Paul Rowen, Mr Armen Rustamyan, Mr Kimmo Sasi, Mr Ellert Schram, Mr Yuri Sharandin (alternate: Mr Sergey Markov), Mr Christoph Strässer, Lord John Tomlinson, Mr Mihai Tudose, Mr Tuğrul Türkeş, Mrs Özlem Türköne, Mr Vasile Ioan Dănuţ Ungureanu, Mr Øyvind Vaksdal, Mr Hugo Vandenberghe, Mr Egidijus Vareikis, Mr Klaas de Vries, Mr Dimitry Vyatkin, Mrs Renate Wohlwend, Mr Marco Zacchera (alternate: Mr Giuseppe Valentino), Mr Krysztof Zaremba, Mr Łukasz Zbonikowski
N.B.: The names of the members who took part in the meeting are printed in bold
Secretariat of the committee: Mr Drzemczewski, Mr Schirmer, Mrs Maffucci-Hugel, Ms Heurtin, Ms Schuetze-Reymann