67/2005) in accordance with the rulings of the European Court of Human Rights in the case of Xenides-Arestis v. Turkey.
The purpose of this measure was to establish an effective domestic remedy for claims relating to abandoned properties in Northern Cyprus.
[3] The European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) has made decisions on the validity of Northern Cyprus.
Thus, the adoption by the authorities of the "TRNC" of civil, administrative or criminal law measures, and their application or enforcement within that territory, may be regarded as having a legal basis in domestic law for the purposes of the Convention"[4] In this ECtHR's decision, the case application of a Greek Cypriot was immediately rejected; i.e., his application was found inadmissible; he was rejected by ECtHR just at the beginning; therefore, his case was not handled (no sessions were held) by ECtHR at all.
On 2 September 2015, ECtHR decided that "...the court system in the "TRNC", including both civil and criminal courts, reflected the judicial and common-law tradition of Cyprus in its functioning and procedures, and that the "TRNC" courts were thus to be considered as "established by law" with reference to the "constitutional and legal basis" on which they operated......the Court has already found that the court system set up in the "TRNC" was to be considered to have been "established by law" with reference to the "constitutional and legal basis" on which it operated, and it has not accepted the allegation that the "TRNC" courts as a whole lacked independence and/or impartiality......when an act of the "TRNC" authorities was in compliance with laws in force within the territory of northern Cyprus, those acts should in principle be regarded as having a legal basis in domestic law for the purposes of the convention.."[5] Here, "laws in force within the territory of northern Cyprus" is the laws that TRNC published and put into implementation (See ECtHR's above 02.07.2013 decision).