In April 2021, “in order to overcome the perception that the Greek side does not want a solution”, a text was published on the details of the decentralized federation proposal written before the Geneva conference and sent to the UN, the EU and the UK for review.
A large section of the document, which he said he had obtained from the weekly Kathimerini, told his readers, “What the Decentralized Federation Foresees… The detailed contents of the document prepared by the Greek Cypriot side and sent to foreigners are in Kathimerini’s hands… The Greek Cypriot side Preconditions the Abolition of Guarantees, the Withdrawal of Troops, the Acceptance of the Request for Concise Territorial Arrangements to the Decentralized Federation, and then they will reconsider the Turkish Cypriot Side’s request for a positive vote in all federal bodies and institutions.”
According to the paper, the relevant document notes that powers are “not limited to power-sharing or the relations of central government and federal states, but also to effective participation in decision-making, resolution of deadlocks and disputes.” It noted that “cyprus’s obligations as an EU member, and in parallel, the system for maintaining its functional and productive accession to the EU, are aimed at functioning.”
In this context, the Eroglu-Anastasiadis Joint Statement of February 1, 2014, also refers to the decision to have 22 or 24 powers in the central government on the basis of negotiations. It is stated that it will be the Central government that will represent the state in the EU, but on some issues, the forming states will decide.
It is noted that the main philosophy of the decentralized federation is that the Central government has the following powers:
“1-The powers to guarantee single sovereignty, one international legal entity, one citizenship will be in the central government. For example, the federal government will use foreign policy, defense and security powers.
2-Take care that the powers in practice are the necessary powers for federal authorities to carry out their work
3-It will have the necessary powers to join the EU and fulfill its international obligations.”
It points out that the powers of the central government are still being consulted, but two difficult issues have arisen: “the need to explain the definition of 1-one authority and 1-ensuring that decisions are taken as closely as possible to citizens.”
The newspaper went on to outline the content of the powers granted to the central government and the establishing states within the framework of the Decentralized Federation of the Greek administration:
“In this context, the goal of decentralization of powers in re-united Cyprus; It is the development of functioning and effectiveness without risking the bi-regional bi-communal federation solution or bringing it to a solution that will be destroyed by deadlocks and problems. As highlighted, the proposal is based on UN resolutions and parameters, and on the basis of a bi-regional bi-communal federation, as agreed in the 1977 and 79Th Peak Agreements. It is pointed out that the proposal shows absolute respect for Article 6 of the Guterres framework, and in parallel fully responds to the thesis of effective participation of Turkish Cypriots.
Which executive powers can be delegated to the forming states?
Granting executive powers is characteristic of federal systems, as in Austria and Germany. In the case of Cyprus, the transfer of environmental policy powers, including the protection of historical monuments, cultural heritage, excavation permits, management of EU funds, meteorology and climate change, is proposed. Ownership of the authority remains federal, but it is transferred, and it is emphasized that the federal government can recall the powers through a agreed mechanism.
Are there any permissions that can be removed from the list because it’s self-explanatory?
According to the document, there is no need to delete what is actually self-understood. For example, it is certain that the federal government will be responsible for the federal buildings and therefore can be taken.
Are there powers that are written federally and can be erased from the Constitution or federal law?
The document 100 examples of environmental protection in the Constitution. This is an authority that can be better implemented by the decision centers of the forming states, as there are coordination mechanisms that both the central government and the federal states can participate in on the common ground. That is, if one side tolerates the release of toxic gas on the environment and the other does not tolerate it, they will have to coordinate to pursue a common policy, as air pollution will affect both sides and the central government will eventually have to pay the penalty to the EU. The coordination mechanism is a new element but is proposed by the Greek Cypriot side for use on the basis of the company registration model. The current agreement stipulates that existing companies can register with the forming states, but there will also be a centralized system under which the two forming states can gain direct access by filling out forms and collecting information.
According to the ‘non-infringement principle’, are there responsibilities between the federal government and the establishing states that can be determined in such a way that the implementation of liability/powers on two levels (government-forming states) can be complementary?
For example, it was agreed that the navy would be under the authority of the central government. But this can be interpreted widely. In other areas, such as ports or coastal activities, the constructor can be transferred to states. Although the central government has powers, the historical monuments are given an example that in parallel, the responsibility for preserving and maintaining historical monuments and organizing visits to them may be in the forming states. However, it is emphasized that this can be recorded in the Constitution. The government’s proposals include the management of European appropriations, which, despite the authority of the central government, may also be responsible for the executive states. In fact, as in the case of maritime affairs, an authority can be written as a federal authority, but some subdivisions of maritime affairs can be given to the forming states.
In today’s state structure, the issue of institutions, authorities and organizations, numbering 144, is of great interest. Under the proposal, federal governments could be responsible for more than 144 of those 144. The proposal envisions the establishment of three-member co-ordination bodies (to be called National or Cypriot representations) with equal representation from the federal government, one from the forming states. The three-member co-ordination bodies have a broad framework of responsibility, including:
Supervisory role (National Human Rights Authority, Police Complaints Commission)
Regulator (Food safety standard, Professional standards)
Consulting (bioethics)
Executive and legislative powers (Gambling Administration, energy network management)
According to the document, indicator-samples can be Agricultural Payment Administration, Management and Human Dynamics Administration, Food Safety Council, National Parks Committee, Radio Television superintendent, bar associations, medical association, travel offices etc.b. professional organizations.
As pointed out in the proposal, what powers are given to the two constructor states, the method of supervision/supervision to be applied.”
In the section devoted by the side title “Preconditions and Positive Vote”, the newspaper stated:
“According to the Greek Cypriot proposal for decentralized federation, problems related to further decentralization of institutions, improved functioning achieved in this way and the interpretation of the Turkish Cypriot side in effective participation are minimized. The document states that ‘the flexibility and political will of our party for us to negotiate in this direction requires the precondition of simultaneously discussing the articles of the UN Secretary-General and removing the guarantees, withdrawing troops, and more concretely determining the acceptance of our request for concise territorial arrangements so that we can rethink the Turkish Cypriot side’s demand for a positive vote in all federal bodies and institutions.’
