Ramifications Of The ICJ Kosovo Advisory Opinion For The Turkish Republic Of Northern Cyprus

Abstract

Kosovo 'unilaterally' declared independence in 2008. In the Advisory Opinion delivered on 22 July 2010, the ICJ opined that this declaration 'did not violate international law.' This Advisory Opinion has some critical ramifications for the future of the Cyprus question. One can easily deduce from the Court's findings that neither the declaration of independence by the TRNC nor its recognition violates any applicable rule of international law. As such the Greek Cypriot Administration as well as the international community does not have the right to impose a solution on the island against the will of the Turkish Cypriot community. In fact, given especially the process and outcome of half-a-century of negotiations and of 2004 referendum, the best solution to the impasse between the communities is to recognize two independent states on the island, namely the Greek Cypriot State and the Turkish Cypriot State, as envisaged in the Annan Plan.

Kosovo 'unilaterally' declared independence in 2008. In the Advisory Opinion delivered on 22 July 2010, the ICJ opined that this declaration 'did not violate international law.' This Advisory Opinion has some critical ramifications for the future of the Cyprus question. One can easily deduce from the Court's findings that neither the declaration of independence by the TRNC nor its recognition violates any applicable rule of international law. As such the Greek Cypriot Administration as well as the international community does not have the right to impose a solution on the island against the will of the Turkish Cypriot community. In fact, given especially the process and outcome of half-a-century of negotiations and of 2004 referendum, the best solution to the impasse between the communities is to recognize two independent states on the island, namely the Greek Cypriot State and the Turkish Cypriot State, as envisaged in the Annan Plan.