- Austrian Red Cross
- Austrian Centre for Country of Origin and Asylum Research and Documentation (ACCORD)
- Wiedner Hauptstraße 32, 1041 Wien
- T +43 1 589 00 583
- F +43 1 589 00 589
- info@ecoi.net
Document #1023629
USDOS – US Department of State (Author)
Since 1974 the southern part of Cyprus has been under the control of the government of the Republic of Cyprus, while the northern part, administered by Turkish Cypriots, proclaimed itself the “Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus” (“TRNC”) in 1983. The United States does not recognize the “TRNC,” nor does any country other than Turkey. A substantial number of Turkish troops remained on the island. A buffer zone, or “green line,” patrolled by the UN Peacekeeping Force in Cyprus (UNFICYP), separates the two parts.
Since 1974 the northern part of Cyprus has been run by a Turkish Cypriot administration that proclaimed itself the “Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus” (“TRNC”) in 1983. The United States does not recognize the “TRNC,” nor does any country other than Turkey. Dervish Eroglu was elected “president” in 2010 in free and fair elections. Elections to the “Assembly of the Republic” in 2009 were also free and fair and resulted in the formation of a single-party “government” of the UBP (National Unity Party). The “TRNC constitution” is the basis for the “laws” that govern the area administered by Turkish Cypriot “police” and security forces were ultimately under the operational command of the Turkish military, per transitional article 10 of the “TRNC constitution,” which cedes responsibility for public security and defense “temporarily” to Turkey.
The most significant problems reported during the year included police abuse of detainees and infringement on the right of demonstrators to peacefully assemble. In addition, there were restrictions on the rights of asylum seekers and no regulatory infrastructure to handle asylum applications or to protect their rights.
Other problems reported during the year included mistreatment of persons in custody, overcrowding in prisons, lack of separation of incarcerated adults and juveniles, corruption and cronyism in the executive and legislative branches, domestic violence against women, trafficking in persons, and criminalization of same-sex sexual activity between men.
While there were investigations of police abuse cases, no officials were prosecuted or punished. Officials sometimes engaged in corrupt practices with impunity.
There were no reports that authorities or their agents committed arbitrary or unlawful killings.
The “law” prohibits such practices; however, there were reports that police abused detainees. The “law” does not refer to “torture,” which falls under the section of the criminal code that deals with assault, violence, and battery.
On May 17, police arrested and detained three men, including an American resident in the north, on burglary charges. The family reported that the American had been beaten by police, and a consul who visited him in prison photographed him with deep contusions and multiple bruises. The accusations were brought to “parliament” by Nicosia “member of parliament” and TDP chairman Mehmet Cakici, who complained that the attending physician who performed a health check on the suspect was complicit because he found that the suspect’s injuries could have been caused by a fall rather than a beating.
On May 31, a newspaper reported that an acquitted child molestation suspect alleged police beat him for two hours and sodomized him with a stick, after which he reportedly required surgery. He filed a complaint with the “attorney general’s” office.
In December a “parliamentary committee” established to investigate allegations of police torture reported that torture has been carried out at police stations. The committee also learned that police and the “attorney general’s office” investigated the complaints and torture allegations and filed a case in “court” based on their findings. The committee studied another 12 petitions from citizens who claimed they were beaten and consulted with the police and the “attorney general’s office” on the cases.
In December Kibrisli newspaper began publishing a series of torture allegations dating from 2006 to the present, based on first-hand accounts. One victim alleged that he was covered with a sack, tortured, beaten, and that electricity was applied to his genitals for seven days after he refused to sign statements prepared by the police. The newspaper published a full statement and photos showing the alleged signs of torture. Another victim alleged that he was beaten so severely he required medical care; the doctor at the hospital reportedly described his wounds as “scratches” and did not give him a health report. The victim claimed that police released him when they understood that he was not guilty. He claimed he filed a complaint with the “attorney general’s” office but had never received a response.
Two police abuse cases filed with the “attorney general” in 2011 were being prepared for a court hearing at the end of the year.
In previous years inmates complained of overcrowding at the prison, but the authorities routinely claimed they had addressed the problem. NGO representatives stated that, while a 2009 bunk-bed system that increased the official bed capacity from 291 to 448 addressed some of the overcrowding problems, health and other services were sorely lacking. Health services were provided to inmates once a week; no health checks were given to prisoners and detainees upon entry into the prison; and inmates lacked regular access to washing water and hot water. Authorities stated that inmates requested a sports facility for the prison but there was no room for such a facility. Of the 293 prisoners held at year’s end, 51 percent were foreigners, mostly Turkish citizens. Ten women prisoners and two juveniles were incarcerated. Approximately 39 percent of the prisoners were awaiting trial.
During the year there were no deaths within the prison or detention centers. Prisoners had access to potable water.
According to the authorities, prisoners and detainees were permitted both to submit complaints to judicial authorities without censorship and to request investigation of credible allegations of inhumane conditions. Authorities reported they did not receive any complaints.
Authorities stated that all prisoners were allowed religious observance. Prisoners with “stern” penalties were allowed to receive visitors every 10 days while prisoners with “light punishment” were allowed to receive visitors every 15 days. Detainees were allowed to receive visitors every 30 days. Visits were limited to 30 minutes except during holidays. Convicted inmates were allowed a maximum of 40 minutes of telephone calls four days a week; detainees were given access to phones three days a week.
The scope of the ombudsman’s duties does not include advocating for reduced or alternative sentences or addressing the status of juvenile prisoners or improving detention/bail conditions.
During the year authorities permitted a prison visit by a group of local journalists and hosted an iftar dinner for the group at the prison, where they were able to meet with inmates and prison employees.
The “law” prohibits arbitrary arrest and detention, and authorities generally observed these prohibitions.
Police are responsible for law enforcement. The chief of police reports to a Turkish Cypriot “general,” who is nominally under the supervision of the “Prime Ministry,” holding the “security portfolio.” The police and security forces are ultimately under the operational command of the Turkish military, however, per transitional article 10 of the “TRNC constitution,” which “temporarily” cedes responsibility for public security and defense to Turkey. Security forces were generally cooperative with civilian authorities and effective in matters of law enforcement. The police are divided into eight functional divisions and five geographic divisions.
The “office of the attorney general” continued to work with the inspection division (or occasionally the criminal investigative division) to investigate allegations of police misconduct. Two complaints were filed with and investigated by the “attorney general's office.” The cases were being prepared for a court hearing at the end of the year.
In 2011 a Turkish Cypriot nearing completion of his two-year mandatory military service wrote an article alleging widespread abuse of soldiers within the military, including physical and psychological abuses.
Judicially issued warrants are required for arrests. No person may be detained longer than 24 hours without referral of the case to the courts for a longer period of detention. Authorities generally respected this right in practice. Detainees were usually informed promptly of charges against them, although individuals believed to have committed a violent offense were often held for longer periods without being charged. According to the “law,” any detained person must be brought before a judge within 24 hours. The person can then be detained in police custody for a period of up to three months, but a judge must review the detention after the third day and every eight days thereafter. Bail was permitted and routinely used. Detainees were usually allowed prompt access to family members and a lawyer of their choice. Authorities only provided lawyers to the indigent for cases involving violent offenses. Particularly at the time of arrest, police sometimes did not observe legal protections. Some suspects were not permitted to have their lawyers present when giving testimony, in contravention of the “law.” Suspects who demanded the presence of a lawyer were sometimes threatened with stiffer charges or physically intimidated.
During the year one suspect who claimed he did not know Turkish complained he was forced to sign a confession drafted in Turkish by police. There were numerous allegations of rough treatment or torture by police of prisoners.
The “law” provides for an independent judiciary, and authorities generally respected judicial independence in practice.
Most criminal and civil cases begin in district courts, from which appeals are made to the “Supreme Court.” There were no special courts for political offenses. Civilian courts have jurisdiction in cases where civilians are accused of violating military restrictions, such as filming or photographing military zones.
The “law” provides for the right to a fair trial, and an independent judiciary generally enforced this right. The “TRNC constitution” provides for public trials, the defendant’s right to be present at those trials, and the defendant’s right to consult with an attorney in a timely manner. Authorities provide lawyers to indigent defendants only in cases involving violent offenses. Defendants are allowed to question witnesses against them and present evidence and witnesses on their behalf. The “law” also requires that defendants and their attorneys have access to evidence held by the “government” related to their cases. Defendants enjoy a presumption of innocence and have a right to appeal. Authorities generally respected these rights in practice.
There were no reports of political prisoners or detainees.
There was generally an independent and impartial judiciary for civil matters, permitting claimants to bring lawsuits seeking damages for human rights violations. There were generally no problems enforcing domestic court orders.
During the year Greek Cypriots continued to pursue property suits against the Turkish government for the loss since 1974 of property located in the area administered by Turkish Cypriots. Turkish Cypriots pursued claims against the Republic of Cyprus as well. Under ECHR rules, as long as adequate local remedies exist, an appellant does not have standing to bring a case before the ECHR until that appellant exhausts all local remedies.
In response to the ECHR’s 2005 ruling in the Xenides-Arestis case that Turkey’s “subordinate local authorities” in Cyprus had not provided an adequate local remedy, a property commission was established to handle claims by Greek Cypriots; in 2006 the ECHR ruled that the commission had satisfied “in principle” the ECHR’s requirement for an effective local remedy. In a March 2010 ruling, the ECHR recognized the property commission as a domestic remedy. The Immoveable Property Commission (IPC) reportedly received 1,926 applications through the end of the year and completed 205 of them through friendly settlements and seven through formal hearings. Five applicants received restitution of their properties outright (plus compensation), one received restitution pending a future settlement of the Cyprus problem, one accepted partial restitution, and one received full restitution. Two property exchange (plus compensation) decisions were also issued. Two applications were rejected and 92 were revoked. As of year’s end, the commission had paid the equivalent of more than $106 million in compensation.
The “law” prohibits such actions. However, there were reports that police subjected Greek Cypriots and Maronites living in the area administered by Turkish Cypriots to surveillance. Although authorities reported otherwise, a Maronite representative asserted that during the year the Turkish military occupied 18 houses in the village of Karpasia.
The “law” provides for freedom of speech and press, and the authorities generally respected this right in practice. Individuals were generally able to publicly criticize the authorities without reprisal, with some exceptions.
Freedom of Speech: Police on occasion interfered with the public display of materials that raised politically sensitive subjects. On July 19, police confiscated a banner from the Turkish Cypriot Public Servants Trade Union building because it was deemed “disrespectful” to visiting Turkish Prime Minister Erdogan. On August 9, media reported that police removed a large sign advertizing a newspaper that included a photograph depicting police violence in July. Police reinstated the sign the following day.
Freedom of Press: While authorities generally respected freedom of the press in practice, journalists were at times obstructed in their reporting, fined, and threatened with charges. The independent media were active and expressed a wide variety of views. International media were generally allowed to operate freely. Bayrak Radyo Televizyon Kurumu (BRT) is the only “government”-owned television and radio station.
Violence and Harassment: Two journalists were attacked during the year, although the relationship between the attacks and the journalists’ reporting was unclear. On July 3, an assailant shot at journalist Ali Osman Tabak inside Afrika newspaper’s office. The office had been attacked in February. Police arrested a suspect in connection with both incidents. After investigation, charges were filed against the suspect and the trial continued. On April 6 and May 12, a second journalist, Mutlu Esendemir, was a victim of bomb attacks on his vehicle, which slightly injured him. After investigation, various charges were filed against the suspect, who was arrested on June 1, and the trial continued. The Turkish Cypriot Journalists Association reported that journalists have been threatened and prevented from working and that they experienced problems trying to access public or other information and political pressure.
The authorities did not restrict access to the Internet, and there were no reports that they monitored e-mail or Internet chat rooms. Individuals and groups could engage in the peaceful expression of views via the Internet, including by e-mail.
The authorities did not restrict academic freedom or cultural events.
The “law” provides for freedom of assembly. However, authorities interfered with peaceful public protests on several occasions in July.
On July 19, groups of regular, undercover, and riot police intervened against peaceful protesters at three separate locations in and around Nicosia. Police entered the Turkish Cypriot Public Servants Union headquarters, confiscated a banner, and arrested two unionists. The same evening, several dozen regular and undercover police officers confronted protesters from the Social Existence Platform organization in front of the Cyprus Turkish Airlines headquarters in Nicosia, resulting in six injuries and another six arrests. Media photographs and video footage showed police shoving, punching, and kicking protesters. The eight demonstrators were released on July 20. They were later charged with causing damage to police vehicles and fined. The main opposition parties, civil society organizations, and trade unions organized protests outside the police headquarters on July 25 to criticize the police and the “government” for their use of excessive force against peaceful demonstrators.
The “law” provides for freedom of association, and the authorities generally respected this right in practice. Some organizations faced lengthy registration periods.
See the Department of State's International Religious Freedom Report at www.state.gov/j/drl/irf/rpt.
The “law” provides for freedom of movement within the area administered by Turkish Cypriots, foreign travel, emigration, and repatriation, and authorities generally respected these rights in practice.
Cooperation between the Office of the UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) and the Turkish Cypriot authorities was handled through an intermediary NGO. Since no law exists regarding the handling of asylum applications, the UNHCR representative in Cyprus adjudicated asylum claims.
Greek Cypriots and Turkish Cypriots were required to show identification cards when crossing the green line. Greek Cypriots and foreigners crossing into the area administered by Turkish Cypriots were also required to fill out a “visa” form.
In an effort to improve regulation of undocumented workers, authorities passed an “immigration amnesty law” in December allowing illegally present workers to request amnesty for 60 days. Applications continued at year’s end. In addition, the new regulation stipulated that any employer of illegal workers would be fined 6,500 Turkish lira ($3,440) or face business closure for two months. According to the immigration “law,” all employers who wish to import foreign workers need official permission from the “Department of Labor” to register them. Authorities deported illegal immigrants found without work permits. All illegal immigrants without work permits were prohibited from entering the “TRNC” at ports of entry. With few exceptions, asylum seekers were generally treated as illegal immigrants and were either deported or denied entry.
Turkish Cypriots had difficulty traveling to most countries because only Turkey recognizes travel documents issued by the “TRNC.” Some Turkish Cypriots used Turkish travel documents, but many obtained travel documents issued by the Republic of Cyprus. Turkish Cypriots born after 1974 to parents who were both Republic of Cyprus citizens before 1974 obtained passports relatively easily, compared with Turkish Cypriots born after 1974 to only one Cypriot parent.
Turkish Cypriots considered persons displaced as a result of the division of the island to be refugees, although they fell under the UN definition of IDPs. These persons and their descendants numbered approximately 90,000 to 100,000 in the north. They were resettled, had access to humanitarian organizations, and were not subject to attack, targeting, or return under dangerous conditions.
Access to Asylum: The 1951 Refugee Convention relating to the Status of Refugees is incorporated into Turkish Cypriot domestic “law,” as were all other laws adopted during pre-1963 British colonial rule and later “ratified” by the Turkish Cypriot administration. Authorities admitted that they had no “law” or system in place for dealing with asylum seekers or the protection of refugees and stated that asylum applications were systematically rejected. Potential asylum seekers who attempted to enter the area administered by Turkish Cypriots illegally were almost always arrested, taken to court, and deported after serving their sentence. During the year, however, authorities facilitated the access of 20 asylum seekers to the UNHCR representatives in the UN buffer zone.
Individuals who requested asylum were supposed to be directed to the UNHCR or its local implementing partner, the Refugee Rights Association (RRA). However, authorities often refused to grant asylum seekers access to the RRA, refused their entry, treated them as undocumented immigrants, and denied them the opportunity to apply for asylum through the UNHCR. The RRA was affiliated with the Turkish Cypriot Human Rights Foundation in the area administered by Turkish Cypriots. Only the UNHCR representative could consider applicability of the 1951 Refugee Convention; the RRA’s mission was to monitor and identify individuals who wanted to apply for asylum, to refer them to the UNHCR, to advocate to the Turkish Cypriot administration not to deport such individuals but instead to provide protection for the prospective applicants, and to facilitate their accommodation and employment.
Of 39 asylum seekers, 14 were deported during the year before a determination had been made regarding their status. Twelve deportation orders were successfully cancelled, with the RRA’s assistance. These 12 asylum seekers were able to depart the north of the island to continue their claims with UNHCR elsewhere. The remaining 13 asylum seekers were in the north at year’s end under status review with UNHCR and receiving assistance from the RRA.
Nonrefoulement: In practice authorities did not provide protection against the expulsion or return of refugees to countries where their lives or freedom would be threatened. The RRA stated in 2011 that, despite its efforts, authorities at ports often denied entry to asylum seekers, and those trying to enter the “TRNC” illegally were usually detained and subsequently deported. The RRA complained that authorities usually denied asylum seekers access to the RRA's lawyers and vice versa. During the year 14 of 39 asylum seekers were deported to their place of origin, Syria.
Access to Basic Services: According to the RRA, at year’s end, 13 asylum seekers and refugees were residing and working (for below-minimum wages and sometimes in exchange for food) or attending school in the area administered by Turkish Cypriots. They could not travel abroad because they would be unable to return due to their lack of status, which rendered them illegal according to Turkish Cypriot immigration rules. The UNHCR did not provide financial assistance to asylum seekers except in exceptional cases. There were no reliable estimates of the number of asylum seekers crossing into the government-controlled areas, since irregular crossings went unrecorded.
The “law” provides Turkish Cypriots the right to change their “government” peacefully, and they exercised this right in practice through periodic, free, and fair elections held on the basis of universal suffrage.
Recent Elections: Turkish Cypriots choose a leader and a representative body every five years or less. In 2010 Dervish Eroglu was elected “president” in free and fair elections.
Political Parties: Greek Cypriots and Maronite residents were prohibited from participating in Turkish Cypriot “national elections;” they were eligible to vote in Greek Cypriot elections but had to travel to the government-controlled area to exercise that right. Greek Cypriot and Maronite enclave communities in the area administered by Turkish Cypriots directly elected municipal officials. Turkish Cypriot authorities did not recognize these officials.
While membership or nonmembership in the dominant party did not confer formal advantages or disadvantages, there were widespread allegations of societal cronyism and nepotism.
Participation of Women and Minorities: There were four women in the 50-seat “parliament.” There were no minorities represented in the “parliament.”
The “law” provides criminal penalties for official corruption; however, authorities did not implement the “law” effectively, and officials sometimes engaged in corrupt practices with impunity. Corruption, cronyism, and lack of transparency were generally perceived to be serious problems in the legislative and executive branches.
Opposition parties continued to claim that the “government” primarily hired supporters of the ruling party for public sector jobs during the year. On September 7, newspapers alleged that the ruling party hired more than 100 workers to staff various public offices and planned to hire an additional 200 persons.
The “constitution” provides for free access to “government” information, and the “law” provides for public access. In practice, however, civil servants were not allowed to provide access to “government” documents without first obtaining permission from their directors or “minister.” There were some complaints by NGO representatives that they were denied access to “government” information during the year. Other NGO representatives claimed that access to “land registry records” was denied, specifically for cases that involved pre-1974 Greek Cypriot owners who wanted to apply to the Immovable Property Commission. A November 2011 Access Info report stated that 78 percent of requests for information submitted to public bodies were not answered; 8 percent were orally refused; 1 percent refused in writing, and 9 percent responded to with the requested information.
A number of domestic human rights groups operated in the area administered by Turkish Cypriots. The international NGO Minority Rights Group International was also active in the area administered by Turkish Cypriots, conducting research, capacity building, and implementing advocacy campaigns under an EU grant. Authorities’ cooperation with NGOs was inconsistent.
Many local human rights groups were concerned with improving human rights conditions in the area administered by Turkish Cypriots. NGOs included groups promoting awareness of domestic violence; women's rights; rights of asylum seekers, refugees, and immigrants; trafficking in persons; torture; and lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender persons' rights. These groups were numerous but had little impact on specific “legislation.” A few international NGOs were active in the area administered by Turkish Cypriots, but many were hesitant to operate there due to political sensitivities related to working in an unrecognized area.
The “law” prohibits discrimination based on race, gender, disability, language, or social status. Authorities generally enforced these prohibitions.
Rape and Domestic Violence: The “law” provides no minimum sentence for individuals convicted of rape, including spousal rape; the maximum sentence is life imprisonment. The authorities and police effectively handled and prosecuted rape cases, including cases of spousal rape. There were no NGOs whose specific mission was to support rape victims.
Violence against women, including spousal abuse, was a problem. The “law” prohibits domestic violence under a general assault/violence/ battery clause in the criminal code. While allegations of domestic violence were usually considered a family matter and settled out of court, two cases of domestic violence were prosecuted. Both cases resulted in various fines and bail but no prison sentences. Authorities considered a case more credible if there was at least one witness in addition to the victim.
According to 2011 statistics, 78 women were subjected to violence in the north. Of the victims, 34 were beaten by their spouses, 12 were victims of violence from a parent or other family member, while four were subjected to violence from boyfriends. Twenty-three women were given “court-appointed” lawyers.
Sexual Harassment: The “law” does not specifically prohibit sexual harassment, but victims could pursue such cases under other sections of the “law.” Sexual harassment was not discussed widely, and such incidents largely went unreported.
Reproductive Rights: Couples and individuals were able to freely decide the number, spacing, and timing of their children and had access to contraception, skilled attendance during childbirth, and obstetric and postpartum care.
Discrimination: Women generally have the same legal status as men under property “law,” family “law,” and in the “judicial system.” “Laws” requiring equal pay for men and women performing the same work were generally enforced at the white-collar level. However, women working in the agricultural and textile sectors were routinely paid less than their male counterparts. Several NGOs worked to protect women’s rights, but no specific “government” agency had this responsibility.
Birth Registration: “Citizenship” is derived from one’s parents, and there was universal registration at the time of birth.
Child Abuse: There were some media reports of child abuse, most commonly in the form of sexual battery or rape. As with domestic violence, there were social and cultural disincentives to seek legal remedies for such problems, which observers believed were underreported.
Sexual Exploitation of Children: The “criminal code” penalizes sexual relations with underage girls. The maximum penalty for sex with a girl under the age of 13 is life imprisonment. The maximum penalty for sex with girls older than 13 but younger than 16 is three years' imprisonment. There are no “laws” regarding child pornography. The age of consent is 16 for girls. No age of consent for boys is specified under the “criminal code.”
On August 14, a social services expert asserted to the press that underage girls were prostituted to soldiers and workers at a mall in Nicosia, as were underage boys, possibly as young as 12, in Kyrenia. The expert reportedly gave this information several times to police, who stated that there were not sufficient grounds to pursue the tips. Police stated they record and investigate such complaints when they are received but do not always find sufficient evidence of criminal or illegal activity to pursue a case.
On April 11 and 12, two underage girls, one of them age 14 who was registered with the “Social Services Department,” were reportedly forced to work as dancers and hostesses in a bar in Nicosia. Authorities arrested the owner of the bar for detention of a girl under age 16; a police investigation found the claims to be unfounded, and the suspect was released.
The very small Jewish community was composed primarily of nonresident businesspersons. A synagogue in Kyrenia held services regularly. There were no reports of anti-Semitic acts.
See the Department of State’s Trafficking in Persons Report at www.state.gov/j/tip.
The “law” prohibits discrimination against persons with physical, sensory, intellectual, and mental disabilities in employment, education, access to health care, or in the provision of other “state” services, and in practice the authorities effectively enforced these provisions. The “government” employed 562 persons with disabilities and provided financial aid to the other 3,673 of the 4,049 known persons with disabilities in the area administered by Turkish Cypriots. The “law” does not mandate access to public buildings and other facilities for persons with disabilities.
The “law” prohibits discrimination, and the 1975 Vienna III Agreement remains the legal source of authority regarding the treatment of the 335 Greek Cypriot and 111 Maronite residents in the area under the administration of “TRNC” authorities.
Under the Vienna III Agreement, the UNFICYP visited Greek Cypriot residents of the enclave weekly and Maronites twice a month; additional visits require preapproval by authorities. Although the Vienna III Agreement provides for medical care by a doctor from the Greek Cypriot community, authorities only permitted such care by registered Turkish Cypriot doctors; individuals in enclaves also traveled to the government-controlled area for medical care.
Greek Cypriots and Maronites were able to take possession of some of their properties but were unable to leave their properties to heirs residing in the government-controlled area. A Maronite representative asserted that Maronites were not allowed to bequeath property to heirs who do not reside in the area administered by Turkish Cypriots and possess “TRNC” identification cards. The authorities allowed the enclaved residents to make improvements to their homes and to apply for permission to build new structures on their properties. Maronites living in the government-controlled area could use their properties only if those properties were not under the control of the Turkish military or allocated to Turkish Cypriots.
A majority of foreign workers in the area administered by Turkish Cypriots were Turkish. Those working in the agricultural and construction sectors were reportedly sometimes forced to sleep on the ground, and restaurant workers were seen sleeping after hours on chairs in the establishments where they worked.
Same-sex sexual activity between men is criminalized in the area administered by Turkish Cypriots under a general sodomy statute. The maximum penalty is 14 years’ imprisonment. Homosexuality remained highly proscribed socially and was rarely discussed. Very few lesbian, gay, bisexual, or transgender (LGBT) persons were publicly open about their sexual orientation.
During the year there were no reports of either police or “government” representatives engaging in or condoning violence against the LGBT community.
While there were no recorded cases of official or societal discrimination based on sexual orientation in employment, housing, or access to education or health care, members of the LGBT community noted that an overwhelming majority of LGBT persons hid their sexual orientation to avoid such problems. They also complained that there is no specific antidiscrimination law for LGBT persons.
All workers except members of the police and military forces have the legal right to form and join independent unions of their own choosing without prior authorization. The “law” allows unions to conduct their activities without interference and provides for the right to strike. The “law” does not permit essential service workers, namely judges and members of the police and armed forces, to strike. Authorities have the power to curtail strikes in “essential services.” The “law” provides for collective bargaining but does not prohibit antiunion discrimination.
Workers formed and joined independent unions in practice. Fewer than 2 percent of private sector workers and more than 60 percent of semipublic and public sector workers belonged to labor unions. Authorities generally protected the right of unions to conduct their activities in practice. While workers may legally strike, employers have an unrestricted right to hire replacement workers in the event of a strike, which limited the effectiveness of this right in practice.
On March 9, the “government” prohibited strikes at the “Title Deed Office” and the “courts,” invoking its right to protect the provision of essential services due to a backlog of cases and files at both institutions. The employees of both institutions began their strikes on January 11 to protest the “government’s” proposed austerity package. On July 19, the “government” prohibited a strike by the Turkish Cypriot Public Servants Union (KTAMS) at the Ercan Airport flight control tower and postponed it for 60 days.
Some unions complained that certain companies pressured workers to join unions led or approved by the company. Officials of independent unions claimed that the authorities created rival public sector unions to weaken the independent unions.
Workers exercised the right to bargain collectively in practice. The 27,244 public and semipublic employees who made up approximately 30 percent of the work force benefited from collective bargaining agreements.
Union leaders claimed that private sector employers were able to discourage union activity because the enforcement of labor regulations was sporadic and penalties for antiunion practices were nominal.
The authorities prohibited forced or compulsory labor, including by children, but there were reports that such practices occurred. Migrant workers in the construction and agricultural sectors were subjected to reduced wages and nonpayment of wages, beatings, and threats of deportation. One NGO asserted that there were cases of forced labor in the agricultural and domestic service sectors.
Also see the Department of State’s Trafficking in Persons Report at www.state.gov/j/tip.
The “laws” generally provide protection for children from exploitation in the workplace. In contrast to previous years, NGOs alleged that authorities did not always effectively enforce these “laws,” and children, mainly from Turkey, were being used for labor, primarily in the agricultural and manufacturing sectors and at industrial areas working in the automotive and construction sectors with their families.
According to accounts by the Turkish Cypriot Human Rights Foundation, child labor in the urban informal economy was also a problem, albeit to a lesser extent than in the agriculture and in manufacturing sectors.
The minimum age for employment in an industrial undertaking is 15, the last year for which education is compulsory, and children may be employed in apprentice positions between the ages of 15 and 18 under a special status. Labor inspectors generally enforced the “law” effectively. It was common in family-run shops for children to work after school, and children as young as 11 worked in orchards during school holidays.
The “Ministry of Labor and Social Security” is responsible for enforcing child labor “laws” and policies and generally enforced them in practice. The “ministry” held monthly inspections and kept statistics of its findings. During the year inspectors identified 461 workers without work permits. Authorities fined 232 employers and companies for failures to comply with the “law,” but their enforcement of the rules and requirements was generally perceived to be inadequate. Total fines amounted to 622,700 lira ($329,500), of which 410,210 lira ($217, 000) were actually collected.
The minimum wage was 1,300 lira ($689) per month. The official poverty line, dating from 2008, was set at 9, 632 lira ($5,100) per year, or 803 lira ($426) per month, for each household member in a family of four. Migrant workers were often provided substandard accommodations as part of their compensation or made to pay for accommodations. The “Ministry of Labor and Social Security” is responsible for enforcing the minimum wage. However, it was widely reported that illegal foreign workers were generally paid below the minimum wage.
Authorities sporadically enforced occupational safety and health regulations. In 2011, 236 workplace accidents were reported in which 231 persons were injured and five persons killed.
Limited information was available on conditions of work. According to information received from a civil servants union, working hours for the public sector were 38 hours a week from December through February and 39 hours for the rest of the year. There was premium pay for overtime in the public sector. Standard working hours for the private sector were 40 hours a week. Premium pay for overtime was also required, but frequently not paid, in the private sector. In the public sector, excessive compulsory overtime is prohibited in certain sectors, depending on the working hours.
According to a union representative, enforcement and labor inspection was almost nonexistent, and standards were not sufficiently and effectively enforced in all sectors. The representative also stated that officials did not take any action to prevent violations of wages and working conditions. For example the minimum wage has not been increased in more than two years.
Country Report on Human Rights Practices for 2011 - Cyprus - the area administered by Turkish Cypriots (Periodical Report, English)
ecoi.net is run by the Austrian Red Cross (department ACCORD) in cooperation with Informationsverbund Asyl & Migration. ecoi.net is funded by the Asylum, Migration and Integration Fund, the Austrian Ministry of the Interior and Caritas Austria. ecoi.net is supported by ECRE & UNHCR.
