Tweet
AGOS, Istambul
Dec 31 2014
Landing Diyarbakır Airport on the Basmacıyans' land
Uygar Gültekin 12.31.2014 18:18 NEWS
Zuart Sudjian wages formidable legal battle for the return of land
that belongs to her family, unlawfully seized by the State and site of
Diyarbakır Airport today
Zuart Sudjian is an Armenian who resides in the US, and whose family
origins go back to Diyarbakır. A member of Diyarbakır's Basmacıyan
family, Sudjian lives in California. Unbeknownst to her, the lands he
inherited from her family were appropriated by the state during
cadastral work.
Sudjian filed a formal appeal in 2012 for to return of the lands she
inherited from her family. The court rejected the appeal in 2013 on
the grounds of the statute of limitations. The file was referred to
the Court of Cassation on appeal. The Court of Cassation reversed the
verdict of the local court, and ruled for the rehearing of the case on
the merits. The fate of the plot of land that is also the site of
Diyarbakır Airport will be decided at the end of the legal process.
After the 1915 Genocide, Zuart Sudjian's family was forced to migrate
first from Diyarbakır to Lebanon, then to Korea, and finally to the
USA. Sudjian presently resides in California. Unbeknownst to her, the
lands she had inherited from her family were appropriated by the state
during cadastral work. The cadastral work was announced only via a
formal newspaper advertisement, and the state seized the land plots,
claiming that the Sudjian family `could not be found'. In 2012,
Sudjian filed an appeal for the return of the lands via her lawyer Ali
ElbeyoÄ?lu.
In the petition, Lawyer ElbeyoÄ?lu stated that they were in possession
of the originals of land deeds for plots in the Diyarbakır Province,
BaÄ?lar District, Alipınar Neighbourhood, and submitted a claim for the
return of her clients' rights, who could not follow cadastral work
because they lived in the USA. ElbeyoÄ?lu explains that there are no
land deeds in her clients' name, and that the cadastral work that was
carried out clearly violated the Constitution, and that it was still
possible to validate the land deeds.
ElbeyoÄ?lu submitted a claim for the registration of the title deeds of
the lands that Zuart Sudjian acquired from Tomas Basmacıyan via
inheritance in his name. The Diyarbakır 5th Civil Court of First
Instance rejected the case in April 2013 claiming the statute of
limitations. Sudjian appealed the verdict and the file went to the
Court of Cassation.
A major violation
In the petition of objection he presented to the Court of Cassation,
Lawyer ElbeyoÄ?lu drew attention to the fact that the court's verdict
violated the articles of the European Convention on Human Rights that
regulated the protection of private property rights.
The petition of objection also stated that the cadastral work had been
carried out unlawfully, and that the work clearly violated the
Constitution, adding, `The aim of cadastral work is to update land
deeds, not to destroy them. The updating of existing land deeds is the
most important obligation. Abiding by this obligation is the most
important duty of the cadastral delegation. The first task in
initiating cadastral work in an area is to implement existing land
deeds. To act against this principle encumbers the state with
responsibility, and no lapse of time is valid in the context of the
responsibilities of the state.'
The petition of objection underlined the fact that there was no valid
grounds for the implementation of the deeds, and stating that is was
possible to determine plot borders today, added `The failure to
implement land deeds of such large areas is clear proof that there has
been a great act of neglect, and the identification and registration
procedure carried out by the cadastral delegation is unlawful'.
ElbeyoÄ?lu also pointed to precedents set by the Court of Cassation in
leading cases.
Court of Cassation reverses verdict
The Court of Cassation's 16th Civil Chamber examined the file and
reversed the verdict of the local court. The Court of Cassation ruled
for the file to be reprocessed on merits.
The Court of Cassation ruled that the local court had not identified
the immovable assets subject to the case, and that the cadastral
records had not been inspected on the basis of land registers, and
returned the file to the local court. The local court will now decide
whether it will abide by the decision of the Court of Cassation.
http://www.agos.com.tr/en/article/10119/landing-diyarbakir-airport-on-the-basmaciyans-land
Dec 31 2014
Landing Diyarbakır Airport on the Basmacıyans' land
Uygar Gültekin 12.31.2014 18:18 NEWS
Zuart Sudjian wages formidable legal battle for the return of land
that belongs to her family, unlawfully seized by the State and site of
Diyarbakır Airport today
Zuart Sudjian is an Armenian who resides in the US, and whose family
origins go back to Diyarbakır. A member of Diyarbakır's Basmacıyan
family, Sudjian lives in California. Unbeknownst to her, the lands he
inherited from her family were appropriated by the state during
cadastral work.
Sudjian filed a formal appeal in 2012 for to return of the lands she
inherited from her family. The court rejected the appeal in 2013 on
the grounds of the statute of limitations. The file was referred to
the Court of Cassation on appeal. The Court of Cassation reversed the
verdict of the local court, and ruled for the rehearing of the case on
the merits. The fate of the plot of land that is also the site of
Diyarbakır Airport will be decided at the end of the legal process.
After the 1915 Genocide, Zuart Sudjian's family was forced to migrate
first from Diyarbakır to Lebanon, then to Korea, and finally to the
USA. Sudjian presently resides in California. Unbeknownst to her, the
lands she had inherited from her family were appropriated by the state
during cadastral work. The cadastral work was announced only via a
formal newspaper advertisement, and the state seized the land plots,
claiming that the Sudjian family `could not be found'. In 2012,
Sudjian filed an appeal for the return of the lands via her lawyer Ali
ElbeyoÄ?lu.
In the petition, Lawyer ElbeyoÄ?lu stated that they were in possession
of the originals of land deeds for plots in the Diyarbakır Province,
BaÄ?lar District, Alipınar Neighbourhood, and submitted a claim for the
return of her clients' rights, who could not follow cadastral work
because they lived in the USA. ElbeyoÄ?lu explains that there are no
land deeds in her clients' name, and that the cadastral work that was
carried out clearly violated the Constitution, and that it was still
possible to validate the land deeds.
ElbeyoÄ?lu submitted a claim for the registration of the title deeds of
the lands that Zuart Sudjian acquired from Tomas Basmacıyan via
inheritance in his name. The Diyarbakır 5th Civil Court of First
Instance rejected the case in April 2013 claiming the statute of
limitations. Sudjian appealed the verdict and the file went to the
Court of Cassation.
A major violation
In the petition of objection he presented to the Court of Cassation,
Lawyer ElbeyoÄ?lu drew attention to the fact that the court's verdict
violated the articles of the European Convention on Human Rights that
regulated the protection of private property rights.
The petition of objection also stated that the cadastral work had been
carried out unlawfully, and that the work clearly violated the
Constitution, adding, `The aim of cadastral work is to update land
deeds, not to destroy them. The updating of existing land deeds is the
most important obligation. Abiding by this obligation is the most
important duty of the cadastral delegation. The first task in
initiating cadastral work in an area is to implement existing land
deeds. To act against this principle encumbers the state with
responsibility, and no lapse of time is valid in the context of the
responsibilities of the state.'
The petition of objection underlined the fact that there was no valid
grounds for the implementation of the deeds, and stating that is was
possible to determine plot borders today, added `The failure to
implement land deeds of such large areas is clear proof that there has
been a great act of neglect, and the identification and registration
procedure carried out by the cadastral delegation is unlawful'.
ElbeyoÄ?lu also pointed to precedents set by the Court of Cassation in
leading cases.
Court of Cassation reverses verdict
The Court of Cassation's 16th Civil Chamber examined the file and
reversed the verdict of the local court. The Court of Cassation ruled
for the file to be reprocessed on merits.
The Court of Cassation ruled that the local court had not identified
the immovable assets subject to the case, and that the cadastral
records had not been inspected on the basis of land registers, and
returned the file to the local court. The local court will now decide
whether it will abide by the decision of the Court of Cassation.
http://www.agos.com.tr/en/article/10119/landing-diyarbakir-airport-on-the-basmaciyans-land