lodged on 20 January 2009 and 23 January 2009 respectively The European Court of Human Rights (Fourth Section), sitting on 2 July 2013 as a Chamber composed of: Ineta Ziemele, President, David Thór Björgvinsson, Päivi Hirvelä, Ledi Bianku, Işıl Karakaş, Vincent A. De Gaetano, Paul Mahoney, judges, and Fatoş Aracı, Deputy Section Registrar, Having regard to the above applications lodged on 20 January 2009 and 23 January 2009 respectively, Having regard to the observations submitted by the respondent Government and the observations in reply submitted by the applicants, Having deliberated, decides as follows: THE FACTS 1. The first applicant, Mr Nicos Pavlides, is a Cypriot national who was born in 1975 and lives in Nicosia. The second applicant, Mr Spyridon Georgakis, is a Cypriot national, born in 1971 and resident in Engomi, Cyprus; he is bishop of the see of Tamasos and Orinis...
FOURTH SECTION DECISION Applications nos. 9130/09 and 9143/09 Nicos PAVLIDES against Turkey and Spyridon GEORGAKIS against Turkey lodged on 20 January 2009 and 23 January 2009 respectively The European Court of Human Rights (Fourth Section), sitting on 2 July 2013 as a Chamber composed of: Ineta Ziemele, President, David Thór Björgvinsson, Päivi Hirvelä, Ledi Bianku, Işıl Karakaş, Vincent A. De Gaetano, Paul Mahoney, judges, and Fatoş Aracı, Deputy Section Registrar, Having regard to the above applications lodged on 20 January 2009 and 23 January 2009 respectively, Having regard to the observations submitted by the respondent Government and the observations in reply submitted by the applicants, Having deliberated, decides as follows: THE FACTS 1. The first applicant, Mr Nicos Pavlides, is a Cypriot national who was born in 1975 and lives in Nicosia. The second applicant, Mr Spyridon Georgakis, is a Cypriot national, born in 1971 and resident in Engomi, Cyprus; he is bishop of the see of Tamasos and Orinis of the Church of Cyprus. The applicants are represented by Mr John Mylonas, a lawyer
2 PAVLIDES v. TURKEY AND GEORGAKIS v. TURKEY – DECISION practising in Nicosia. The Turkish Government were represented by their Agent. The Cyprus Government did not exercise their right to intervene. A. The circumstances of the case 2. The facts of the case, as submitted by the parties, may be summarised as follows. 3. The applicants are members of the Church of Cyprus, which is regarded as having been founded by Saint Barnabas around the first century. The traditional burial place of Saint Barnabas is located on a hilltop in the area near Famagusta now occupied by Turkish forces and administered by the “TRNC” (the “Turkish Republic of northern Cyprus”) since 1974. The Monastery of Saint Barnabas and a small church are located at that site. They are now used to house an icon museum and receive tourists and visitors at specified times. 4. After the partial lifting of travel restrictions in 2003, efforts were made by the Abbot of the Monastery of Saint Barnabas to resume religious rites at the site, negotiations being conducted through the United Nations. The request for monthly masses at the monastery and church was refused; the “TRNC” authorities initially agreed that mass could be celebrated at the church every three months at pre-arranged times authorised in advance. 5. Following this agreement, mass was celebrated several times at the church during 2008. 6. On 25 June 2008, UNIFCYP received a written reply from the “TRNC” authorities stating that as the last periodic holy mass had been performed on 8 May 2008 the next service could be arranged for the first week of August. By letter dated 26 June 2008, the United Nations Chief Civil Affairs Officer informed the Abbot that the request to perform a mass on 5 July 2008 at the monastery had been refused; he stated that permission was however given for a mass to be celebrated ...