George Michael and being Cypriot – 12 things you might like to know….

 

Before you start reading the blog…click on image below to hear The George Michael Street Mix on Mixcloud as you read…words and music go hand in hand…Also bear in mind this blog is a work in progress, just like the campaign to have a street named after George in Cyprus, so changes, adaptations will be made regularly…..

Every one who is a Cypriot in the UK will have had or have claim to have had a link to the late George Michael in some way of another. Most of these ‘links’ are caught somewhere between adoring fandom and lameness. Just rewind to the early 80’s and how many Cypriot teenage girls screamed and scrambled their way to the front of Wham gigs – plus how many young guys copied the peroxide hair style with the flick. On the mundane there are always people wanting to sell a story to a popular rag like The Sun proclaiming something rather dull about George or his dad. Like, ‘I lived and worked in North London and so did his dad’ – what a ridiculous link to make – millions of people lived there, doesn’t mean much really.  It is the price of fame, everybody knows you but hardly any one really does.

My only link, aside from the great tunes he made as a solo artist (not really a big Wham fan) was a chance encounter with his father Jack a couple of years ago in a friend’s tea house in Cockfosters. He was a such a humble man and we chatted for about an hour. I didn’t blog about it at the time or post photos all over cyber space, nor will I now, out of respect for the family’s privacy in a time of mourning.

What has always fascinated me about George is his Cypriot link and what he meant to a whole generation of people of  Cypriot origin as a role model. He kind of set the sound for singers to follow but what many sound a-likes never realised was he had the soul to be himself. How many people xeroxed that voice or tried to at least – often Greek wedding singers or youth just wanting a pop career as an easy way to become rich. But none of that success and fame came easy.

What George Michael reflected more than anything is that pattern of migration, and achievement through hard work.  Coming from a Cypriot father from the small  village of Patriki in Karpasia and working class English mother who was a dancer, George literally leapt in terms of social mobility over 2 generations. That is in some ways the dominant British Cypriot work ethic, emigrate, work hard, and move on. It makes a lot of sense. Even in one generation our fathers and mothers came from villages with no electricity in the 50’s and 60’s, often working from the age of 14 to a radically different life in the UK say 30 years later doing everything for the future of the next generation. So here are a few things/thoughts/insights on George Michael and being Cypriot:

1. George would say often say in interviews ‘the only Greek thing about me is my hairy chest’ and that was so easy to misconstrue. But he would also follow it up with what he got from his father, that determination to work hard and succeed, and that he considered himself a 2nd generation son of an immigrant. That word ‘immigrant’ has become almost a dirty word nowadays, but George always used it proudly. Watch video here on MEGA TV Greece around 5.31. So he was proud of his roots, his parents, and where he came from. This theme is also explored in one of his songs ‘Round Here’ where he talks about his upbringing and how his dad ‘ got here on the gravy train’

2. George Michael’s first interview in Cyprus was with John Vickers in 1984, in his Wham days, for CyBC 2 Radio, the state broadcaster. John is a rare kind of journalist in Cyprus and he will admit it himself, interviewing George Michael  topless was an honour!!!

3. Charity and George Michael go hand in hand. He was one of those people who did not like to broadcast his name all over everything but the people who knew, the people who benefitted from his charitable donations always held him in high esteem. He was the main benefactor for The UK Thalassemeia Society, which has been in existence for more than 30 years and has amassed a wealth of experience on Thalassaemia, that most dreaded of ancient  Cypriot diseases. I can recall performing with DJ Peter Lewis and Soul Singer Irini at The Community Centre in Wood Green for this charity in the early 90’s and  the leather jacket George wore on the worldwide ‘Faith’ tour was auctioned for many thousands of pounds. And to any ‘doubters’, the picture below gives clear evidence of George’s philanthropy towards the community. Thanks to my twitter friend Dino, the youth pictured bottom front right, who was there to witness this at Haringey Civic Centre in the 1980’s.

4.Urban legend has it that George Michael has a house Cyprus. There is some confusion on this however. While a photo does exist online (Google it and see) it’s not clearly stated by the architect  who designed the property if it’s George Michael the famous singer’s house  – which is misleading. Also consider there are probably thousands of people called George Michael (and I know at least 5 of them) and this one is clearly not accurate. Whatever the case George came to Cyprus but pop stars, in such a small place, always move in silence.

5.Yusuf Islam frequents Cyprus often as well and when George Michael passed away he tweeted: ‘So sad to hear my Cypriot brother @GeorgeMichael has passed away.Will miss him & pray God will have mercy on him. Condolences to his family’

6.On Twitter George would often sign himself off as ‘The Singing Greek’ and his nickname was also ‘Yog’ short for Giorgos. Its possible some one cottoned  onto the ‘Singing Greek’ tag by creating a twitter account, making things a bit confusing. In the end George Michael got the  name officially removed.

7.Club Tropicana, despite urban myth was not filmed as a video clip in Limassol Cyprus, it was made in Ibiza. However many people have used the name in Cyprus for their clubs and even my nephew had a chippy in Liverpool with the name in bright blue silver neon lights. “Its pure class” he declared at the chippy’s opening

8.George Michael, like many of us who had to endure, went to Greek school as a kid in northwest London. Greek school was an additional educational chore, often on a Saturday morning. To some it was  a pain, a routine where they learnt nothing and to others it was key to learning the Greek language. I would have preferred Saturday morning pictures.

9. A very reliable source, Costas Yennaris (who through marriage has a link)  stated on Facebook recently that George Michael also did the vragga-dagga thing as a youth with  traditional dances and the vraka – the national traditional male attire of Cyprus back in the day. Going through the same things, I am sure our paths may have even crossed on a dancefloor in a church hall off Turnpike Lane…at some stage or other.

10. GM The Original Vrakaman was also a theme  explored in The Cyprus Weekly in 1996 when George first started donning a goatee in public. They published a headshot pic of the the both of us side by side saying GM was looking more and more like HM and we were one and the same person!  Far fetched for sure  and I am not in the same league but as the original Cypriot goatee-ist it did make me feel very humbled at the time.

11. George was a star for all people, ethnicities, races and creeds. He appeals and is just as important to Greek Cypriots as he is to Turkish Cypriots, and Armenians, Latins and Maronites. He is what Cyprus could have been, tolerant, daring and forward thinking and that was always clearly manifested through his music.

12. May be this  is not so important to some but  I will throw it in for some clarification. Still trying to figure out what side of North London George Michael was in terms of football, blue or red. It would be devastating if he was a Gooner – it hit me hard when I found out the late Bob Marley supported Arsenal a couple of years ago – but news so far from trawling the net seems to indicate GM was with Man United. Also possible growing up in Hertfordshire he could have even been Watford.

Last but by no means least…a couple of days ago we started a petition to have a street named after George Michael in Cyprus. Its going really well with over 1,743 people signing so far. Considering he is the most famous person worldwide with a Cyprus link, we see this as imperative out of respect for a person who gave so much to so many people. And it would be good if there were many streets named after George Michael worldwide…So please sign the petition here…..

RiP Yog, Αναπαύσου εν ειρήνη you will always be remembered…

‘One Summer…’ New Haji Mike & Kingdom Signal launched live on Radio out of Corsica, Cyprus and London

Radio brings people together, it always and always will. Haji Mike in Cyprus linked up with Gibsy Rhodes aka Kingdom Signal in the summer of 2014 via Versionist Radio. Gibsy wanted to do a Haji Mike Special so he requested a few tunes. This led to an invite to Haji Mike to join the station, which happened shortly afterwards. Versionist was also known as the ‘Village Radio’ and would later transmute into ‘OuttaMiYard Radio’ where people from different locations around the world switch studios every couple of hours like as one Reggae/Dub Radio Marathon. Radio also brings people together through music and is a vital media for musicians as a platform to showcase their creations. Haji Mike realized this when he started releasing independent music in 1990 via London. ‘The first time I did a radio session for Andy Kershaw I was over the moon. In fact Kershaw was the first person to play ‘Stavroulla’ one of my early releases in Cyprus’ says Haji Mike ‘ and that concept of the live session, where musicians jam on air was crucial for many artists like myself back in the day as a way of getting exposure.’ Fast forward, 27 years and the live radio session is just as important but something fundamental has changed in the meantime. The Internet gives everyone the opportunity to play live on air from any place and any time as long as the technology works. So Haji Mike & Kingdom Signal, follow in the that fine live radio session tradition this month with a couple of special exclusive shows to launch their new release ‘One Summer’ (Power of Love Records) which came out on May 1st. Dates as follows for the sessions and interviews:

Weds 10th May 17:00–21:00 UTC+02 (4-8pm, UK – 6-10pm, CY) OuttaMiYardRadio Live Session Episode 1 – Live and direct from Kingdom Signal Studios, Corsica Haji Mike & Kingdom Signal play ‘One Summer…’ in full plus dubplates, selections and tunes galore as the two Kings of The Mediterranean Underground meet for the first time on Air.

Tune in here——> 

Thurs 11th May Live interview with Jahmon Selector (Belgium) on OuttaMiYardRadio 18:00 – 18.30  Tune in here——>    

Thurs 11th May Live interview with DJ Debbie Golt on The Outerglobe (UK) on Resonance FM 7.40-8.15 pm  Tune in here——>  

Fri  12^th May 5-7pm UK (7-9pm CY) GreekBeat Radio (UK)  Live Session Episode 2 live and direct from Kingdom Signal Studios, Corsica Haji Mike & Kingdom Signal perform ‘One Summer…’ in full plus dubplates and selections. Tune in here ——————>

What people have been saying about ‘One Summer…’   

‘Lush New Dub Sound’ – Sarah Fenwick – Cyprus News Report

‘Meditative’ Sista Skanka – OMYRadio

‘Hypnotic’ Dub Thomas – Dubophonic/OMYRadio/RastFM

‘Fabulous!’ Dj Mario Greekbeat Radio

‘A contemplative call to action, earthed in the cosmos, rootical, soaring, essential!’ Debbie Golt Outerglobe/Resonance 104.4FM

‘Many things…an awakening, fresh, exciting, earthy, witty, poetic, summerness, takes you on journeys, bittersweet and ambitious’ Stelios Keryniotis, Astra Radio Cyprus

 

The New release ‘One Summer…’ is available through  Google ,24/7 ,7 Digital, Amazon MP3, BounDEE, Emusic, iFeel Music, iMusica, iTunes,Juno, MediaNet Mobile Partners: AMI Entertainment & Gracenote – Streaming – Napster/Rhapsody/YouTube Art Tracks and many more….

 

 

 

Also check the video for ‘Stargazing’ by Haji Mike & Kingdom Signal

Web Links:

Power of Love Records on Facebook

Haji Mike & Kingdom Signal Bandcamp

Kingdom Signal Soundcloud 

Haji Mike

For more information contact  POLRecords@protonmail.com

 The ‘Haji Mike & Kingdom Signal Live Corsica Sessions’ are supported by

      

‘One Summer…’ New Haji Mike & Kingdom Signal launched live on Radio out of Corsica, Cyprus and London

Radio brings people together, it always and always will. Haji Mike in Cyprus linked up with Gibsy Rhodes aka Kingdom Signal in the summer of 2014 via Versionist Radio. Gibsy wanted to do a Haji Mike Special so he requested a few tunes. This led to an invite to Haji Mike to join the station, which happened shortly afterwards. Versionist was also known as the ‘Village Radio’ and would later transmute into ‘OuttaMiYard Radio’ where people from different locations around the world switch studios every couple of hours like as one Reggae/Dub Radio Marathon. Radio also brings people together through music and is a vital media for musicians as a platform to showcase their creations. Haji Mike realized this when he started releasing independent music in 1990 via London. ‘The first time I did a radio session for Andy Kershaw I was over the moon. In fact Kershaw was the first person to play ‘Stavroulla’ one of my early releases in Cyprus’ says Haji Mike ‘ and that concept of the live session, where musicians jam on air was crucial for many artists like myself back in the day as a way of getting exposure.’ Fast forward, 27 years and the live radio session is just as important but something fundamental has changed in the meantime. The Internet gives everyone the opportunity to play live on air from any place and any time as long as the technology works. So Haji Mike & Kingdom Signal, follow in the that fine live radio session tradition this month with a couple of special exclusive shows to launch their new release ‘One Summer’ (Power of Love Records) which came out on May 1st. Dates as follows for the sessions and interviews:

Weds 10th May 17:00–21:00 UTC+02 (4-8pm, UK – 6-10pm, CY) OuttaMiYardRadio Live Session Episode 1 – Live and direct from Kingdom Signal Studios, Corsica Haji Mike & Kingdom Signal play ‘One Summer…’ in full plus dubplates, selections and tunes galore as the two Kings of The Mediterranean Underground meet for the first time on Air.

Tune in here——> 

Thurs 11th May Live interview with Jahmon Selector (Belgium) on OuttaMiYardRadio 18:00 – 18.30  Tune in here——>    

Thurs 11th May Live interview with DJ Debbie Golt on The Outerglobe (UK) on Resonance FM 7.40-8.15 pm  Tune in here——>  

Fri  12^th May 5-7pm UK (7-9pm CY) GreekBeat Radio (UK)  Live Session Episode 2 live and direct from Kingdom Signal Studios, Corsica Haji Mike & Kingdom Signal perform ‘One Summer…’ in full plus dubplates and selections. Tune in here ——————>

What people have been saying about ‘One Summer…’   

‘Lush New Dub Sound’ – Sarah Fenwick – Cyprus News Report

‘Meditative’ Sista Skanka – OMYRadio

‘Hypnotic’ Dub Thomas – Dubophonic/OMYRadio/RastFM

‘Fabulous!’ Dj Mario Greekbeat Radio

‘A contemplative call to action, earthed in the cosmos, rootical, soaring, essential!’ Debbie Golt Outerglobe/Resonance 104.4FM

‘Many things…an awakening, fresh, exciting, earthy, witty, poetic, summerness, takes you on journeys, bittersweet and ambitious’ Stelios Keryniotis, Astra Radio Cyprus

 

The New release ‘One Summer…’ is available through  Google ,24/7 ,7 Digital, Amazon MP3, BounDEE, Emusic, iFeel Music, iMusica, iTunes,Juno, MediaNet Mobile Partners: AMI Entertainment & Gracenote – Streaming – Napster/Rhapsody/YouTube Art Tracks and many more….

 

 

 

Also check the video for ‘Stargazing’ by Haji Mike & Kingdom Signal

Web Links:

Power of Love Records on Facebook

Haji Mike & Kingdom Signal Bandcamp

Kingdom Signal Soundcloud 

Haji Mike

For more information contact  POLRecords@protonmail.com

 The ‘Haji Mike & Kingdom Signal Live Corsica Sessions’ are supported by

      

Solidarity to the activists who fight for the protection of songbirds and all other species of wild life

India’s coastal law is being altered in public interest – by bypassing the public

Published in Scroll.In, 26th October 2017

In the first week of October, the Ministry of Environment, Forests and Climate Change issued an amendment to the Coastal Regulation Zone Notification, 2011, which regulates development on India’s coastline. The change in the rules allows the mining of atomic minerals (such as uranium and thorium, which are mostly used to generate nuclear energy) in Coastal Regulation Zone areas notwithstanding their availability in other areas. While environmentalists have expressed concern over this amendment and its implications on fragile coastal areas, the change is worrisome for another reason. This is the eighth time in the last three years that the ministry has dispensed with the requirement of a public notice and instead of first issuing a draft has straight away come out with a final amendment to the notification.

The Coastal Regulation Zone Notification was first issued in 1991. It saw close to 20 amendments and eight reviews in the following 20 years before it was replaced by a new notification in 2011. While the 2011 notification was to piece together all these amendments in one document, it also presented an opportunity for public engagement in designing a law. Numerous consultations, dialogue and negotiations between key actors including fishing groups, civil society, environmentalists, urban planners and policy-makers preceded the new law. But three years later, the notification was subjected to a review by an expert committee and a series of amendments – the number of which has now reached 12.

Of these 12 amendments, eight were issued without first publishing a draft that would have enabled feedback from concerned citizens and those likely to be affected by the changes. And of the eight amendments, four dealt with extending the validity of the existing Coastal Zone Management Plan that was approved under the 1991 notification. The Coastal Zone Management Plan is a reference document that guides coastal development and implementation of the Coastal Regulation Zone Notification. In 2011, as a new notification replaced the 1991 version, it brought with it the need to prepare a fresh Coastal Zone Management Plan within two years, for the old plan would cease to be valid by then. However, the new plan is still in the making and the existing plan has been given several extensions, the latest one in July.

Besides the extensions to the Coastal Zone Management Plan, the amendments in which the ministry bypassed the draft stage pertain to the following changes:

• Transfer of powers to appraise certain coastal projects that are not listed in the Environment Impact Assessment Notification from the Ministry of Environment, Forests and Climate Change to the State Environment Impact Assessment Authorities (November 2014). The Environment Impact Assessment Notification, 2006, provides a list of projects that require environmental clearance before being set up. It categorises the projects as A and B depending on their capacity and size. Projects in category A require environmental clearance from the ministry while those in category B seek clearance from the concerned State Environment Impact Assessment Authority. For any project to come up in a coastal area, permission from the concerned state-level coastal authority is mandatory. This is in addition to the environment clearance (if required). With this amendment, some projects that do not require environmental clearance, which would have reached the ministry earlier, would now approach these state-level appraisal authorities for final approval. For instance, a beach resort on the northern coast of Karnataka received its final coastal clearance from the ministry in 2010. If it were to be proposed now, it would receive its final approval from the Karnataka State Environment Impact Assessment Authority.
• Permitting relaxations to tourism projects in urban areas of Coastal Regulation Zones (February 2015). These relaxations included lifting the ban on withdrawal of groundwater from near the coast, and doing away with the requirement of maintaining a path between two tourist structures to access the beach.
• Permitting construction of a memorial to BR Ambedkar in Mumbai on Indu 6 Mills lands, an ecologically sensitive coastal area (December 2016). The memorial would include a 350-foot statue, a library, a pond and a viewing deck among other structures. The memorial has been in discussion for over a decade and both the Congress and Bharatiya Janata Party governments have in the past tried to get the requisite permissions for it to attract Dalit voters, especially around election time. This amendment, thus, was expected to be of consequence to the BJP as it came ahead of civic body elections in Mumbai and other major cities of Maharashtra.
• Permitting mining of atomic minerals in Coastal Regulation Zones (October 2017). Earlier, only mining of “rare minerals” that were not available outside of these areas was permitted.

A distortion

While allowing relaxations to tourism projects, the ministry did not acknowledge that it was evading the issuance of a draft – perhaps because the changes brought through this amendment lay in an annexure (and not the main text) of the notification, which provides guidelines for the construction of hotels and beach resorts in Coastal Regulation Zones. But in the seven other amendments, the ministry cited “public interest” to justify this snipping of the legal procedure of amending a piece of law.

Such generous use of the phrase in such a distorted manner poses a threat to the very concept of public interest. Black’s Law Dictionary (Eighth Edition) defines public interest as:

“General welfare of the public that warrants recommendation and protection; something in which the public as a whole has a stake.”

Allowing mining and relaxations to tourism projects in coastal regions has direct implications for a large section of the population that resides in these areas. It affects the livelihoods of people living in more than 3,200 fishing villages. If we factor in the ecological services of the coast – erosion control, water balance and waste processing, among others – the entire population of the country seems to have a stake in coastal protection and regulation.

Instead, the ministry seems to imply that the mining of atomic minerals (irrespective of whether they are available in mainland areas or not) and the construction of memorials is in public interest. This offers a twisted understanding of the word. Using the public interest clause and dispensing with the need to seek public comment on activities that undermine coastal conservation and livelihoods is contradictory in itself. In a way, the government is saying that the matter is of public interest but does not warrant an input from the public.

Rules framed in secrecy

This discretionary use of public interest sets a wrong precedent: in the past three years, reviews, amendments and circulars pertaining to the Coastal Regulation Zone Notification have largely been closed-door activities. In 2014, the committee tasked with reviewing the notification consulted only the state governments and submitted its report to the ministry in January 2015. The report was kept out of public view until the Central Information Commission, in response to a Right to Information application, directed the government to disclose it in June 2016.

All this while, amendments to the notification – some with drafts and many without – continued. Amendments for the transfer of powers to state governments and to allow special structures in Mumbai seem to be directed at pleasing the states. Earlier this month, Union Environment Minister Harsh Vardhan substantiated this when he said policies on coastal regulation would be prepared in consultation with state governments. Time and again, the Centre has shown an inclination towards appeasing state governments while ignoring the coastal population and the general public.

The abuse of the phrase public interest that has been witnessed in the forming of coastal rules is perhaps taking place in other legislations too. Its exploitation not only weakens the concerned legislation, it slowly starts a trend where the public is bypassed and kept outside the arena of policy-making.

Meenakshi Kapoor and Krithika Dinesh are with the Centre for Policy Research-Namati Environmental Justice Program.

Χερσόνησος Ακάμα: περιοχή προστασίας της φύσης και της βιοποικιλότητας ή… ξέφραγο αμπέλι για ανεξέλεγκτες αναπτύξεις και ασύμβατες δρασ

Κοινό Δελτίο Τύπου – Παρασκευή, 27 Οκτωβρίου 2017

 Χερσόνησος Ακάμα: περιοχή προστασίας της φύσης και της βιοποικιλότητας ή… 

ξέφραγο αμπέλι για ανεξέλεγκτες αναπτύξεις και ασύμβατες δραστηριότητες;

 

Οι περιβαλλοντικές οργανώσεις κρούουν τον κώδωνα του κινδύνου και προειδοποιούν ότι η Χερσόνησος του Ακάμα, μία από τις σημαντικότερες περιοχές προστασίας της φύσης και της βιοποικιλότητας στην επικράτεια της Κυπριακής Δημοκρατίας, βρίσκεται υπό την άμεση απειλή του κατακερματισμού και της υποβάθμισης από ανεξέλεγκτες αναπτύξεις και ασύμβατες δραστηριότητες. Κατά τη διάρκεια της τελευταίας εβδομάδας, τρεις διαφορετικές υποθέσεις που είδαν το φως της δημοσιότητας αναδεικνύουν ξανά το πραγματικό μέγεθος του προβλήματος της ανεπαρκούς διατήρησης και διαχείρισης της Χερσονήσου Ακάμα από ορισμένα έργα, σχέδια και δραστηριότητες:

1. Ο Δήμος Πέγειας υπέβαλε προσφυγή στο Ανώτατο Δικαστήριο εναντίον της χορήγησης πολεοδομικής άδειας για την κατασκευή μίας ενοποιημένης ανάπτυξης μεγάλων και σύνθετων χρήσεων στο Αγιοβούνι της Πέγειας, μία περιοχή εξαιρετικής φυσικής καλλονής και ιδιαίτερης οικολογικής αξίας εκτός ορίου ανάπτυξης, η οποία εφάπτεται με τις περιοχές του Δικτύου Natura 2000 Τόπος Κοινοτικής Σημασίας (ΤΚΣ) και Ζώνη Ειδικής Προστασίας (ΖΕΠ) Χερσόνησος Ακάμα. Τονίζεται ότι η πολεοδομική άδεια και η περιβαλλοντική έγκριση του προτεινόμενου έργου δεν έλαβαν υπόψη τις επιφυλάξεις και ενστάσεις του Δήμου Πέγειας [1]. Επιπλέον, η Πολεοδομική Αρχή δεν προέβη στην αξιολόγηση των επιπτώσεων στο τοπίο της περιοχής πριν από τη χορήγηση πολεοδομικής άδειας, ενώ η Περιβαλλοντική Αρχή εξέδωσε θετική περιβαλλοντική γνωμάτευση, παρά την αναγνώριση των σοβαρών, αρνητικών και μη-αναστρέψιμων επιπτώσεων στη φύση και την άγρια ζωή, το τοπίο, τη μορφολογία, τη γεωλογία, την υδρολογία, τη χρήση γης και τις δημόσιες υποδομές της περιοχής [2].
2. Το Υπουργείο Οικονομικών, σε συνεννόηση με το Υπουργείο Εσωτερικών και το Τμήμα Κτηματολογίου και Χωρομετρίας, συμπεριέλαβε στον κατάλογο της προτεινόμενης προς αποξένωση ακίνητης ιδιοκτησίας της Δημοκρατίας ένα τεμάχιο έκτασης 78,931 τ.μ., το οποίο χωροθετείται στις νοτιοανατολικές παρυφές του Κρατικού Δάσους Πέγειας (περιοχή Πυκνής) και του Εθνικού Δασικού Πάρκου Ακάμα, καθώς και εντός και πλησίον των περιοχών του Δικτύου Natura 2000 ΤΚΣ και ΖΕΠ Χερσόνησος Ακάμα. Το συγκεκριμένο τεμάχιο εφάπτεται με την περιοχή χωροθέτησης της ενοποιημένης ανάπτυξης μεγάλων και σύνθετων χρήσεων στο Αγιοβούνι της Πέγειας [3]. Σύμφωνα με το ερωτηματολόγιο αντίκτυπου της προτεινόμενης νομοθεσίας που υπέβαλε το Υπουργείο Οικονομικών προς την Κοινοβουλευτική Επιτροπή Εσωτερικών, παρά το γεγονός ότι το συγκεκριμένο τεμάχιο εμπίπτει εντός και πλησίον των περιοχών του Δικτύου Natura 2000 ΤΚΣ και ΖΕΠ Χερσόνησος Ακάμα, δεν προηγήθηκε καμία διαβούλευση με τις συναρμόδιες αρχές (συγκεκριμένα τα Τμήματα Περιβάλλοντος και Δασών, του Υπουργείου Γεωργίας, Αγροτικής Ανάπτυξης και Περιβάλλοντος, καθώς και την Υπηρεσία Θήρας και Πανίδας του Υπουργείου Εσωτερικών), ενώ παράλληλα το Υπουργείο Οικονομικών δεν προέβη σε οποιαδήποτε μελέτη εκτίμησης των επιπτώσεων στο περιβάλλον από την προτεινόμενη τροποποίηση του περί Ακίνητης Ιδιοκτησίας (Διακατοχή, Εγγραφή και Εκτίμηση) Νόμου (ΚΕΦ.224) [4]. Η συζήτηση του νομοσχεδίου στην Κοινοβουλευτική Επιτροπή Εσωτερικών θα συνεχιστεί την ερχόμενη Δευτέρα, 30 Οκτωβρίου 2017 [5].
3. Το Τμήμα Οδικών Μεταφορών χορήγησε άδεια για τη διοργάνωση διεθνούς έκθεσης τετράτροχων μοτοσυκλετών («γουρούνων») σε αγροτικό και δασικό οδικό δίκτυο πλησίον της Θαλάσσιας Προστατευόμενης Περιοχής Λάρας – Τοξεύτρας. Σημειώνεται ότι η έκθεση «γουρούνων» διοργανώνεται εκτός του Εθνικού Δασικού Πάρκου Ακάμα, αλλά εντός των περιοχών του Δικτύου Natura 2000 ΤΚΣ και ΖΕΠ Χερσόνησος Ακάμα. Ειδικότερα, η έκθεση «γουρούνων» διεξάγεται σε τεμάχιο τουρκοκυπριακής ιδιοκτησίας, στο οποίο μάλιστα έχουν διεξαχθεί χωματουργικές εργασίες (εκσκαφές και επιχωματώσεις) και δημιουργήθηκε μία «πίστα γουρούνων». Σημειώνεται επίσης ότι οι καθ’ ύλην αρμόδιες αρχές για τη διατήρηση και διαχείριση των περιοχών του Δικτύου Natura 2000 ΤΚΣ και ΖΕΠ Χερσόνησος Ακάμα ενημερώθηκαν την τελευταία στιγμή για τη διοργάνωση της έκθεσης «γουρούνων», χωρίς να προηγηθεί οποιαδήποτε διαβούλευση μαζί τους.

Επιπλέον, οι περιβαλλοντικές οργανώσεις τονίζουν ότι η διοργάνωση μίας διεθνούς έκθεσης τετράτροχων μοτοσυκλετών («γουρούνων») πλησίον των σημαντικότερων παραλιών ωοτοκίας των θαλάσσιων χελώνων δεν συνάδει με τους στόχους διατήρησης και διαχείρισης της Χερσονήσου Ακάμα. Για την ακρίβεια, κινείται προς την ακριβώς αντίθετη κατεύθυνση καθώς στέλλει ένα λανθασμένο μήνυμα, σε μία περίοδο που οι «γουρούνες» συνεχίζουν να αποτελούν μία σημαντική απειλή για τους βιότοπους των θαλάσσιων χελώνων, όπως αποδείχθηκε πρόσφατα με την καταστροφή 19 φωλιών θαλάσσιων χελώνων από μία «γουρούνα» στην παραλία της Λίμνης στον Κόλπο Χρυσοχούς, εντός της περιοχής Natura 2000 ΤΚΣ Πόλις – Γιαλιά [6]. Σημειώνεται επίσης ότι η ανεξέλεγκτη χρήση «γουρούνων» εντός των περιοχών Natura 2000 ΤΚΣ και ΖΕΠ Χερσόνησος Ακάμα οδηγεί στην υποβάθμιση σημαντικών οικοτόπων (κυρίως αμμοθινών) και στην όχληση ειδών άγριας ζωής (κυρίως ερπετών και πτηνών).

Παράλληλα, οι περιβαλλοντικές οργανώσεις υπογραμμίζουν το γεγονός ότι αυτή είναι η πολλοστή φορά τους τελευταίους μήνες που χορηγείται άδεια για ασύμβατες δραστηριότητες εντός των περιοχών του Δικτύου Natura, χωρίς να προηγηθεί ένας ολοκληρωμένος προέλεγχος (screening) των επιπτώσεων στο περιβάλλον, μέσω μίας διαφανούς και συμμετοχικής διαδικασίας. Ενδεικτικά, αναφέρεται η διοργάνωση συναυλιών στις περιοχές ΤΚΣ και ΖΕΠ Ακρωτήριο Άσπρο – Πέτρα του Ρωμιού [7], καθώς και η διοργάνωση δεξίωσης γάμου και συναυλίας στην παραλία Ασπρόκρεμος, εντός των περιοχών ΤΚΣ και ΖΕΠ Χερσόνησος Ακάμα [8]. Πέρα από τις πιο πάνω δραστηριότητες, ενδεικτική είναι επίσης η ανοχή που επιδεικνύεται σε παράνομα υποστατικά (εστιατόρια και αναψυκτήρια), τα οποία χωροθετούνται εντός και πλησίον της Θαλάσσιας Προστατευόμενης Περιοχής Λάρας – Τοξεύτρας [9].

Καταλήγοντας, οι περιβαλλοντικές οργανώσεις απαιτούν:

1. Την θέσπιση ενός ολοκληρωμένου, δεσμευτικού και αποτελεσματικού καθεστώτος προστασίας των περιοχών του Δικτύου Natura 2000 ΤΚΣ και ΖΕΠ Χερσόνησος Ακάμα∙
2. Τη διασφάλιση μίας ορθής, έγκαιρης και επαρκούς διαδικασίας εκτίμησης των επιπτώσεων στο περιβάλλον από ορισμένα έργα και σχέδια, τα οποία χωροθετούνται εντός ή/και πλησίον των περιοχών του Δικτύου Natura 2000 και δύναται να τις επηρεάζουν σημαντικά∙
3. Την υιοθέτηση και εφαρμογή μίας διαφανούς και συμμετοχικής διαδικασίας προέλεγχου (screening) των επιπτώσεων στο περιβάλλον από ορισμένες δραστηριότητες, οι οποίες χωροθετούνται εντός ή/και πλησίον των περιοχών του Δικτύου Natura 2000 και δύναται να τις επηρεάζουν σημαντικά∙
4. Τον άμεσο τερματισμό όλων των παράνομων επεμβάσεων (κατεδάφιση παράνομων κατασκευών και απομάκρυνση παράνομων υποστατικών), καθώς και την αποτελεσματική εφαρμογή της ισχύουσας νομοθεσίας για την πρόληψη και αποκατάσταση της περιβαλλοντικής ζημιάς.

Το κοινό δελτίο τύπου συνυπογράφουν η Ομοσπονδία Περιβαλλοντικών Οργανώσεων Κύπρου, το Κυπριακό Ίδρυμα Προστασίας του Περιβάλλοντος Terra Cypria, ο Πτηνολογικός Σϋνδεσμος Κύπρου, οι Φίλοι της Γης Κύπρου, η Οικολογική Παρέμβαση Φίλοι του Ακάμα, η Οικολογική Κίνηση Κύπρου, το Κέντρο Περιβαλλοντικής Έρευνας Ενάλια Φύσις και η Πρωτοβουλία για τη Διάσωση των Φυσικών Ακτών.

Σημειώσεις:

[1] http://cyprus-mail.com/2017/10/22/peyia-goes-court-vassiliou-project/ [2]http://www.moa.gov.cy/moa/environment/environmentnew.nsf/All/A14413D240268C30C2257F290068DDE1/$file/GN20150810101.pdf?OpenElement [3] http://www.philenews.com/eidiseis/topika/article/446326/apoxenonoyn-g-se-perioches-natura-2000-eikones

http://dialogos.com.cy/blog/idou-ta-kratika-fileta-pou-theli-na-ekpiisi-i-kivernisi/

[4] http://reclaimthesea.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/2.pdf [5] http://www.parliament.cy/easyconsole.cfm/id/334 [6] http://www.philenews.com/koinonia/eidiseis/article/427710/me-gyroynes-dielysan-tis-folies-ton-chelonon-eikones [7] http://www.philenews.com/eidiseis/topika/article/419868/epikindynes-epembaseis-stin-petra-toy-romioy-eikones [8] http://www.moi.gov.cy/moi/moi.nsf/All/D6230480E5D6EABBC2258193002B4A49?OpenDocument

http://www.moa.gov.cy/moa/agriculture.nsf/All/160580454F87B41BC22581990037A5ED?OpenDocument

[9] http://www.philenews.com/eidiseis/topika/article/427503/odoiporiko-stis-paranomies-toy-akama-eikones

Tepki Oylarına Dair Bir Seçim Yazısı

Neden Oy Vermeyeceğim ?

 

Seçimlere sayılı günler kaldığı ve siyasi partiler ve adaylar son hamlelerini yapıyor. Tümünün odaklandığı tek birşey var: kazanmak. Bu kadar insanın kolektif biçimde seçimlere odaklanması, gündemi de dönüştürüyor. 2017 yılı sona ererken, yıl boyunca nelerin yaşandığını akılcı bir biçimde ele almak bile mümkün olmuyor. Tartışmalar; #hashtaglı iletilerden ileri gitmiyor. Aynı şeyleri söyleyen adayların neden farklı partilerde yer aldığını bir türlü anlamıyorum. Tüm bunlar vaatlerin absürtlüğü ile dalga geçmekten yorulan, kendimi de dahil gördüğüm öfkelilerin, öfkesini arttırmaktan başka bir işe yaramıyor.

Yazının başlığından anlaşılacağı gibi bu seçim oy vermeyeceğim. Yazarken, derdim kısmen de olsa kendi adıma bu sebepleri ortaya koymak, en azından aklı selim bir biçimde seçim tartışmasına eleştirel bir gözle bakabilmektir. Bunun için benim için en önemli belli başlı kopuş noktalarını ele almak istiyorum.

• Önce seçim kararı nasıl verilmişti hatırlayalım. Başbakan Özgürgün ile Ana muhalefet başkanı Tufan Erhürman TV programlarında atışmıştı. Başbakan, “delikanlı” edasıyla ile seçim için tarih istemiş, CTP Başkanı da olabilecek en erken tarihi söylemişti ve bir anda kendimizi erken seçimlerin içinde bulmuştuk. Böyle bir “adamlar atışmasının” toplumun tümünü etkileyecek kararlar yaratacağına tüm “feministler” sessiz kalmış, sabah akşam erkek egemen topluma karşı olduğunu söyleyenler, kararları “adam gibi adamların” aldığı bir toplumda, özne olmadıklarına tepki bile göstermemişti. Üstüne üstlük listelerde feminist kariyer yarışmasına tanık oluyoruz. Karar alıcıların “delikanlıların” olduğu yapıda, kadın-merkezli düşünen, sorumluluk sahibi feministlerin, insan haklarından taraf olanların ise buna sessiz kalıp “sığınma evi talep etmesini” içselleştirilmiş kadercilikten başka nasıl açıklayabiliriz ki?

 

• Bu arada seçime, “erken” derken, seçimler çok da erkene alınmadı. Normal şartlarda Temmuz’da olması gerekiyordu. Olması gerekenden sadece 6-7 ay önce gerçekleşmiş oldu. Normal koşullarda sorumluluk sahibi bir siyasi parti, seçimin doğal tarihi bu kadar yaklaşırken, propaganda yapmanın yanında kapsamlı programlara sahip olması beklenir. Oysa ki, seçime giderken elimizdeki en kapsamlı program siyasi partilerin seçim manifestosu oldu. Yarın iktidar olacakların, çoğu konu ile ilgili söyleyebileceği şeyler tek paragraf. Tek paragraflık bir vizyonla, gerçekten birilerinin sizi 5 yıl temsil edebileceğini, temsilcilerin yürütmeyi belirleyebileceğine gerçekten ikna oldunuz mu? Bunun demokratik ve sağlıklı mı olduğunu düşünüyorsunuz ? Bu yüzden oy mu vereceksiniz? Eğer oy vermeyi ezbere yapılan bir davranış olarak kurgulamadıysanız bu zaafiyetlerin sonuçlarını tahmin edebileceğinizi düşünüyorum. Ama hayal edemeyenler için örnek vererek açıklayayım. Seçimin en karizmatik adayı, vekil olacak hatta bakan olacak. Mesela tarım bakanı olacak. İlgili bakanlığı ile ilgili 1 paragraflık programını hayata geçirmeden önce, bir büyükelçiliğinin onlarca sayfalık yapılandırılmış programı sunulacak. Elindeki 1 paragrafı kenara bırakıp, yapılandırılmış, projelendirilmiş programı uygulayacak. “İyilik timsali”, “hoşsözlü bakan”, o noktadan sonra artık başka bir ülkenin bürokratları tarafından hazırlanmış bir planın uygulayacısı olurken, bu ülke adına konuşacak. Projeyi mükemmel uygulayabilir. Ancak, kararı veren kim olacak ? Demek istediğim, gerçekten seçim yaptığımızda gerçekten bu ülkeyi yönetecek miyiz? Gerçekten bu ülkeyi yönetmeye hazır olan biri var mıydı ? Bence yok. Seçimlere gelmeden önce, muhalefet partilerinin var olanı eleştirirken, soyut güzel günler teması dışında bir siyasi argümanı var mıydı ? Hayır. Peki meclis dışında, meclise girme olasılığı olan partilerin var mıydı ? Hayır.
• Mesele sadece plan ve projeye sahip olmakla ilgili de değil. Temsiliyet ve demokrasiye dair de zaafiyetler var. Demokrasiden ve toplumdan taraf olan partiler uygulanabilir bir siyasi programı oluştururken, bunu üyeleri ile bile paylaşmış durumda değildi. Katılımcı süreçler yaşanmamış ancak köklü çözüm önerileri ortaya atılmıştı. Ancak, köklü çözüm önerisi için, önce gelenekselin dışında bir yaklaşım gerekirdi. Konuya dair fikri olan 3-5 akil adamın yazacağı program, köklü çözüm değil tepeden inme elitist bir çözüm sunmak demekti. Demokrasiden taraf olan birileri için bu tavır kabul edilebilir olmamalıdır. Siyasi parti üyeleri, kendi partilerinin, siyaset yapma süreçlerinin dışında tutulurken, nasıl olurda sürünün bir parçası olarak hareket etmeyi anlayamıyorum. Ancak, bu koşulları kabul etmiş olacaklar ki, seçimlerde partileri için amigoluk yapma görevini kabul ediyorlar. Ancak, dışarda olan insanların bir parçası olanların bu tutumu protesto etme hakkı saklıdır. Oy vermemek biraz da demokratik süreçleri talep etme meselesidir. O yüzden siyasi partilerin ağalık sistemine karşı bir duruştur oy vermemek.
• Günün sonunda, seçim alanına girdiğimizde üst akıldan gelen belli başlı projeler dile getirilmiş ama siyasi partilerin hiçbiri, siyasi üretimi gerçekleşmemiştir. Kaynak tartışması bile yapıldığında “TC’nin gerçekleştirmek için sunduğu projeler” bahsediliyor, “UBP-DP’nin bunları gerçekleştirmekte sorun yaşadığı” ifade ediliyordu. Ancak, hiç bir parti “Bu projeleri, kim nasıl hazırladı? Hangi ihtiyaca göre belirlendi?” tartışmasına girmiyor. Kaynak orada duruyor, onu etkin kullanmakta zorluk yaşanıyor gibi bir söylem ortaya atılıyor. Aslında, proje bazlı bile düşünülürken, “ülkenin ihtiyaçlarımızın ne olduğunu biz belirleriz” bile denilemiyor. Bunları bile konuşamayacaksak, korkak ve parmağın arkasına saklanarak siyaset yapılacaksa eğer siyasi haysiyet ortada yoktur demektir. O yüzden, birileri haysiyeti diline dolamış olabilir ama bu kadar çok haysiyetsiz duruş söz konusuysa, haysiyetten taraf olduğum için oy vermeyeceğim.
• Belki de temel bir noktadan sorular sormak gerekir. Siyaset şirket yönetmek mi ? Yoksa irade mi ? Seçilme umudu olanlara söylemek gerek, eğer şirket yönetecekseniz, şirketinizin çalışanı olmayacağımızı bilmeniz gerek. Siyaseti kölelikten kurtulmak için kullanıyoruz köleniz olmak için değil. Siyaseti, özgür olmanın yolu olarak görüyoruz. Çünkü temelde hepinizin özgür olmak isteyen insanlar olduğunu düşünüyoruz. Bu yüzden özgürlük ve adaletten değil de patronaj sisteminden bahsettiğiniz sürece seçimlerin sizin KKTC LTD şirketinin patronu olma tiyatrosunu meşrulaştırmaya yaradığını biliyoruz. Seçimler, özgürlük arayan insanlar için hiçbir anlam ifade etmiyor. O insanlardan biri olduğum için ben bu seçim oy vermeyeceğim.

 

UBP hükümete gelmesin, CTP gelsin. DP olmasın, TDP olsun, HP gelsin. Ayşe gitsin, Fatma gelsin. Nüfus çok, az, yasal vs…

Bu tartışmalara girmedim ve girmeyeceğim.

Boykotu karalayan egemenler ve onların sözcülüğünü yapanları görmezden gelenlere devam edeceğim. Günün sonunda, futbol sahasında, futbol oynanır. Takımların kim olduğu değil, yapılması gerekenle ilgileniyorum.

Eğer köklü bir dönüşüm istersek, çıkış yolu, takımların taraftar sayısı ile ilgili değil, oyunun kuralları, oynanışı ile ilgilidir.

Siyaset de böyledir.

Taraftara keyifli saatler geçiren amigolar olmak yerine, biraz da meseleyi konuşup buna yönelik tepkiler göstermediğimiz sürece, bu ülkede hiçbirşey iyileşmeyecektir.

Derdimiz, yaşadığımız yere sahip çıkmak, geleceği kurmaksa, geleceğe dönük konuşabilmek gereklidir. Aynı zamanda, siyasi partilerin yanlış bir dili konuştuğunu göstermek gerekir. Bu yüzden, işin özü bu seçim oy vermemek bugüne bakarken, yarını kurmanın yoludur.

“I do not fear them. I have nothing to lose” – Iran’s current “No Future”- movement challenges the Islamic Republic

January 4, 2018 by Beyond Europe

from Hamid Mohseni, Iranian-German activist and free-lance journalist based in Berlin, who is involved in the Iran solidarity networks since the 2009 uprising

It’s kicking off in Iran. Millions have taken to the streets in anti-government protests. Twenty people are reported dead, more than 500 arrested. But the dynamic is not declining. Unlike 2009, this period of protest has much more potential, because Iran’s no future-generation – like here in Europe – has nothing to lose and is willing to risk everything.

There is a saying in Iran: Every thirty-ish years, there is a regime change. In 1979, a people’s revolution chased away the Shah, this was before the Islamists around the first supreme leader Khomeini took over the state violently and transformed it into the Islamic Republic of Iran (IRI). Exactly 30 years later, in 2009, the country saw its last big uprising, orchestrated by and around the “reformist” current of Iranian real-politic – a movement which gave not only reformists, but all who wanted change a plausible reason for hope for improvement. But in the end, neither the controversial former conservative president Ahmadinedjad and the current supreme leader Ali Khamenei nor the principles of the Islamic Republic were touched. The movement was cracked down on. Is the cycle of regime change broken? Recent events in Iran give us hope that it’s only delayed. This movement – certainly in its beginning yet – has far more potential than in 2009 because in some crucial points it differs vastly from the 2009 movement. It is making the Islamic Republic’s elite shake and gives all of us who want to see the Islamic Republic gone and the people in Iran living in dignity and freedom a reason to hope.

First of all, very briefly: what is happening in Iran right now?

We are witnessing the transformation of social revolt into a more and more radical social movement all over the country. This is the biggest protest-wave the country has seen in eight years. The aim of it can be summed up as “Bread, Work, Dignity, Freedom” – and large numbers of the millions in the street are demanding nothing less than the end of the Islamic Republic.

The reasons why it’s kicking off are complex and have been growing for years, if not decades. In the news, it is said the spark was escalating egg prices and unemployment. Indeed, inflation in Iran is disastrous and combined with harsh austerity politics it outreaches the level of wages and incomes by far. In many cases these conditions push not only the unemployed, but even the masses of precarious employed Iranian to the edge of surviving. This is why Iran is at an unrest for a long time: the state funded organisation Isargara counts 1700 protest actions of social character only between March 2016 and today – be it wildcat strikes by factory workers or actions by pensioners and public sector employees – despite harsh prosecution against (radical) unionism and any kind of similar organisation. The end of the previous, hurtful UN-sanctions did not bring back economical recovery except for some corrupt Mullahs and their economic-military complex, the Revolutionary Guards.

But, the state’s economic struggle isn’t the only problem for people living in Iran. The increasing authoritarianism under Ahmadinedjad was not really stopped by the current president Rouhani, who is considered a reformist, and at least a moderate type of guy. The religiously motivated, authoritarian pressure on daily life, especially the harassment against women and alternative young people, the executions in the name of Allah etc. have not declined at all. The pollution especially in big cities is so bad that some blocks at some hours are only to sustain with masks. Last but not least many Iranians are furious that the expansionist IRI sponsors ideologically related struggles in the region, like in Palestine or in Lebanon with billions of dollars, but does not give a dime about the suffering people back home.  

But what is different now compared to 2009 – the year of the last uprising, which did not succeed?

The character of the protest and what it’s all about. 2009 was a genuinely political protest in the sense that it was concerned with “real-politic” in Iran. It was orchestrated around and within the “reformist” current, with the former candidates for presidency Mousavi – the same man by the way, who was premier minister under Khomeini during the mass executions against about 40.000 political opponents at the end of the 80s. But we will come back to the desperation of Iranian reformism later. However, the founding moment was the election within an autocratic and totalitarian regime, which implies, that the reformist wanted to take power within the Islamic Republic and – if possible – do things better slightly. More democracy, more individual freedom, less harassment, slight opening towards the West – all perfectly capable within the Islamic Republic, who have tolerated these changes already in 1997 during the last reformist candidate Khatami.

Now, the whole situation is turned around. The reformists are in power in the form of Rouhani, but the problems are the same, if not even worse. This is why the demands are more existential and the struggle, the conflict, is far more fundamental. It is not about choosing between different currents within the ruling class, but rather against the ruling class itself. In fact the first rally of this protest cycle on 28^th December 2017 in the city of Mashad was organised by conservative hardliner and Rouhani-rival Raisi, but quickly got out his hand. The people are fed up of being used as negotiation masses between the reformist and the conservative currents of the real-politic – none of which are able to solve fundamental, existential problems. This was expressed during one of the first demonstrations in the current protest cycle at Teheran University, when people shouted “Reformists or Conservatives – the game is over”.

The subject of the struggle. The 2009 uprising was led by the urban, educated middle class, which was not suffering existentially in a material sense, but ideologically. They were – and they had every right to be – fed up with the aggressive, authoritarian development under Ahmadinedjad, whose administration massively increased the attack on genuinely democratic and individual rights like freedom of the press, assembly, opinion and so on. He manoeuvred Iran into a more and more leading role in opposing the West (who, despite the sanctions did not get tired of doing massive business with the IRI, though) and mobilising the country and regional allies as the West’s counterpart – as kind of an “anti-imperialist block of the 21^stcentury”. While Ahmadinedjad was able to unify the lower classes by appealing to the national identity, the middle class wanted to take part in the globalisation of the western world – but not revolutionize Iran. They put their hopes into the reformist candidate of presidency to achieve that and chose the parliamentary way – which is a structural problem in a totalitarian state, where the supreme leader has to approve all the candidates.

Now, it is totally another social group revolting in the street: It is mostly the (young) lower classes, the (precarious) labourers, the non-represented, but also students (which are part of every big uprising in Iran) – and, very importantly, one of the strongest movement in Iran for decades, progressive women in the front. Most of this huge part of Iran’s population has literally no future. They have no perspective whatsoever. They want a life in dignity, they want something to eat, they want work in order to afford basic needs and they are frustrated about religious justifications of the misery. They have – unlike the 2009 urban class – nothing to lose and the mentality to risk everything. A young man from the south said during the riots: “I live with my parents and we can hardly afford meals for all of us. I cannot find work. What will they do? I do not fear them. I have nothing to lose”. It is astonishing, how this sentence in its exact wording could come from the (South-)European youth, who live in another world but suffer the same problem of being un-represented, dispensable in the eyes of the ruling class – and becoming ungovernable.

The determination and the symbolism of the protest. Consider this: Iran’s repressive apparatus is one of the most advanced and most ruthless in the region, if not in the world. There is not only police, but the better organised, more important and more brutal Revolutionary Guard and their unofficial, paramilitary arm the “Bassidj” militia, founded by Khomeini himself. This is why it takes a huge amount of courage to go out and demonstrate even peacefully at all. There is practically no right to do so, especially if it turns against the government. In this context, it is even more impressive what the people shout during these illegal assemblies. There are basically no religious slogans being heard. Unlike 2009 where one of the most central slogans was “Allahu Akbar” (God is great) in order to symbolize a loyalty to the principles of the Islamic Republic. You cannot find this slogan here. On the contrary, the people shout in masses and in all cities “Down with Rouhani”, “Down with the Dictator”, “Mullahs go home” even “Down with Khamenei” and finally “Down with the Islamic Republic” – these slogans can be prosecuted as “mohareb” (sin against God) and punished with the death penalty. According to the revolution in 1979 as well as Western republican revolutions they also demand “Independence, Freedom – an Iranian Republic” and reject the IRI by that as well.

The people seem to keep radicalizing every day. They do not let themselves be chased away by police, in many cases they overwhelm the riot units and set their cars and police stations on fire. In the videos, you can see that during militant actions, the people care for each other and stop others if they about to harm innocent people. There is a big sensitivity in the riots. The targets of direct actions are also very clear: people turn against police buildings and cars, banks, local administration buildings and especially against property of the hated Revolutionary Guard. Furthermore, they tear down huge posters of the Supreme Leader and burn the flag of the Islamic Republic. One of the most important signals for secular and progressive protest is the presence and the active involvement of women, many protesting without the Hijab. A young, protesting woman turning her Hijab to a flag became the symbol of this movement.

 

The geography of the protest. Unlike 2009, the actors of the current uprising are not limited on the relatively small urban middle class in three or four cities, but distributed all over the country. Iranian society is very heterogeneous– 60% is made up by the Persian majority, which in many cases aggressively claim the hegemony of the nationality “Iranian”, and there are several smaller and larger ethnic, cultural, religious minorities, like Azeris, Kurds, Lurs, Baha’i and so on. 2009 had a very crucial problem – it basically did not reach any of those minorities, because it never convinced those minorities why they would have a better fate with a reformist president. No wonder, since this topic was not a considerable part of their programme.

This year the social protest does not prefer any of those identities, but is very existential and includes all. While 2009 was massively orchestrated around Tehran and Isfahan, this year’s cycle started in the North-West (close to Iranian Kurdistan) and then was swept to Teheran and around 70(!) more cities in every parts of the country, including the minorities’ regions like Khuzestan, Kermanshah and Kurdistan. This is a nationwide movement of millions and it includes a very large part of society, 2009 did not.

The organisation of the movement. Naturally, the 2009 movement was a classical political movement with a narrow window of demands and – most importantly – with leaders. Mousavi and his wife Zahra Rahnaward and the co-candidate of the reformists, Karroubi, did not only consider themselves as leaders, but they were called as leaders by the movement. They and their team were responsible for the programme and choreography of the movement – and they also decided what was important enough to ask for, i.e. they warned of too much radicalization – naturally. But in a totalitarian state, this top-down-organisation is not a mistake for ideological but for pragmatic reasons. When the state was ready, they imprisoned these leaders and the dynamic was harmed heavily. Easy game. The protests did not stop but in many ways the movement became headless.

This year’s protest movement is much more decentralised and self-organised. People in the different cities coordinate with Internet tools and by taking recordings they see what is going everywhere, so they can refer to each other. They usually come together after work or school, when it gets dark, start chatting about politics and life, then they shout slogans and eventually take direct action – and disperse. Come and go, Hit and Run. Sure, there are attacks from security forces, arrests, people die. But nonetheless the protesters keep coming and coming, with a certain calmness. This has a spontaneity which a genuinely political movement like 2009 usually does neither know nor tolerate. There is nothing to behead for the authorities (yet?), this makes it so painful to stop. 

Reactions within the state apparatus and perspectives. The state apparatus is kept hesitating a long time, now it is slowly getting into position. After the protests got so big that they could not ignore them anymore, they started their usual blaming game: terrorists, agent provocateurs, foreigners and other enemies are responsible for the revolt. It is said, though, some police officers and soldiers have resigned already and deny duty. There are efforts to high jack the protest from conservative forces, for example, yelling “Allahu Akbar” through the microphones, but those efforts were shut down everywhere in Iran. Recent “demonstrations of power” where loyalists of the regime should come out in “masses” were beyond expectation. But the state has not mobilised all of its repressive apparatus yet. The revolutionary guard and the Bassidj militia are keeping clear for now. They want to see how it turns out. The reformists, given their misery and their pointless hope of transforming a totalitarian regime effectively by just installing a different president, will probably turn out as the accomplice of the conservatives in the end and form a “unity of reason” government, i.e. a unity of those who want to uphold the Islamic Republic and confront the movement.

However, here is one crucial difference to 2009: a lot must happen that the people become scared and stay home. They are hungry, unemployed or employed but feel miserable just like the unemployed, fed up with the Islamic regime and have no future. Even if the death toll is relatively much higher than 2009 (2009: 60-70 killed after 6 months, now more than 20 after 7 days), they keep staying on the street. This is what makes them dangerous, unpredictable and this is why it is probably not possible for political reasons to crack down the movement militarily. The state has men and material for sure, but they too surely fear a further escalation, that will expose further the regime to the outer world.

The misery of Iranian Reformism. Not only are the reformists not really part of this movement – many parts consider it as hostile. First, because the man in power is considered in their political current: When he got elected, reformists – imagine how desperate they are – celebrated that as a victory. But Rouhani’s era was more than disastrous and one more signal that reformism within the Islamic Republic is not an option.

Facing the protests now, I would even go further and say that the reformist promises and its real outcomes are a big part of why people got angry and take to the streets now. Despite his election campaign, Rouhani’s cabinet was heavily conservative – neither women nor representatives of a minority were part of it. This cabinet was a love letter to the supreme leader. During his campaign he heavily agitated against the Revolutionary guards, now he seems not to get enough of cuddling up to them and he refers to a “brotherhood” with them. Furthermore it was leaked that billions of the government’s budget was invested in religious projects outside and inside the country – but none of those really helped people in social need in Iran. But at least he lowered the numbers of executions? No, he did not. No wonder that two months ago a campaign under the name “I regret it” went viral, where people and celebrities (like former football star Ali Karimi) expressed their disappointment in the reformist current.

Reformism, its false promises and their historically consistent, fatal cooperation with conservatives and hardliners and selling that as “the lesser evil” are a reason for the misery in Iran and why it is kicking off everywhere now. They deserve nothing less.

What can we do here?

Organise solidarity. We know from many sources within Iran that it is vital for them that their struggle receives global attention. Not only do they feel empowered for the rightfulness of their struggle, but it has a political-strategic value: a tweet by USA’s Ahmadinedjad, Donald Trump, warning the Islamic Republic to maintain standards of human rights (what an irony), makes the Islamic Republic think twice about shooting down protesters. On the other hand, the Islamic regime is highly professionalised in transforming comments like these into their fake news, where they make foreigners responsible for the protest – an important ideological twist. Nonetheless we should not be silenced by that, never and from no regime to practice solidarity to a struggle we support. If there are solidarity actions in the whole of Europe or the whole world, it can and will make the Islamic Republic shake at least a little bit more – even if they claim the opposite.

Furthermore in a globalised world like ours, the struggle in Iran has to do with us. Have a look how, despite the sanctions, European capital makes large profits through trade with the Islamic Republic. According to the campaign “Antifa Teheran” from 2009/2010 you will be surprised how many companies in Europe not only have innocent trade and commerce links, but, for example many German and British companies, also deliver intelligence and material for the Islamic Republic security regime, for example riot gear and less than lethal crowd dispersal weaponry. In what way so ever: there are many ways to show solidarity. Make use of it and do not hesitate to clarify, what you are in solidarity with, i.e. social justice, secularism, freedom and peace – and with what not. The community of exiled Iranians is highly political and includes all sorts of political currents, partly extremely well organised: Several leftist currents, Mudjaheddin, nationalists, neoliberals, monarchists.

Let’s not forget: Iran’s regional and geopolitical importance is obvious by now. And the people of Iran – like everywhere – deserve a much better fate than the super-authoritarian, clerical IRI. But the 2009 movement in Iran was the start of the global protest wave, which swept over Arab countries, the USA and the movement of squares in Europe – even if not everywhere the rebellion succeeded or if there was no direct action connection with Iran. Now, after the terrible global rise of the right wing and authoritarian formations, it must be our time again. And Iran can be the beginning – again.

Ανοιχτή επιστολή για τις αυθαίρετες και παράνομες επεμβάσεις στην ακτογραμμή της επαρχίας Αμμοχώστου από τον Δήμο Παραλιμνίου

Πρωτοβουλία για την Διάσωση των Φυσικών Ακτών

Παρασκευή, 19 Ιανουαρίου 2018

Επείγον – Με ηλεκτρονικό ταχυδρομείο

Προς:

• Έπαρχο Αμμοχώστου, κ. Γιώργο Χρυσαφίνη, famagusta.dao@famda.moi.gov.cy

 

Αξιότιμε κ. Χρυσαφίνη,

Θέμα: Ανοιχτή επιστολή για τις αυθαίρετες και παράνομες επεμβάσεις στην ακτογραμμή της επαρχίας Αμμοχώστου από τον Δήμο Παραλιμνίου

Έχουν περάσει τέσσερα χρόνια από την πρώτη καταγγελία που υποβάλαμε προς την Επαρχιακή Διοίκηση Αμμοχώστου, η οποία αφορούσε αυθαίρετη και παράνομη επέμβαση εντός της Ζώνης Προστασίας της Παραλίας στην επικράτεια του Δήμου Παραλιμνίου.

Λυπούμαστε να παρατηρήσουμε ότι η Επαρχιακή Διοίκηση Αμμοχώστου, η οποία υπάγεται στο Υπουργείο Εσωτερικών και αποτελεί την καθ’ ύλην αρμόδια αρχή για την προστασία και διαχείριση των παραλιών της επαρχίας, ανέχεται διαχρονικά την απαράδεκτη κατάσταση που επικρατεί στην περιοχή και κυριολεκτικά κάνει τα στραβά μάτια μπροστά στις αυθαίρετες και παράνομες επεμβάσεις του Δήμου Παραλιμνίου.

Η κατάσταση έχει φτάσει πλέον στο απροχώρητο και γι’ αυτό σας καλούμε δημόσια να αναλάβετε τις ευθύνες σας για τη σημαντική υποβάθμιση, αλλοίωση και καταστροφή της παράκτιας ζώνης, η οποία αφήνει φτωχότερο τόσο το περιβάλλον όσο και την κοινωνία του Παραλιμνίου, της Αμμοχώστου και ολόκληρης της Κύπρου.

Οι αυθαίρετες και παράνομες επεμβάσεις εντός της Ζώνης Προστασίας Παραλίας παρατηρούνται πλέον κατά μήκος ολόκληρης της ακτογραμμής στον Δήμο Παραλιμνίου. Από τα νότια προς τα βόρεια, οι καταστροφικές επεμβάσεις ξεκινούν από την περιοχή Νησιά, αμέσως μετά το Κάβο Γκρέκο, και φτάνουν μέχρι τις παραλίες Da Costa, Fig Tree Bay, Crystal Springs, Σειρήνα και την περιοχή του Κάππαρη (τοποθεσίες Λούμα, Γλυτζιά Νερά και Αρμυροπήγαδο).

Την Παρασκευή, 12 Ιανουαρίου, μέλη της Πρωτοβουλίας για την Διάσωση των Φυσικών Ακτών βρέθηκαν στην περιοχή του Κάππαρη στο Δήμο Παραλιμνίου. Στην παραλία των Σκύλων, η οποία έχει δημιουργηθεί από προηγούμενες παράνομες παρεμβάσεις, έχει κατασκευαστεί ένας χωμάτινος δρόμος, ο οποίος συνδέει το βόρειο μέρος της παραλίας με την παραλία των Προσκόπων. Όπως φαίνεται στις φωτογραφίες 1 και 2, η επέμβαση στην εκβολή δημόσιου ποταμού και η «κατασκευή» δρόμου και οχετού απορροής αποτελεί κίνδυνο για την ασφάλεια των διερχομένων και των επισκεπτών της περιοχής του Κάππαρη. Οι φωτογραφίες 3, 4 και 5 είναι ενδεικτικές της περιβαλλοντικής ζημιάς που έχει προκληθεί, καθώς και της αλαζονείας που επιδεικνύει ο Δήμος Παραλιμνίου και της ασυδοσίας που επικρατεί στην επαρχία Αμμοχώστου. Ένας εκσκαφέας με υδραυλικό σφυρί σπάζει βράχια και ένας άλλος εκσκαφέας απομακρύνει μπάζα εντός της Ζώνης Προστασίας της Παραλίας στην τοποθεσία Γλυτζιά Νερά.

Η ακτογραμμή αποτελεί μέρος των οικολογικών μας κοινών και της φυσικής μας κληρονομιάς. Εικόνες με εκσκαφείς και φορτηγά που προβαίνουν σε παράνομους εκβραχισμούς ακτών και στην αυθαίρετη διαμόρφωση παραλιών, με στόχο την παροχή οργανωμένων υπηρεσιών λουομένων, έχουν καταστεί πλέον σύμβολα της ανεπαρκούς προστασίας και διαχείρισης των παραλιών στον Δήμο Παραλιμνίου ειδικότερα και της ακτογραμμής στην επαρχία Αμμοχώστου γενικότερα.

Έχουμε τονίσει επανειλημμένα ότι οι αυθαίρετες και παράνομες επεμβάσεις εντός της Ζώνης Προστασίας Παραλίας πρέπει να αντιμετωπίζονται με την ανάλογη αυστηρότητα, αλλιώς το πρόβλημα θα συνεχίσει να επιδεινώνεται.

Οι παράνομες ενέργειες στις οποίες προβαίνει ο Δήμος Παραλιμνίου και η συστηματική ανοχή που επιδεικνύει η Επαρχιακή Διοίκηση Αμμοχώστου του Υπουργείου Εσωτερικών προσβάλλουν το δημόσιο αίσθημα περί δικαίου και κλονίζουν το κύρος και την αξιοπιστία των καθ’ ύλην αρμόδιων αρχών.

Σε καμία από τις αυθαίρετες, παράτυπες και παράνομες επεμβάσεις που διενεργήθηκαν εντός της Ζώνης Προστασίας Παραλίας και καταγγέλθηκαν από διάφορα ενδιαφερόμενα μέρη (συναρμόδιες αρχές, περιβαλλοντικές οργανώσεις ή/και απλούς πολίτες) δεν λήφθηκαν αυστηρά μέτρα και δεν επιβλήθηκαν αποτρεπτικές ποινές κατά του Δήμου Παραλιμνίου από την Επαρχιακή Διοίκηση Αμμοχώστου και το Υπουργείο Εσωτερικών.

Οι επεμβάσεις αυτές συμβάλλουν στην καταστροφή του παράκτιου περιβάλλοντος και τοπίου, καθώς επιφέρουν αλλοίωση στην αισθητική του χώρου και τη γεωμορφολογία της περιοχής, υποβάθμιση της ποιότητας της ακτής, διάβρωση του εδάφους και απώλεια παράκτιων τύπων φυσικών οικοτόπων και ενδιαιτημάτων σημαντικών ειδών πανίδας και χλωρίδας.

Η Επαρχιακή Διοίκηση Αμμοχώστου και το Υπουργείο Εσωτερικών πρέπει να προβούν άμεσα σε όλες τις νενομισμένες διαδικασίες για την εφαρμογή του περί Προστασίας της Παραλίας Νόμου (ΚΕΦ.59). Θεωρούμε ότι πρέπει να διεξαχθεί άμεση καταγραφή και συνολική αξιολόγηση όλων των αυθαίρετων και παράνομων επεμβάσεων που έχουν πραγματοποιηθεί την τελευταία πενταετία κατά μήκος της ακτογραμμής του Δήμου Παραλιμνίου, να εκπονηθεί εξειδικευμένη ακτομηχανική μελέτη και ολοκληρωμένη μελέτη εκτίμησης επιπτώσεων στο περιβάλλον, οι οποίες να εξετάζουν τόσο τις άμεσες όσο και τις αθροιστικές / συσσωρευτικές επιπτώσεις των αυθαίρετων και παράνομων επεμβάσεων εντός της Ζώνης Προστασίας Παραλίας, έτσι ώστε να θεσπιστούν μέτρα αποκατάστασης της περιβαλλοντικής ζημιάς και να διασφαλιστεί η περιβαλλοντική συμμόρφωση του Δήμου Παραλιμνίου.

Με εκτίμηση,

Εκ μέρους της Πρωτοβουλίας για τη Διάσωση των Φυσικών Ακτών,

Κλείτος Παπαστυλιανού BA in Political Science and History MSc in Environmental Social Science

Δρ. Μαρία Χατζημιχαήλ PhD in Marine Governance and Fisheries Policy Research Fellow in Environmental Politics

 

 

Κοινοποίηση:

• Υπουργό Εσωτερικών, κ. Κωνσταντίνο Πετρίδη, minister@moi.gov.cy
• Πρόεδρο Κοινοβουλευτικής Επιτροπής Εσωτερικών, κα Ελένη Μαύρου, emavrou@parliament.cy
• Πρόεδρο Κοινοβουλευτικής Επιτροπής Περιβάλλοντος, κ. Αδάμο Αδάμου, aadamou@parliament.cy
• Γενικό Εισαγγελέα της Δημοκρατίας, κ. Πέτρο Κληρίδη, att.gen@law.gov.cy
• Γενικό Ελεγκτή της Δημοκρατίας, Δρ. Οδυσσέα Μιχαηλίδη, cao@audit.gov.cy
• Επίτροπο Διοικήσεως και Ανθρωπίνων Δικαιωμάτων, κα Μαρία Λοττίδη, ombudsman@ombudsman.gov.cy
• Επίτροπο Περιβάλλοντος, κα Ιωάννα Παναγιώτου, ipanayiotou@ec.gov.cy
• Διευθυντή Τμήματος Περιβάλλοντος, κ. Κώστα Χατζηπαναγιώτου, director@environment.moa.gov.cy
• Διευθύντρια Τμήματος Αλιείας και Θαλάσσιων Ερευνών, κα Μαρίνα Αργυρού, director@dfmr.moa.gov.cy
• Διευθυντή Τμήματος Αναπτύξεως Υδάτων, κ. Ανδρέα Μανώλη, director@wdd.moa.gov.cy
• Διευθύντρια Τμήματος Δημοσίων Έργων, κα Χρυστάλλα Μαλλούππα, director@pwd.mcw.gov.cy
• Διευθύντρια Τμήματος Πολεοδομίας και Οικήσεως, κα Αθηνά Αριστοτέλους – Κληρίδου, director@tph.moi.gov.cy
• Πρόεδρο Επιστημονικού και Τεχνικού Επιμελητηρίου Κύπρου, κ. Στέλιο Αχνιώτη, cyprus@etek.org.cy

Η Πρωτοβουλία για τη Διάσωση των Φυσικών Ακτών είναι ένα άτυπο δίκτυο πολιτών από διάφορες πόλεις και επαρχίες, το οποίο απαιτεί: ·         Την προστασία των δημόσιων παραλιών, των φυσικών ακτών και των θαλασσών μας · ·         Τη διασφάλιση της ανοικτής, ελεύθερης και δημόσιας πρόσβασης στις ακτές και τις παραλίες μας · ·         Την πλήρη και αποτελεσματική εφαρμογή της εθνικής νομοθεσίας, των κοινοτικών οδηγιών και των διεθνών συμβάσεων, καθώς επίσης την εφαρμογή ανοικτών, δημοκρατικών και διαφανών διαδικασιών δημόσιας παρουσίασης, ακρόασης και διαβούλευσης για περιβαλλοντικά θέματα. Αγωνιζόμαστε για τη διασφάλιση και προάσπιση των θεμελιωδών και αναφαίρετων περιβαλλοντικών και κοινωνικών μας δικαιωμάτων (όπως η προστασία του φυσικού περιβάλλοντος, η διασφάλιση ενός υψηλού επιπέδου ποιότητας ζωής, η πρόσβαση σε περιβαλλοντική πληροφόρηση, η συμμετοχή στη διαδικασία λήψης αποφάσεων και η προσφυγή στη δικαιοσύνη για περιβαλλοντικά θέματα), τη διατήρηση της φύσης, της βιοποικιλότητας, των δασών και του τοπίου, καθώς και τη διαφύλαξη του δημοσίου συμφέροντος, των φυσικών πόρων και των κοινών αγαθών.   Στοιχεία επικοινωνίας: Πρωτοβουλία για τη Διάσωση των Φυσικών Ακτών |  Initiative for the Protection of the Natural Coastline Website: http://reclaimthesea.org/ | Email: reclaimthesea@gmail.com | Facebook: https://el–gr.facebook.com/coastlinecy/

Reproductive justice, the right to abortion, and the case of south Cyprus 

by Sispirosi Atakton
December 2017

Over the long view of history, the reproductive rights debate has given rise to a vast number of conflicts as a result of an ever-expanding state, in which edicts of the church are often enshrined in law, and a gradual process of full politicization of the womb as a public space subject to legal and social regulation. These conflicts occurred both in the 19th and 20th centuries when many countries criminalized and recriminalized abortions (there were some exceptions as the fascist regimes in Germany and Austria adapted abortion restriction to eugenics and pro-natalist goals, while in Catalonia, Spain, abortion laws were briefly liberalized in the 1930s, but any efforts to implement reforms were squashed by the victory of the fascist Franco regime), and again in the late 20th century when many countries reformed and liberalized their abortion laws, after a heightened debate on the issue, leading to legislative change and partial decriminalization (1960s-1980s).

It is essential that every person has control over their body, and the ability to make informed decisions regarding their sexual and reproductive health, such as for example if and how many children one will have. Every woman, or person of any gender which might get pregnant (such as trans men, non-binary, agender people, etc.), must have the access and right to opt for abortion services, regardless of their reasons for wanting to terminate the pregnancy. This right to control our bodies is indispensable in the struggles for liberation and social justice, as nobody should be forcefully assigned the role of a child-bearing reproductive machine.

In our discussion it is crucial to think of abortion as just one of the issues of reproductive justice, which expands the pro-choice agenda to incorporate a wider array of economic, social and political issues affecting women’s power to decide about their bodily autonomy, reproduction and well-being. Legal abortions are meaningless if those who want them can’t afford them, and this framework allows to see the inequalities in women’s control over reproduction. Besides, middle and upper class women, with privileged access to relevant information, have always had access to abortion, by making use of the loopholes in the existing law, or by travelling to countries where abortion was/is legal. Working class women, on the other hand, not trained to argue with the authorities and/or could not pay for a doctor’s (legal or illegal) help, were the ones who have always been at risk. Thus, we can conceptualize a struggle not only for the right to choose, but for the social, political and economic conditions necessary to exercise that right. It entails a movement oriented approach, in addition to demands for safeguarding reproductive rights and accessible reproductive health services.

The acknowledgement of reproductive work as unpaid labor in the 60s made it possible to redefine the domestic or private sphere as an anti-capitalist site of struggle. In this sense, strict restrictions on abortion can be interpreted as an attempt to control the labor-supply, and deviations from the form of the procreative, heteronormative family and gender roles as resistance to this mechanism [1]. Radical and liberal feminists often disagreed about the demands the women’s movement should have, with the former arguing amongst others for free abortion on demand, free child-care and equal pay, while the latter were mainly concerned with the legal right to abortion and equal employment opportunities. The radical feminist agenda included practices such as consciousness raising and setting up self-help clinics and women’s shelters; discourses centered on liberation and sexual difference (rather than equality); and a political stance to which abortion and, more generally, the reclaiming of the sexed body, was central. Those were considered moments of deep feminist challenge to the dominant patriarchal culture and the state. Those creating policy and articulating hegemonic cultural norms responded (to a greater or lesser extent) to feminist threats to the status quo, and engaged in processes of negotiation and transformation [2].

It seems that with the demise of the radical feminist movements of the 70s which expressed an unapologetic stance for abortions, and the co-optation of women in legal debates over the matter, a shift occurred towards a defensive and prevention based stance. The focus has shifted from reproductive autonomy and self-determination to issues of sex education and contraception methods, with abortion framed as an avoidable last resort. In this way, regardless of how useful and necessary sex education and the availability of contraceptives might be, abortion is kept secret, shameful and regrettable, and the liberating potential of choice is surrounded by feelings of shame and guilt. It seems that the new, gendered language that was developed along the radical feminist movement with which to speak of one’s body, one’s sexuality, one’s pain and alienation faded away.  Despite the efforts of radical feminist movements to center the debate on abortions around women’s self-determination, linking thus abortion to men’s assumed responsibility for controlling and monitoring women’s sexuality and reproduction, in most countries the initial debate is framed around the unborn fetus, doctors’ rights, or the state’s response to rising illegal abortions. It is important to bring back the unapologetic demand for abortions and the repeal (what has been called the decriminalization of abortion without limitation), not reform, of abortion laws into current struggles, as modernization of abortion laws does no justice to women, who are still denied agency.

It seems that a woman’s desire to end a pregnancy is not enough in itself, for it has to be approved first by a “respectable” authority figure, be it her husband, her father, her family, her community, her nation. Denying women the right to end a pregnancy is like denying them the right to own their bodies, which, in turn, results in women’s infantilization, which is all about rendering them incapable of making an independent decision. Historically, and ontologically, women and the feminine were strictly associated with the passion of the body; a body which was simply considered, by the Cartesian/humanist philosophical canon, to be inert and passive, silent and inferior, part of an unchangeable nature. On the contrary, the so-called superiority of the logos of the mind was associated with men and the masculine. Consciousness, rationality, intelligence, selfhood and subjecthood were synonyms of the masculine, and men were identified with the thinking subject and, by extension, with the universal [3]. There was no place for women’s voices to be heard, while their right to (own) a self was forbidden. They were supposed to live for others and their bodies were considered property of the autonomous (male) subject, as he was the one making all the decisions –nationally, institutionally, domestically– on her behalf. In a word, women were denied their existential freedom [4]; they were denied their status as thinking subjects, who could make decisions for their own bodies and choose between having a baby or not. This discourse is extremely important to the extent that it somehow sets the frame to understand better the arguments, claims, and struggles of the pro-abortion/pro-choice movement.

In other words, despite the fact that abortions are performed on women’s bodies, policymakers have often framed it in other terms –doctors’ rights, fetal rights, law enforcement, morality, religion, progressivism, family planning, eugenics– rather than discussing women’s choice, health, autonomy, agency, or sexuality. The dominant framework of the issue when abortion first arrived on the public agenda, was either the status of the unborn fetus (e.g. Great Britain, the Netherlands, Spain, Belgium), or doctors’ rights (e.g. France, Canada, USA), or state’s integrity in the face of rising rates of illegal abortions (e.g. Germany, Italy) [5]. The debate about how abortion policy could strengthen women’s autonomy was completely absent. Once again, women were not the talking subject, but rather a silent participant in a malestream debate, whose decisions were to determine the future of her own body. The political semiotics of representation play a crucial role here as, in this case, the object of representation (the fetus), permanently speechless, becomes the representative’s (patriarchal institutions) wet dreams because it can be easily naturalized and disengaged from the discursive realm. Women who want abortion simply vanish or become the enemy because they have opposing “interests”. The only actor left whose voice can be heard is the one who represents and is traditionally related to the hegemonic masculinity mostly articulated in juridical and medical discourses [6]. For this reason, concepts such as self-determination and agency are really important for the abortion debate because they put women, as subjects who are not afraid to speak their truth, back at the center of the way we talk about abortion.

However, relying solely on politics of ‘choice’ and ‘rights’ obscures the presence of other factors affecting the person’s choice over an abortion, such as access to subsidized care and job security [7]. Framing abortion and parenthood as an exclusively private issue suffers from an insensitivity to the way the private/public dichotomy fails communities whose social, political and economic realities are incompatible with this distinction. For example, migrant women’s paid labor is often domestic labor, and child-rearing is often intertwined with interpersonal relations and bonds of solidarity and cooperation for the overall well-being of the community, even in individualistic societies. When systemic inequalities result in the material conditions which determine the necessity of an abortion, defending only the right to choose is inadequate. Such a narrow-focused approach leaves unchallenged the fact that even if accessible abortions permit greater women’s access into the workforce, thus challenging the subordination of women in the private sphere, the burden of unpaid reproductive and domestic work remains disproportionately on them. In cases where abortion was legalized, legalization alone proved useless in claiming the resources women need to maintain control over their bodies and lives. While mainstream feminist movements made sure that women could have access to male-dominated workplaces, they abandoned reproductive work and the domestic sphere as a site of struggle. Terms like autonomy, empowerment and choice, historically employed by the feminist movements to raise consciousness, have been deployed by media and the state to promote the ideal of an active, individually responsible working and consuming female citizen. This promoted ideal does not suffice to challenge the exploitative relations of the capitalist mode of production and reproduction, and has accelerated the undoing of the radical women’s movements.

Additionally, focusing only on modernizing abortion laws, neglects the way age, class and ability influence one’s reproductive health priorities, and how under neoliberal restructuring of economies, the cost of the relevant reproductive health services is falling on the individuals. At the same time, women are more visible to governmental agencies, through the required medical intervention in abortions, giving birth, postnatal care, menopausal issues, breast-cancer checks, etc [8]. Reproductive capacity is monitored and medically controlled throughout a woman’s life. Even in countries where abortions are more readily accessible, women who want to undergo sterilization, the most permanent of contraceptive methods, are often forced to lie about their reasons and denied the agency in taking decisions affecting their bodies. Whereas the right to voluntary motherhood has become more accepted, the denial of a woman to procreate is often dismissed as an immature and immoral choice.

Upon impregnation, the person is stripped off their bodily autonomy, and anyone who wants to have an abortion must face the consequences of confronting not only medical authorities and their policies, but also the defenders of the procreative role assigned to women by capitalism and the nation-state. The latter insist on the patriotic mobilization of mothers against imagined demographic threats, either from minorities within the Republic of Cyprus, or by “Turkish settlers” in the north [9]. Lower birth rate, a phenomenon frequently associated with accessible abortions, is wrapped in nationalistic rhetoric and presented as a problem by government officials. The role of motherhood has been elevated over the past century to mother-of-the-nation, a heroic figure responsible for protecting traditional morals and producing the future defenders of the country’s national interests, as well as the younger sector of the workforce that would strive for the country’s economic recovery and growth. Future dehellenization and lack of local labor supply are expressed as the second most important problem after the Cypriot issue by conservatives and the right-wing, or even as an integral aspect of it [10]. This is not to say that everyone against abortions falls in these categories. As long as the debate over when human personhood begins remains open, some of the opposition might also be rooted in liberal defense of individual liberties. What we can conclude from this however, is that it would be a contradiction for the state to offer free accessible abortions. Defending abortions and reproductive justice requires to overcome the pervasive nationalistic rhetoric and militarist attitudes in society.
In October 2017, there was an arrest and 5-day detention of a woman and her doctor for an abortion, which is a criminal offence according to current laws, after a complaint filed by her partner, who was unaware of the event [11].

The Criminal Code of Cyprus (sections 167-169 and 169A), as amended in 1986 (Law No. 186), permits abortion if two medical practitioners are of the opinion that continuance of the pregnancy would endanger the life of the pregnant woman, or that physical, mental or psychological injury would be suffered by her or by any existing child she may have, greater than if the pregnancy were terminated, or that there is a substantial risk that if the child were born it would suffer from such serious physical or psychological abnormalities causing severe disabilities.  The Criminal Code also permits abortion following certification by the competent police authority, confirmed by medical certification whenever possible, that the pregnancy resulted from rape and under circumstances in which the pregnancy, if not terminated would seriously jeopardize the social status of the woman or of her family.  Although the Code does not specifically address socio-economic grounds other than as a factor in the criminal indication for abortion, in practice, “mental and psychological injury” is generally interpreted as including socio-economic grounds.  The Code was first liberalized in 1974, when provisions permitting abortions only on therapeutic grounds were replaced. Prior to the liberalization of abortion laws in Cyprus, laws were not strictly enforced.  Abortion could be obtained in private clinics. Most abortion clients were married women with multiple births or young unmarried women.

Any person performing an unlawful abortion is liable to seven years’ imprisonment.  A woman inducing her own abortion is liable to the same punishment.  Any person unlawfully supplying or procuring anything knowing that it is unlawfully intended to be used to procure an abortion is subject to three years in prison.  An abortion must be performed by a registered medical practitioner.  Although not specified by law, in practice abortion is performed within 28 weeks of gestation[12a,12b].

In February 2015, a new bill for decriminalization of abortions was proposed by four big political parties, but was never discussed in parliament and no voting was carried out, due to also direct and indirect influence of the church in order for this new bill not to proceed [13]. Just last year, in September 2016, the Archbishopric, the National Committee of Bioethics and the Pancyprian Medical Association organized the scientific convention “Abortions: medical, social, legal, spiritual dimensions” [14]. During the convention, positions against abortion under any justification were express and signed for by the three institutions in a memorandum of understanding. This alliance does not surprise us. The liberating potential of someone prioritizing themselves, usually against the patriarchal roles assigned to them, poses a threat towards the state, church and medical/scientific authorities. We perceive the decision for abortion as a matter of self-determination of our bodies, and consider unacceptable the criminalization and arrest of those pregnant and seeking abortion, as well as the doctors who help terminate a pregnancy safely.

As emerges from the analysis above, the capitalist-patriarchal state is deeply invested in control over reproduction, but when faced with acute social pressure key political and social actors are compelled to revise their positions. This includes elements of engagement with feminist arguments, but mostly a modification of those arguments, by refocusing the debate on a discourse of (sex-less) individual rights. Creating a legal consensus on abortion is seen across the political spectrum as key to the stabilization of socio-political life. More fundamentally, by controlling reproduction through an articulation of the conditions in which abortion is allowed, the state attempts not only to control population, but also to lay down the boundaries of acceptable values and behaviors [15]. Thus, it is important that abortion should be accessible to all women without discrimination, and each person seeking abortion to have access in safe abortion services around the world. On the contrary, abortion is either prohibited or criminalized or extremely limited (for example Ireland and Poland). When abortion is criminalized, it means that the person seeking abortion is denied fundamental rights over their bodies, health, self-determination, dignity and to have access to rights without discrimination. It means that the person will either seek abortion methods that would endanger their life and/or health and that they would try to seek for abortion in other countries. The right to abortion is just one part of the struggles for safe access to sexual and reproductive health care for everyone, which should entail access to counseling and support before and after the abortion if necessary. Lack of access to abortion services is an attack on the freedom to self-determination, and paves the way towards dangerous methods of terminating the pregnancy. Let’s not forget that the existing ‘way out’ through private doctors and clinics comes with a financial burden which prevents those with low income, migrants, teenagers and others from having an abortion. As long as the state monopolizes authority and uses it to define which medical and surgical procedures are accessible, it is necessary to proceed immediately into a discussion and amendment of the legislation, and decriminalize abortions without requirements for justification and medical opinions. It should ensure that everyone, regardless of gender and gender identity, will have access to these services when they need them.

The pro-choice, feminist movements and those in the radical left struggling for reproductive justice should not rest on their laurels, even in countries which witnessed progress on reproductive rights or positive abortion law reforms. As the anti-abortion camp is pushing for retrogression in abortion laws, it is becoming increasingly evident that abortion law reforms are insufficient to safeguard women’s increasing access to abortion. For example, Armenia, FYROM, Georgia, Russia and Slovakia have recently reintroduced preconditions for accessing abortions. Even in countries with legal abortions, long waiting periods and biased counseling services act as barriers to accessing an abortion safely. Legislative proposals for near-total bans or retrogression to stricter abortion laws also took place in Latvia, Lithuania, Spain, Romania, and Poland; however, they were met with public outcry and protests and never realized. Andorra, Malta, Liechtenstein, Ireland, Monaco and San Marino currently have very restrictive abortion laws, with the former two prohibiting all abortions. As in Cyprus, most of these countries’ criminal codes include sanctions for women who undergo unauthorized abortions and those who assist them to do so [16]. Amidst the rise of authoritarian populism and the resurgence of traditionalist values in public discourse, it is crucial that we do not remain silent in front of the attacks on reproductive rights and our sexualities. In our struggles for social justice, deciding for one’s own body is an inalienable right, without the intervention of any authority threatening one’s health, life or freedom. Our bodies are ours, and not reproductive machines of any system.

 

References and further reading

[1] Silvia Federici, “The reproduction of labour-power in the global economy, Marxist theory and the unfinished feminist revolution”
Silvia Federici, “The reproduction of labour-power in the global economy, Marxist theory and the unfinished feminist revolution”

[2] McBride Stetson, Dorothy (2003) Conclusion: Comparative abortion politics and the case for state feminism.
https://www3.nd.edu/~ggoertz/sgair/McBride%20Stetson2002chp13.pdf

[3] Braidotti, Rosi (2002) Metamorphoses: towards a materialist theory of becoming (Cambridge: Polity Press); Grosz, Elizabeth (1994) Volatile bodies: toward a corporeal feminism (Sydney: Allen and Unwin).

[4] Τούτος εν ένας όρος που εδιατυπώθηκεν πρώτα που την Katha Pollitt. Για περαιτέρω συζήτηση γυρώ που την έκτρωση σαν ένα ηθικό δικαίωμα, δες Pollitt, Katha (2014) Pro: Reclaiming abortion rights (New York: Picador).

[5] McBride Stetson, Dorothy (ibid)

[6] Για μια πιο εκτενή συζήτηση γυρώ που την πολιτική σημειολογία της αντιπροσώπευσης, δες Haraway, Donna (1992) The promises of monsters: a regenerative politics of inappropriate/d others, in: Lawrence Grossber, Cary Nelson & Paula A. Treichler (eds.) Cultural studies (New York, London: Routledge), pp. 295-337.

[7] Dorothy Roberts, “Reproductive Justice, Not Just Rights”

Reproductive Justice, Not Just Rights

[8] Madame Tlank, “The Battle of all* Mothers (or: No Unauthorised Reproduction)”
Madame Tlank, “The Battle of all* Mothers (or: No Unauthorised Reproduction)”

[9] “Αυξάνονται οι αλλοδαποί, μειώνονται οι Κύπριοι”, Sigmalive
http://www.sigmalive.com/archive/simerini/politics/reportaz/451616

[10] An example of this argument can be found here: http://www.cna.org.cy/webnews.aspx?a=13b07a14e43f4f4e9bd2b891d8310818

[11] Woman who had illegal abortion released (Updated)

Woman who had illegal abortion released (Updated)

[12a] Ο περί Ποινικού Κώδικα Νόμος (ΚΕΦ.154), ΜΕΡΟΣ IV ΠΟΙΝΙΚΑ ΑΔΙΚΗΜΑΤΑ ΠΟΥ ΠΑΡΑΒΛΑΠΤΟΥΝ ΤΟ ΚΟΙΝΟ ΓΕΝΙΚΑ, Ποινικά Αδικήματα εναντίον των Ηθών
http://www.cylaw.org/nomoi/enop/non-ind/0_154/division-dd12fa068c-825c-475f-8af5-93cb97376e6e.html

[12b] www.un.org/esa/population/publications/abortion/doc/cyprus1.doc

[13] Εκτρώσεις: Τι προβλέπει η πρόταση νόμου του 2015
http://www.philenews.com/koinonia/eidiseis/article/437883/ektroseis-ti-problepei-i-protasi-nomoy-toy-2015

[14] Ιερά Αρχιεπισκοπή Κύπρου: Επιστημονικό Συνέδριο με γενικό θέμα: «Εκτρώσεις: Ιατρικές – Κοινωνικές – Νομικές – Πνευματικές διαστάσεις»

Ιερά Αρχιεπισκοπή Κύπρου: Επιστημονικό Συνέδριο με γενικό θέμα: «Εκτρώσεις: Ιατρικές – Κοινωνικές – Νομικές – Πνευματικές διαστάσεις»

[15] Pollitt, Katha (ibid)

[16] Women’s sexual and reproductive health and rights in Europe
https://rm.coe.int/women-s-sexual-and-reproductive-health-and-rights-in-europe-issue-pape/168076dead

‘They stole the beach’ – the major mafia that almost nobody wants to talk about

An opportune moment for marine spatial planning

20 February 2018

With Supreme Court challenge, tech billionaire could dismantle beach access rights — and a landmark coastal law (California)

Published in L.A. Times 

Η συνέχεια μιας αφήγησης, η κίνηση τζιαι οι χώροι: Μια αυτοβιογραφική αποτίμηση του 2007-2018

Why I find it extremely hard to speak up against the private-interest speeding cameras

End of last month, two important legal changes were made in southern Cyprus, and will come to effect soon. The first is the new law regulating bicycle use, and the second is a Ministry of Finance decision on how speeding cameras will be operated.

Starting from the latter, the Ministry decided that the way they are going to do it will be to leave it up to a private entity to finance, run and operate the whole thing, and collect the fines from drivers violating the traffic code. Obviously traffic fines even when they were the responsibility of the Police, have been horrifically flawed since they are optimising for increased cash flow. Add into that a private entity as the administrator, and the use of a digital system that builds a database of number plates and the locations they are sighted in, and the opportunities for privacy violations are hard to miss.

The bicycle use law approved in the Parliament introduces some penalties for car drivers who endanger cyclists, but for the most part it does everything possible to discourage cycling as a way to commute. The law introduces a ban on cycling on pedestrian side-walks (instead pushing cyclists on the road, if no bike lane exists, and let’s face it, most of the time they don’t exist), it prohibits cycling in a single row under most realistic circumstances, and introduces 1000+EUR fines for behaviours that cause no problems. The law is completely unbalanced in where it places responsibility for safe use of public roads, and if it were to be enforced, any progress made in reducing private cars for commuting will quickly be reversed. That is not to say that cyclists do not have any obligation to be responsible road users, but that car drivers clearly have way more.

So, where’s the link?

This year we had a cyclist death every 2 months so far (often in hit-and-runs), and dozens more cyclists are injured in accidents involving cars. This has chilling effects on the use of bicycles as a way to commute. People who don’t stop cycling all together, feel safer using the pedestrian side-walks at least. Should the law prohibiting bikes on side-walks be enforced, and cycling lanes do not magically appear overnight, a lot more people will stop cycling.

Because of this realistic threat to their life, a bike commuter finds it very hard to speak out against traffic cameras when they see cars run red lights at controlled intersections and street crossings (at speeds of 80+km/h often) on a daily basis. A bike commuter finds it very hard to defend car drivers when the few stretches of bike lanes in their city are routinely used as parking spots. A bike commuter finds it very hard to take a principled stance against surveillance overreach when they see bike lanes that already exist being demolished to expand car lanes. A bike commuter finally finds it very hard to sympathise with car drivers, when car drivers overtake them without clearance, to make a left turn in front of them cutting their path and park on the corner of an intersection.

Solidarity is the people’s weapon against legal overreaches. But I’m comfortable saying: “Car drivers, you first”.

Bike commuters have almost no privilege on the road, only pedestrians are more vulnerable than them. The responsibility of making the roads safer for all without resorting to social control apparatuses falls on car drivers.

Πέρα απ’ την κυρίαρχη ιδεολογία του οικονομισμού και της ανάπτυξης

Στις 15 Απριλίου συμμετέχουμε στην πορεία και συναυλία διαμαρτυρίας που διοργανώνεται από την Κίνηση Save Akamas / Save Cyprus για την προάσπιση της κοινής φυσικής και πολιτιστικής μας κληρονομιάς. Οι τελευταίες υποθέσεις υποβάθμισης του περιβάλλοντος και αλλοίωσης του τοπίου στις Θαλασσινές Σπηλιές της  Πέγειας  και στο Κάβο Γκρέκο αποτελούν απλά την αφορμή γι’ αυτήν τη διαμαρτυρία. Για εμάς, αυτές οι υποθέσεις αποτελούν τα πιο πρόσφατα παραδείγματα μίας συστηματικής πολιτικής καταστροφής του περιβάλλοντος και οικειοποίησης των οικολογικών μας κοινών.

ΦΕΣΤΙΒΑΛ ΟΙΚΟΠΟΛΙΣ, 25-27 Ιουλίου

 

Το Οικοπόλις εν ένα τριήμερο αντιεμπορευματικό φεστιβάλ χωρίς χορηγούς. Η είσοδος θα είναι ελεύθερη σε ούλλες τις εκδηλώσεις του φεστιβάλ.

Το φετινό πρόγραμμα είναι (παραπάνω πληροφορίες σύντομα):

25/07 – Παρουσιάσεις τζιαι συζητήσεις
26/07 – Καλλιτεχνικές εκθέσεις τζιαι παραστάσεις
27/07 – Συναυλία

Οι εισφορές εν ο κύριος παράγοντας που κρατά το φεστιβάλ ανεξάρτητο τζιαι αυτοχρηματοδοτούμενο, οπόταν είναι αυστηρά ευπρόσδεκτες.

Η πόλη ως το κατεξοχήν πεδίο κοινωνικής δραστηριότητας & δράσης αντικατοπτρίζει το ευρύτερο κοινωνικό περιβάλλον. Το φεστιβάλ Οικοπόλις έσχει στόχο την ανάδειξη, αμφισβήτηση και επαναδιαπραγμάτευση των κοινωνικών εντάσεων της καθημερινότητας μέστους δρόμους, τες πλατείες τζιαι τα παγκάκια τούντης πόλης. Mιας πόλης που πλέον πνίεται μες τα καφέ, τα τραπεζάκια, τζιαι τα μοδάτα μπαράκια. Η παλιά πόλη της Λευκωσίας άλλαξε φάτσα: που υπο-ανάπτυκτο ιστορικό κέντρο εκπληρώνει πλέον τη δυνατότητά της ως ιδανική πόλη-εμπόρευμα. Που τη μια διατηρώντας τη διαφημιστική εικόνα της “τελευταίας μοιρασμένης πρωτεύουσας,” τζιαι που την άλλη η ριζική ανάπλαση των τελευταίων χρόνων να την καθιστά ως βιτρίνα “καθαρή” που κοινωνικές σχέσεις τζιαι καταστάσεις που αντιτίθενται στις εμπορευματικές σχέσεις διαμεσολαβημένες που το θέαμα.

Ουρανοξύστες για high class διαμερίσματα τζιαι επιχειρήσεις, πεζόδρομοι κατηλημμένοι που τα τραπεζάκια των δεκάδων ομοιότυπων μαγαζιών, ελάχιστα παγκάκια, κάτζελα που χρόνο με το χρόνο ψηλώνουν στην εκκλησία της Φανερωμένης, πεζοδρόμια γεμάτα παρκαρισμένα αυτοκίνητα, ενοίκια που ανεβαίνουν τζιαι γίνουνται απαγορευτικά για μετανάστες κατοίκους – ούλλα κομμάτι της κοσμοσυρροής ως αποτέλεσμα του gentrification, δημιουργώντας μια πόλη όπου η μόνη αποδεκτή κοινωνική/πολιτική δραστηριότητα εν η κατανάλωση. Ταυτόχρονα, ττέλια, βαρέλλες τζιαι στρατοί αναγκάζουν μας να ζούμε το γεωγραφικό τζιαι ιστορικό μας χώρο ως μισό, διαμεσολαβημένο που τα συμβολα του μισους τζιαι τις κουραστικες αναμονες στα οδοφραγματα για να περπατησουμε μια αποσταση 100 μετρων.

Για εμάς τούτοι εν παράγοντες που συνθέτουν ένα προκλητικό τοπίο δράσης, στο οποίο παρεμβαίνουμε δημιουργικά εκφράζοντας τζιαι πραγματώνοντας προτάσεις για κοινωνίες οργανωμένες έξω που ιεραρχικούς, καπιταλιστικούς τζιαι σεξιστικούς θεσμούς τζιαι λογικές, στη βάση της αυτοοργάνωσης, της κοινωνικής αλληλεγγύης τζιαι της συντροφικότητας. Το φεστιβάλ Οικοπόλις διοργανώνεται φέτος για πρώτη φορά, που την ομώνυμη ομάδα εργασίας για την οικολογία τζιαι την πόλη. Έσχιει ως στόχο να βάλει κάτω το πρόταγμα της διεκδίκησης της πόλης ως ένα Κοινό, ως πεδίο αντίστασης στην κοινωνική τζιαι περιβαλλοντική επέλαση του νεοφιλελευθερισμού. Θέλουμε να δημιουργήσουμε τες συνθήκες όπου η πόλη βιώνεται ως σημείο αναφοράς τζιαι κοινωνικοποίησης, δράσης τζιαι πειραματισμού, παρά ως γυαλιστερό real estate-εμπόρευμα που αγοράζεται τζιαι πουλιέται σύμφωνα με τους νόμους της αγοράς τζιαι τις εκάστοτε μόδες.

ECOPOLIS FESTIVAL, 25-27 July

 

 

 

Ecopolis is a 3-day anti-commercial festival with no sponsors. All events will be free. This year’s festival schedule is as follows (more info soon):

25/07 – Talks, presentations, and discussions
26/07 – Art exhibitions and performances
27/07 – Concert

Donations help us maintain the festival’s independent and self-funded character, so they are more than welcome.

The city as the main field of social activity and action reflects the wider social environment. Ecopolis festival aims to reveal, challenge, and renegotiate the social tensions of everyday life in the streets, squares and benches of Nicosia. A city that is drowning in coffee shops, street-side tables and fashionable bars. The old city of Nicosia has changed face: from sub-developed historical center it has now fulfilled its potential as an ideal city-commodity, maintaining the advertisable image of the “last divided capital”, while the accelerated gentrification of the last years has constituted it as an urban jewel “clean” from social relations and situations that oppose commodity relations mediated by spectacle.

Skyscrapers for high-class apartments and businesses, pedestrian zones occupied by the tables of countless interchangeable shops, the lack of public benches, fences around Faneromeni church that get taller every year, sidewalks full of parked cars, sky-rocketing rents that become prohibitive for migrant residents –all a result of gentrification and the consumerist influx which followed, creating a city where the only acceptable social / political activity is consumption. Meanwhile, barbed wire, barrels and armies force us us to live our geographical and historic site as half, mediated by the symbols of hatred and tedious queues at the checkpoints to walk a distance of 100 meters.

For us, these are factors composing a challenging landscape of action, in which we intervene creatively by expressing and making proposals for societies organized outside hierarchical, capitalist and sexist mentalities and institutions, on the basis of self-organization, solidarity and companionship. The Ecopolis festival is being held this year for the first time by the Ecopolis working group on ecology and the city. Ecopolis festival aims to put forth the claim to the city as a Common, as a field of resistance to the social and environmental endeavors of neoliberalism. We want to create the conditions in which the city is experienced as a point of reference and socialization, action and experimentation, rather than as a polished real estate commodity bought and sold according to the laws of the market and current trends.

Why it’s probably not my place to try to radicalise the Cypriot LGBT+ communit{y,ies,y?}

I have had trouble working within the Cypriot LGBT+ community for a long time. Often that becomes a source of great frustration and disappointment to me, and I would assume of similar negative feelings to those on the opposing side of the disagreement. With May being Pride Month, I am forced to do some self-contemplation about this, again.

An account of how I came to withdraw from the mainstream part of it was published last year on the website of the anti-authoritarian political group I participate in. I warned my comrades back then though that the text is not representative of what my current views are. I don’t think I disagree with anything I wrote back then, but I did feel that at the time of publication and I am more sure about it now: I have drifted further away from that abstraction we call the LGBT+ or Queer community (whether there’s one community, many, or none at all is another, unanswered question).

I’m not going to surprise you and spew some anti-identity politics brocialist and class-reductionist bullshit. Identity politics are a necessary (but not sufficient) precondition for personal and social liberation, and class-reductionism is a political position comparable in stupidity with “anarcho”-capitalism. I’m not even going to present a critique of the LGBT+ and/or Queer community on the grounds of intersectionality. For the purposes of this discussion, the intersectionality aspect is not a concern.

The text is —perhaps egoistically— about me and how I’m probably not entitled to have any demands about how those communities should act, and what their priorities should be.

I believe that identities such as lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer, are political labels. They have some tenuous relation to observations about one’s body and brain, but they are primarily ways to define and position one’s self in the societal battleground (quite uncontroversially, I assume, I am adopting a conflict-based approach to sociology, because that’s the sociological model that best captures reality).

The question then is, other than the fact that in the periods of my life that I am dating, I mostly date people of more-or-less similar gender to me (that is, “male but not really enthusiastic about it”), do I find myself in a similar societal position in society as other people using a label from the LGBT+ Extended Universe, or from the Queer vocabulary?

After some discussions recently, I realised that I am probably not any more. I was definitely in that position 6–7 years ago. I experienced homophobia, in some cases expressed violently. I had shared interests and demands as other people under the same labels. I participated in similar types of relationships as other people in this spectrum of social identities. That’s not the case any more though.

I don’t feel I have, in recent times, experienced any form of homophobia (on a personal level) severe enough for me to register it consciously. And that’s not because I take any measures to hide my identity. But in the last several years, I find myself in spaces where homophobia is atypically absent, and I have been very comfortable burning bridges and cutting off the people who are homophobia carriers from my social sphere. So for a long time now, in my private reality, homophobia and having to be careful about revealing aspects of your identity were not a concern.

Because of my private reality, I don’t have any intuitive sense about social rights I could be denied access to. I feel safe and comfortable. I haven’t received any behaviours that affected me negatively for a very long time. On the political/legal rights, the state doesn’t currently restrict my own freedoms on basis of my sexuality. “Sodomy” has been decriminalised a more than a decade before I began engaging in it. Because I don’t have a uterus, the state doesn’t really try to control my reproductive choices. I don’t plan to marry, or to adopt children. I don’t have substantial property or a medical insurance to share with a partner, and with social mobility like it is now, I will probably never will. And the state doesn’t misgender me on official documents. There isn’t any medical treatment I am denied access to on the basis of my sexuality and gender expression. I don’t seek the enactment or the enforcement of state censorship of publications under the guise of “combating hate speech” (not because that speech deserves to be protected, but because my idea of combating hate speech doesn’t involve the state).

I am also no longer in types of relationships readily recognisable to either the LGBT culture, or the more diverse queer one. Both cultures misinterpret and mis-categorise my approach in one of their many boxes, which is perhaps the only time I feel some negative disposition towards my sexuality, and ironically it comes from what until a few days ago I would certainly call “the inside” (but not so sure now).

On all three levels then, it feels like I am not at the same place as the people with whom I am often conflicting on political and organisational aspects of the LGBT+ and Queer liberation struggle. Due to circumstances, choices, and privilege on some aspects, I found myself in a post-homophobia private reality of some sort. Having spent so many years in it, I am beginning to suspect that my perception is skewed. It might very well be the case that I actually don’t belong to those communities, and I was just imposing my presence there, just because I used to be a part of them a decade go.

Because of this suspicion I have, I’m wondering if it is really my place to tell the LGBT+ and/or Queer movement that their priorities or their rhetoric and praxis are wrong or ineffective. My brand of social anarchism doesn’t really like armchair activism and vanguards. If I am really not part of the same social position as the people who are fighting for their liberation, what right do I have to tell them that this should be their demand, and such and such should be their tactics? It wouldn’t make me any better than those sad cases who, from the comfort of their houses, issue decrees on what Zapatistas or the Kurds should do to obtain superior strategic advantages in battle, and chastise them every time real world circumstances deviate from the holy scriptures of communists and anarchists from the late 1800s. 

The Data Union: A positive step in the wrong direction

The Data Union asks for better living conditions inside the walled garden, but they are not daring to imagine an ecosystem without walls.

Very recently, a new international union was founded in the Netherlands, with the goal of uniting social media users, and through collective representation put pressure on big Internet companies and state governments. They want to pressure companies such as Google and Facebook to provide more user-friendly terms and conditions, and governments to enact stronger privacy laws.

There’s a lot to like about this initiative. It’s an attempt to bargain collectively in an insufferably individualised neoliberal world. Statements from the board of directors of this union recognise user-generated content as the result of labour, and of users as unpaid workers producing surplus value for the commercial entities that run the websites. Quotes such as “What we want…is to get across the table from Google and Facebook to talk about reasonable compensation, or at least better working conditions” by President of the Advisory Board and Dutch Labour Party Dr. Paul Tang MEP show a refreshingly good understanding of the relationship between users and Internet service providers.

There’s also of course the obvious criticisms, such as their focus on reformist, compromise-driven tripartite model of “State-Capital-Union” negotiations, or its hierarchical, (social-)democratic centralist-type structure. But for me the problem runs deeper. The Data Union is pushing in the wrong direction. Winning concessions from Facebook or Google is not the solution. Doing away with them is.

To fight a sociopolitical structure, you need to understand how it works. Focusing just on Facebook, for ease of exposition, we need to understand this about them: Facebook is a private walled garden. A walled garden is a metaphor used in discussions of network services to describe how a provider tries to (a) bring users into their service, and (b) limit their ability to leave that service once they are in.

Before Facebook, there was the Web (now retroactively renamed Web 1.0). On the Web, each user could have a presence by having their own websites, and use tools like email to communicate. The users of course didn’t own the cables that connected their computers with everyone else around the world, but they controlled their online presence to a great extend. To communicate with others, they could simply establish a peer-to-peer relationship, by sending them an email, or visiting their blog. It didn’t matter if user A was on user_a@cytanet.com.cy and user B was on user_b@aol.com, their different underlying network service providers were just carriers. Many users were even the network carriers for themselves, managing their own webservers and not relying on a company to do it for them.

With Facebook, a lot of things that were already possible, like chat (email, IRC, Jabber), aggregation of new posts from multiple sources (RSS), and event calendars (iCalendar, vCal), were packed together and integrated for easier use.

As a matter of fact, Facebook early on made use of technologies like Jabber, and RSS to provide their services, and they were to some degree compatible with other servers also running the same technologies. So if you wanted to talk with someone on Facebook, but you didn’t have a Facebook account yourself, you could still do it by using your Jabber account. Or you could get real-time notifications from a Facebook page without having to visit Facebook itself. Being on Facebook meant everything was done from the same interface though, and that drove many people in.

Once a lot of people were in though, Facebook had power, and they used it. For example they cut off chat functionality with the rest of the non-Facebook Web in 2015, by dropping support for Jabber. Now you could only contact people on Facebook and Facebook alone. RSS was also dropped. Any external links posted on Facebook are also disadvantaged: “native content” gets priority, and external links are treated as “potentially malicious” and get hidden away behind an “Are you sure you want to leave Facebook?” warning. That’s the second stage of a walled garden. Locking the gates.

That’s not just something Facebook does because its CEO is evil. This is the fate of centralised network services, where all data storage and processing happens at the servers controlled by one entity, and where the users are at the mercy of that entity. Centralised services are often more convenient than alternatives, but because of their very structure, they are always more restrictive and hierarchical.

The Data Union asks for better living conditions inside the walled garden, but they are not daring to imagine an ecosystem without walls.

Contrary to what neoliberalism wants us to believe, there is an alternative. There is a way to have horizontal, non-hierarchical social networks: The Federated Web, or The Fediverse (federated universe).

Federated network services are services where different entities (running different servers), have the technical ability to communicate with each other and seamlessly share content between them. They do that by using open communication protocols: email for text messages, Jabber/XMPP for real-time chat, RSS/Atom for real-time content delivery, and recently ActivityPub for social interactions (implemented for example by Mastodon, the software that runs many federated social networks).

In the Federated Web, it doesn’t matter if you run your own server, and few of your friends banded together to collectively run a server jointly used by all of them, and maybe some other common friends use services provided by some organisation that manages their server (eg their university). You can all communicate together, as if you were all on the same website.

The Federated Web radically defuses the power one single service provider could have on the users. It doesn’t prohibit you from contacting people who are not on the same server than you, and you always have the option of leaving one federated node for another one if you start to feel that the administrator of that node is malicious, without losing access to the people with whom you want to stay in touch. Leaving a centralised service like Facebook on the other hand is near-unimaginable for most people, because it means losing contact with anyone who doesn’t follow you in your attempt to climb the walled garden and escape.

The Data Union’s ideas are welcome and they have the best intents. But with their reformist tripartite compromise-seeking, they will not solve the social injustices that are inherent to centralisation.

For technology-user liberation, we should tear down all the walls and built horizontal network relationships that rely on open protocols, and implement the protocols in libre software that anyone can use, modify, and share.

Cypriot Consciousness

Note: The translation of the text was done in the framework of the documentary TONGUE –
(https://www.facebook.com/tonguefilm/?fb_…LnadcjU02Q)

Cypriot Consciousness

By Costis Achniotis
Within The Walls, Issue 35, September 1988

This text is my lecture for the event that our magazine has organized at Famagusta Gate. At the same event Mehmet Yiaşin spoke about the “Turkish Cypriot identity in literature”. We will publish Yiasin’s presentation in the next issue in which there will be a feature on Turkish Cypriots. We will also answer to some articles published in the newspapers about our event there.
____________________________________________________________________________

Firstly, I clarify that I understand the definition of collective consciousness (and its contents) not as stable and unchangeable and of course I do not give it the dimension of a natural order. Collective consciousness just as any social concept is changeable and follows the shifting needs of of a society.

This changeability of course is not at all mechanic. The superstructure can drastically act on social evolution. For example the appearance of industries shapes the totality of workers that are possible to become carriers of labor consciousness. Labor consciousness is potentially common for all nations and can determine the totality of the workers of the world. Of course, this understanding is macroscopic. Other factors (individual consciousness) act and shape opposing subtotalities.

For the purpose of this text, I call Cypriot Consciousness, the consciousness of the Cypriot Independence. Therefore, its carrier is anyone who understands Cyprus and its people as an independent entity and strives as a consequence for the protection of the corresponding state institution, the Independent Cypriot State.

Of course the understanding of Cypriot Independence is basically a subject that has not been studied neither historically nor sociologically, nor politically, and this stands for both communities. And it is entirely natural as since the 50’s the consciousness for Enosis (Union with Greece[1]) and for taksim (separation[2]) were entirely dominant. Regardless of the acceptance of this so-called Independence in 1960, the governing teams of both communities were (or were acting like) for Enosis or for taksim. Therefore only this version of history was projected with its corresponding ideological response. It is indicative how misguiding history is in Greek-Cypriot schools.

So it is not easy to realise that CPC (Communist Party of Cyprus) took an anti-union stand. I will quote an excerpt:
“…CPC sees as its duty to protest by any means, firstly against local English government which due to its indifference contributes in the intensification of intercommunal hate between the citizens of Cyprus and secondly against the fraudulent leaders of this place which spoke and will speak in the name of the Cypriot people. DOWN WITH ENOSIS – LONG LIVE THE INDEPENDENCE OF CYPRUS – LONG LIVE THE PROLETARIATS OF THE WORLD (Neos Kosmos, 25.4.1925)

We see that the understanding for Independence was already in combination with the effort to escape bicommunal conflicts.

Of course there is no doubt that since then, up until the categorical acceptance of “Enosis and only Enosis” by AKEL after about 25 years of inaptitude, the folk sentiment of the Greek-Cypriot community was all the more oriented toward Greece. The Turkish-Cypriot minority seems to have lagged behind in terms of following the developments and eventually takes a position after EOKA’s struggle. When AKEL leaned toward Enosis, the Trotskyist Party of Cyprus (which was a small communist organisation) criticized them harshly, as they saw independence as a self-government of the oppressed classes, without mentioning the Turkish-Cypriot community.
I quote an excerpt:

“COMRADES,
May this year’s 1st of May find us on the frontlines of the struggle for the handing down of power to our people, for SELF-GOVERNMENT. The traitorous abandonment of the position for Self-government on the part of the stalinist leadership and the adoption of the position for Enosis should make us come to our senses. We ourselves must stop the poisoning by Enosis. We must make the ill-fated leaders of our laborer’s organisations get on the right track of serving workers’ benefits. If they deny, we should set them aside and keep moving forward in a new polemic, with class-awareness and decisive leadership for the struggle for the handing down of power to the workers and farmers. Enosis can provide us neither better working conditions nor better wages, nor can it ensure our social emancipation. It will merely exchange our chains. Nothing more, nothing less.

WORKERS, FARMERS, OPPRESSED,
Move forward in the struggle for our emancipation. The struggle for our economic and political demands. The battle for the improvement of our working conditions and Social Security. For the creation of more jobs for the unemployed. For unemployment benefits. For the organisation and class awareness of all of the oppressed. For SELF-GOVERNMENT. For a Government of Workers – Farmers, that feels for the worker and protects the farmer. For the complete national and social liberation.”

In this text there is no mention of Turkish-Cypriots. But in the municipal elections the idea of proportionate representation of Turkish-Cypriots is projected from the candidates of this party and at the same time the request for Enosis is condemned in exchange for the request for Self-Government. The request for Enosis is considered a request which is entirely bourgeois (Ergatis, 15 May 1949).

The organisation of Trotskyists broke up and got dismantled soon after. One of the reasons is that a fraction of the members becomes for Enosis as one can witness through the conversational essays in it’s later editions.

We can see that briefly before the 50s, the Greek-Cypriot left tends to ambiguously want independence without always condemning Enosis and combines this demand with an intense worker’s politics (it is not by chance that the last labour struggles happened back then) and an understanding of danger that is included in a possible intercommunal conflict (and certainly other reasons such as geopolitical ones).

I do not know whether you, like myself, see that history actively justified the dears of the leftists of the era.

Whereas the Greek-Cypriot community votes for “Enosis and only Enosis” as one in 1950, and for the entire decade it leaves no space for anything else, I suppose that hidden within the bourgeois class exist thoughts for independence, because of course it cannot be by chance that Makarios gave that infamous interview in 1957 or that the national council of the time takes part, even in disagreement, in the negotiations in Zurich and London.

In making a report of the 50s, we can in summary say that the entire revolutionary force of the Cypriot people, Turkish Cypriot and Greek Cypriot, was wasted on marginalising the conscious participation of the working class, in order for an intercommunal conflict to be built and for neither self-government nor Enosis but for dependence to be given.

This is why Cypriot Consciousness is always a newborn consciousness. It has never overcome the stage of infancy. In consequence, its face is marked by the sorrow of profound old-age and the main sentiment that it can feel is the uncertain pain of existence. Cypriot Consciousness exists trampled under the feet of its adversaries who are caught in an infinite hand-to-hand battle. From the point of view of where it exists, on the ground, it sees them as enormous giants. Regardless of the constant trampling, the Cypriot Consciousness is saved by the fact that none of the giants is entirely dominant. Otherwise the Cypriot Consciousness would be lost.

The Cypriot Consciousness thinks itself weak. That’s why it plays possum, waiting for better days.

The Cypriot Consciousness is weak and humble. It knows it and doesn’t go to battle. It settles for cackling at the weakness of its far stronger adversaries who are nonetheless also too weak to impose their own order of things. In its ears the voices echo like empty words and fanfare.

Cypriot Consciousness has the arrogance of the marginals.

 

[1]. The dominant Greek Cypriot Discourse which called for union with Greece.

[2].  The dominant Greek Cypriot Discourse which called for complete separation of the two communities.

Baraka Kültür Merkezi’nden Liseli Gençlere Tiyatro Daveti

On beş yıldır tiyatro faaliyeti yürüten Baraka Kültür Merkezi, yetişkin ekibinin yanı sıra liseli gençlik ekibi ile de çeşitli sahne ve sokak tiyatroları sergilemekte. 15-18 yaş aralığını kapsayan liseli gençlik ekibinin yeni dönem kayıtları başladı. Eğitim çalışmaları ile kendilerini geliştirmek ve oyunlarda rol almak isteyen gençlerin 29 Eylül Cumartesi günü saat 18.00’de derneğin Kızılbaş’taki lokaline gelmeleri gerektiği duyuruldu. Tamamen ücretsiz olan çalışmalarda, beden, nefes ve ses kullanımı, yaratıcı doğaçlama, müzik ve ritim atölyesi gerçekleştirilecek ve ezilenlerin tiyatrosu cephaneliğinden eğlenceli ve eğitici oyunlar yer alacak. Ayrıca ekim ayı sonunda Lapta Gençlik Kampı’nda  tiyatro kampı da yapılacak. Ardından, sahnelenecek olan oyunun provalarına başlanacak ve Mart ayında oyun sahnelenerek turnelere de gidilecek.

İZLE-TARTIŞ’TA YOL AYRIMI İZLENİLECEK

Baraka’nın kesintisiz devam eden İzle-Tartış etkinliği, serin bir sonbahar akşamında Yol Ayrımı filmini izleyiciler ile buluşturuyor.   Mazhar, hayatını babasından devraldığı teskstil imparatorluğunu büyütmeye adamıştır. Bunun için de agresif ve acımasız yöntemler izlemekten çekinmez. Fakat Mazhar'ın yaşadığı trafik kazası birçok şeyi değiştirir. Kaza Mazhar'ın hayata yeniden tutunmasını sağlar. Belki böylece geçmişten bugüne fark etmeden yaşadığı ağır yükten de kurtulabilecektir. Bu değişim tabii ki kolay olmayacak, başka bir insana dönüşme girişimleri, başta ailesi olmak üzere çok kişiyi karşısına almasına neden olacaktır. Mazhar Kozanlı, yaptığı tercihin bedelini ya ödemek ya da pes etmekle karşı karşıya kalacaktır.  Ailesi mi? Yeni tanıştığı arkadaşları mı? Yoksa çocukluğundan beri düşleyip de yapamadığı hayallerinin mi peşinden koşacaktır  Mazhar?..   Eğer siz de; “Her çocuğun içinde, geçmişine dair yapmak isteyip de yapamadığı ya da ebeveynlerinden isteyip de yapılmayan bir şeyler mutlaka vardır. O hiç unutulmaz, beynimizin bir köşesinde durur ve ortaya çıkacağı günü bekler.” diyorsanız gelin birlikte izleyelim, birlikte tartışalım.   6 Ekim Cumartesi akşamı 20:00’de Baraka Kültür Merkezi’nde buluşalım. Yol ayrımlarımızı konuşalım.

Dünya Yalnız Bizim Değil Hareketi: “Hayvan Refahı Yasası İyileştirilmeli”

  Baraka olarak Bileşeni olduğumuz, pek çok örgüt ve kişiden oluşan Dünya Yalnız Bizim Değil Hareketi, 4 Ekim Hayvanları Koruma Günü’nde Meclis önünde toplanarak bir basın açıklaması gerçekleştirdi. “Hayvan Refahı Yasası İyileştirilsin” talebinin ön plana alındığı ve yasayı Meclis’e sunarak ivediliğinin oybirliği ile alınmasını sağlayan Hüseyin Angolemli’ye teşekkür edilen açıklama şöyle: Bugün 4 Ekim Dünya Hayvanları Koruma Günü, bizler bugünün anlamı ile Meclis’te ivediliği onaylanan Hayvan Refahı (Değişiklik) Yasası’nın derhal, daha fazla ertelenmeden görüşülmeye başlanmasını talep etmek için buradayız. Çünkü 20113 yılında yürürlüğe giren Hayvan Refahı Yasası, geçen 5 senenin içinde ne yazık ki, sokaktaki can dostlarımızı koruyamamış, hane içinde beslenen sahipli hayvanların refah düzeyini artırmamış, çalıştırılan hayvanların ise bakım koşullarını ya da egzotik hayvanların adaya giriş çıkışlarını hiç bir şekilde kontrol altında tutmayı başaramamıştır. Bu yüzden de birçok hayvanın yaşam hakkı elinden alınmış, şiddete maruz kalmış veya koşullarına uygun olmayan bir memlekette bakılarak istismar edilmiştir. Değişiklik önerilerimizi 7 madde içerisinde toparlayarak neden gerekli olduğunu şu şekilde açıklamak isteriz: 1-Hayvanlar üzerinde deney yapılmasının yasaklanmasını istiyoruz. Çünkü Hayvan Hakları Evrensel Beyannamesi’ne göre "Bütün hayvanlar yaşam önünde eşit doğarlar ve aynı var olma hakkına sahiptirler. Bütün hayvanlar saygı görme hakkına sahiptir. Bir hayvan türü olan insan, diğer hayvanları yok edemez. Bu hakkı çiğneyerek onları sömüremez. Bilgilerini hayvanların hizmetine sunmakla görevlidir. Bütün hayvanların insanca gözetilme, bakılma ve korunma hakları vardır." 2-Cezaların işlevsel ve ıslah edici olabilmesi için “kamu hizmeti” adı altında hayvanlara ve çevreye faydası olacak yaptırımlar ve cezalar uygulanmasını; suçun tekrarı halinde ise cezaların artırılmasını istiyoruz. Çünkü bir cana eziyet edene sadece para cezası verilmesi yeterli değildir. Cezanın amacı suçluyu ve toplumu eğitmek olmalıdır. 3-Hayvan Refahı Danışma Komitesi’nde demokratik kitle örgütlerinin etkisinin artırılmasını, en az iki sivil toplum örgütünün bu komitede temsil edilmesini istiyoruz. Çünkü dostlarımız hakkında alınacak önemli kararlarda, onların korunması ve haklarının geliştirilmesi yönünde gönüllü çalışan örgütlere de söz hakkı verilmelidir. 4-Çalıştırılan hayvanların sağlık kontrolüne götürülmesini, yeterli sıklıkta dinlendirilmesini ve beslenmesini, hayvanın sağlığını zorlayacak şekilde çalıştırılmamasını istiyoruz. Çünkü kölelik, sadece insanlariçin değil hayvanlar için de kabul edilemez. 5-Yasaya aykırılıkların bildirilebilmesi amacıyla, Belediyelerin bir ihbar hattı oluşturmasını ve aldığı ihbar üzerine, hayvan haklarına uyun işlem ve eylemleri yapmasını istiyoruz. Çünkü yasalar kağıt üzerinde kaldıkça hiçbir işe yaramıyor. 6-Barınakların en az ayda bir kez, Veteriner Dairesi'ne bağlı veterinerlerce denetlenmesini istiyoruz. Çünkü barınaklardaki kötü koşulların iyileştirilmesi gerekiyor. 7-Herhangi bir sebepten ötürü toplanan hayvanların başka bir yerel yönetim sınırına, ormanlık alana veya başka bir yaban ortama bırakılmamasını istiyoruz. Çünkü hayvanların bir yerden alınıp başka bir yere atılması, hem hayvanlar hem de insanlar için hiçbir sorunu çözmüyor, bilakis artırıyor. Geçen dönem kadük olan yasamız, Meclis’in yeni döneminde Hüseyin Angolemli tarafından tekrardan meclise sunularak, 2 Ekim pazartesi günü ivediliği oybirliği ile kabul edilmiştir. Önerimizin Meclis’te sözünün edilmesini ve ilgili komiteye aktarılarak görüşülmesini ikinci kez sağlayan Hüseyin Angolemli’ye Dünya Yalnız Bizim Değil Hareketi olarak tüm can dostlarımız ve hayvanseverler adına teşekkür ederiz. Yasamızın görüşüleceği Hukuk Komitesi’nden,  pek çok canlının savunmasız bir hayat sürerken tek güvencesinin bu şekilde yaratılabileceğinin bilinci ile yasamıza öncelik vermesini istiyoruz.  

Baraka Kültür Merkezi’nden Tiyatro Kampı

Baraka Kültür Merkezi, 27-29 Ekim tarihleri arasında Lapta Gençlik Kampı tesislerinde tiyatro kampı düzenliyor. 15 yaş ve üzeri gençlere ve yetişkinlere yönelik tiyatro eğitimlerini içeren kamp programında, müzik ve ritim atölyeleri, Yaşar Ersoy ile söyleşi, ezilenlerin tiyatrosu cephaneliğinden oyunlar, okuma-tartışma grupları ve forum tiyatrosu çalışmaları gibi etkinlikler yer alacak. Derneğin genç ve yetişkin tiyatro ekiplerinin yanı sıra dışarıdan da tiyatro severlere ve eğitimlerle kendini geliştirmek isteyenlere açık olan kampa katılım için 13 Ekim Cumartesi veya 16 Ekim Salı saat 17.30-19.30 arasında Baraka Kültür Merkezi’nde kayıt yaptırmak gerekmekte. Gençlik Dairesi tarafından talep edilen ücret 100TL olduğundan, kampa katılım ücreti öğrenciler için 100TL, yetişkinler için ise 120TL olarak belirtildi. Baraka Kültür Merkezi’nden yapılan açıklamada kampla ilgili şu detaylar da belirtildi: • Kampımız, tiyatro eğitim çalışmalarına ilgi duyan 15 yaş ve üzeri genç ve yetişkinlere açıktır. • Ulaşım özel arabalarla sağlanacaktır, arabası olmayanlar için ayarlama yapılacaktır. • 4 kişilik odalarda konaklanacaktır. • Kahvaltı, öğlen yemeği ve akşam yemeği verilecektir. • Gençlik kampı tesisi olduğundan ve 18 yaşından küçükler de bulunduğundan dolayı alkollü içki getirilmesi kesinlikle yasaktır. • Kampımızın tümüne kayıt yapılması gerekmektedir, günlük katılım veya dışarıdan misafir kabul edilmemektedir. • Kamp ücreti öğrenciler için 100TL, yetişkinler için 120TL.dir. (100TL Gençlik Dairesi’nin verdiği fiyat olup tarafımızdan Gençlik Dairesi’ne yatırılacaktır. 20TL ise derneğin giderlerine katkı olarak alınmaktadır.) • Kayıt ve ödeme, 13 Ekim Cumartesi veya 16 Ekim Salı saat 17.30-19.30 arasında Baraka Kültür Merkezi’nde yapılacaktır.

Υπόμνημα Θέσεων – Ιδιωτικοί Τεχνητοί Ύφαλοι

Πρωτοβουλία για τη Διάσωση των Φυσικών Ακτών

Υπόμνημα Θέσεων

Τετάρτη, 10 Οκτωβρίου 2018

 

Προς: Πρόεδρο και Μέλη Κοινοβουλευτικής Επιτροπής Περιβάλλοντος

 

Συνεδρία 10/10/2018. Κεφάλαιο Β. Θέμα 1.

Οι περί της Σύμβασης για την Προστασία της Μεσογείου Θάλασσας από τη Ρύπανση και περί Συναφών Πρωτοκόλλων (Τεχνητοί Ύφαλοι) Κανονισμοί του 2018 (Αρ. Φακ. 23.03.054.085-2017).

 

Πλαίσιο αναφοράς

Επί της γενικής αρχής, η Πρωτοβουλία για τη Διάσωση των Φυσικών Ακτών θεωρεί ότι η θάλασσα αποτελεί κοινό αγαθό και αναπόσπαστο μέρος του δημόσιου πλούτου. Ως εκ τούτου, η Κυπριακή Δημοκρατία οφείλει να διασφαλίσει τη μακροπρόθεσμη διατήρηση και ολοκληρωμένη διαχείριση του θαλάσσιου χώρου, και την διασφάλιση του ως δημόσιο αγαθό.

Αντ’ αυτού, παρατηρούμε συστηματικές προσπάθειες με στόχο την αποξένωση / εκχώρηση και οικειοποίηση / ιδιωτικοποίηση του θαλάσσιου χώρου. Τονίζουμε την έλλειψη στρατηγικού σχεδιασμού όσον αφορά θαλάσσιες δραστηριότητες, την έλλειψη διαφάνειας και την περιορισμένη διαβούλευση, την ανεπαρκή αιτιολόγηση των αναγκών που καλούνται να καλύψουν οι συγκεκριμένες τροποποιήσεις, αλλά και τη σύγκρουση / ασυμβατότητα των προτεινόμενων Κανονισμών με την ισχύουσα νομοθεσία και τις υποχρεώσεις της Κυπριακής Δημοκρατίας ως Κράτους Μέλους της ΕΕ.

Το υπό συζήτηση νομοσχέδιο, με τίτλο «Οι περί της Σύμβασης για την Προστασία της Μεσογείου Θάλασσας από τη Ρύπανση και περί Συναφών Πρωτοκόλλων (Τεχνητοί Ύφαλοι) Κανονισμοί του 2018» προβλέπει την έκδοση κανονισμών κατόπιν απόφασης του Υπουργικού Συμβουλίου, «ασκώντας τις εξουσίες που του χορηγούνται με βάση το άρθρο 6 των περί της Σύμβασης για την Προστασία της Μεσογείου Θάλασσας από τη Ρύπανση και περί συναφών Πρωτοκόλλων (Κυρωτικών) Νόμων του 1979 μέχρι 2017».

Οι προτεινόμενοι κανονισμοί, σύμφωνα με το Άρθρο 3 («Πεδίο Εφαρμογής») θα:

«(1) εφαρμόζονται στους τεχνητούς υφάλους, οι οποίοι κατασκευάζονται, τοποθετούνται και λειτουργούν σε θαλάσσιο χώρο της Δημοκρατίας.

(2) […] εφαρμόζονται για την αδειοδότηση δυνητικών επενδύσεων και δεν εφαρμόζονται σε σχέση με έργα τα οποία υλοποιούνται από τη Δημοκρατία».

Αποσκοπούν δηλαδή στη δημιουργία νομικού πλαισίου για την κατασκευή, τοποθέτηση και λειτουργία ιδιωτικών τεχνητών υφάλων. Σύμφωνα με το προτεινόμενο νομοσχέδιο: «Για την έκδοση ή ανανέωση άδειας κατασκευής, τοποθέτησης και λειτουργίας τεχνητών υφάλων σε θαλάσσιο χώρο καταβάλλονται τέλη που ανέρχονται σε επτακόσια ευρώ (€ 700)» (Άρθρο 7), «η άδεια χρήσης θαλάσσιου χώρου σε θαλάσσια περιοχή της Δημοκρατίας για σκοπούς κατασκευής, τοποθέτησης και λειτουργίας τεχνητών υφάλων χορηγείται από το Υπουργικό Συμβούλιο» (Άρθρο 8), και «για κάθε θαλάσσια περιοχή, σε σχέση με την οποία εκδίδεται άδεια χρήσης θαλάσσιου χώρου για σκοπούς τοποθέτησης και λειτουργίας τεχνητών υφάλων, καταβάλλονται τέλη 17 σεντ ετησίως για κάθε τετραγωνικό μέτρο της επιφάνειας του θαλάσσιου βυθού που αποτελεί τη συνολική περιοχή έκτασης των τεχνητών υφάλων, περιλαμβανομένης της θαλάσσιας περιοχής που ορίζεται με βάση το Άρθρο 5Α του Περί Αλιείας Νόμου» (Άρθρο 9).

 

Κατευθυντήριες Γραμμές

Σύμφωνα με ανακοίνωση που εξέδωσε ο Κυπριακός Οργανισμός Τουρισμού (ΚΟΤ) στις 2/7/2015, με αφορμή την «Εβδομάδα Ζηνοβίας», διεξήγαγε έρευνα για τη «Λειτουργία και διαχείριση των υπό δημιουργία θαλασσίων προστατευόμενων περιοχών με την τοποθέτηση τεχνητών υφάλων – θαλάσσιων πάρκων στην Κύπρο», την οποία παρέδωσε στο Τμήμα Αλιείας και Θαλασσίων Ερευνών για πιθανή αξιοποίηση. Προς συνέχεια της συγκεκριμένης έρευνας και με αφορμή τη συζήτηση του συγκεκριμένου νομοσχεδίου, σε επιστολή ημερομηνίας 24/9/2018, ο ΚΟΤ αναφέρει προς την Κοινοβουλευτική Επιτροπή Περιβάλλοντος ότι ο τομέας του καταδυτικού τουρισμού έχει μεγάλες προοπτικές ανάπτυξης και γι’αυτό τον λόγο στηρίζει την προσπάθεια που γίνεται για ρύθμιση των περιβαλλοντικών θεμάτων που αφορούν τη δημιουργία τεχνητών υφάλων.

Δεν αντιλαμβανόμαστε στη βάση ποιας δικαιοδοσίας και τεχνογνωσίας, ο ΚΟΤ προέβη σε μια έρευνα για τη «λειτουργία και διαχείριση των υπό δημιουργία θαλασσίων προστατευόμενων περιοχών με την τοποθέτηση τεχνητών υφάλων – θαλάσσιων πάρκων στην Κύπρο». Επισημαίνουμε ότι σύμφωνα με τις κατευθυντήριες αρχές του Οργανισμού Τροφίμων και Γεωργίας (Food and Agriculture Organisation – FAO) του Οργανισμού Ηνωμένων Εθνών, στόχοι των τεχνητών υφάλων είναι «η αναβάθμιση και / ή βελτίωση των φυσικών βιοτόπων, η αύξηση της παραγωγικότητας του οικοσυστήματος και η διαχείρηση των αλιευτικών πόρων» («to recover and/or improve natural habitats, increase productivity and manage aquatic resources») [1]. Επιπρόσθετα, οι κατευθυντήριες γραμμές του Μεσογειακού Σχεδίου Δράσης του Προγράμματος Περιβάλλοντος των Ηνωμένων Εθνών (United Nations Environment Programme / Mediterranean Action Plan – UNEP/MAP), αν και αναγνωρίζουν ότι οι τεχνητοί ύφαλοι μπορούν να στοχεύουν και στην προώθηση έρευνας και αναψυχής, τονίζουν πως πρωταρχικός στόχος των τεχνητών υφάλων είναι το «να παρέχουν ορισμένες λειτουργίες ενός φυσικού υφάλου, όπως η προστασία, η αναγέννηση, η συγκέντρωση και/ή η ενίσχυση της βιολογικής ποικιλομορφίας ή / και των πληθυσμών των έμβιων θαλάσσιων πόρων» («emulate some functions of a natural reef such as protecting, regenerating, concentrating, and/or enhancing [biological diversity and/or] populations of living marine resources») [2]. Σύμφωνα με το «Ερωτηματολόγιο Αντίκτυπου» του προτεινόμενου Νομοσχεδίου, ο στόχος των προτεινόμενων Κανονισμών είναι «η παραχώρηση χρήσης χώρου για τη διεξαγωγή και αδειοδότηση δυνητικών επενδύσεων με τεχνητούς υφάλους στο θαλάσσιο χώρο», γεγονός το οποίο δεν συνάδει με τις πιο πάνω κατευθυντήριες γραμμές.

Όσον αφορά τη διαβούλευση που προηγήθηκε, σε αυτή συμμετείχαν ως επί το πλείστον συναρμόδιες αρχές. Η διαβούλευση πραγματοποιήθηκε μέσω ηλεκτρονικού ταχυδρομείου, χωρίς να διεξαχθεί οποιαδήποτε δημόσια παρουσίαση και ακρόαση με τα ενδιαφερόμενα μέρη. Ο μόνος περιβαλλοντικός μη κυβερνητικός οργανισμός που κλήθηκε να υποβάλει απόψεις ήταν η Ομοσπονδία Περιβαλοντικών Οργανώσεων Κύπρου (ΟΠΟΚ), οι θέσεις της οποίας ήταν αρνητικές και δεν ενσωματώθηκαν στους προτεινόμενους Κανονισμούς.

Κατά την άποψη μας, υπάρχει έλλειψη διαφάνειας και επαρκούς αιτιολόγησης όσον αφορά τους προτεινόμενους Κανονισμούς. Σύμφωνα με το άρθρο 28 (Επαρκής Αιτιολογία) των περί Γενικών Αρχών του Διοικητικού Δικαίου Νόμων του 1999 έως 2014: «(1) Η αιτιολογία μιας διοικητικής πράξης πρέπει να είναι σαφής, ώστε να μην αφήνει αμφιβολίες ως προς το ποιος ήταν ο πραγματικός λόγος που οδήγησε το διοικητικό όργανο στη λήψη της απόφασης. (2) Δεν αποτελεί επαρκή αιτιολογία η αναφορά στην απόφαση γενικών χαρακτηρισμών που μπορούν να εφαρμοστούν και να ισχύουν για κάθε περίπτωση ούτε η απλή αναφορά των γενικών όρων του νόμου που μπορούν να τύχουν εφαρμογής σε οποιαδήποτε περίπτωση. (3) Αναιτιολόγητη είναι μια πράξη που επικαλείται γενικά και αόριστα το δημόσιο συμφέρον. Το δημόσιο συμφέρον του οποίου γίνεται επίκληση πρέπει να εξειδικεύεται με αναφορά σε συγκεκριμένα πραγματικά περιστατικά στα οποία στηρίχτηκε η κρίση του αρμόδιου διοικητικού οργάνου» [7].

Αντιλαμβανόμαστε ότι η τοποθέτηση και λειτουργία τεχνητών υφάλων από επενδυτές αποσκοπεί σε κάποια ωφελήματα στους ίδιους τους επενδυτές. Νοουμένου ότι η δημιουργία τεχνητών υφάλων έχει πολύ υψηλό οικονομικό κόστος, ποιά θα είναι τα ωφελήματα και με ποιό τρόπο θα γίνει η απόσβεση ενός ιδιώτη επενδυτή;

Ταυτόχρονα η εκχώρηση δημόσιου (θαλάσσιου) χώρου ενέχει και άλλους προβληματισμούς και ερωτήματα τα οποία δεν έχουν απαντηθεί. Τι είδους δικαιώματα αποκτά ένας ιδιώτης επενδυτής, ο οποίος ενδέχεται να υποβάλει αίτηση για χορήγηση άδειας κατασκευής, τοποθέτησης και λειτουργίας τεχνητού υφάλου στο θαλάσσιο χώρο της Κυπριακής Δημοκρατίας, με βάση τους προτεινόμενους Κανονισμούς; Στη βάση ποιων κριτηρίων και προδιαγραφών θα γίνεται η επιλογή του θαλάσσιου χώρου στον οποίο θα κατασκευαστεί ένας τεχνητός ύφαλος;

Πέρα από την ασυμβατότητα των προτεινόμενων Κανονισμών με τις Κατευθυντήριες Γραμμές Διεθνών Οργανισμών, όπως ο FAO και το UNEP/MAP, θα θέλαμε να σημειώσουμε και τους προβληματισμούς μας σχετικά με την ευθυγράμμιση / εναρμόνιση του συγκεκριμένου Νομοσχεδίου, με άλλες υποχρεώσεις της Κυπριακής Δημοκρατίας, και συγκεκριμένα τη θέσπιση ενός δικτύου Θαλάσσιων Προστατευόμενων Περιοχών, καθώς και την εκπόνηση ενός Θαλάσσιου Χωροταξικού Σχεδιασμού.

 

Θαλάσσιες Προστατευόμενες Περιοχές

Το συγκεκριμένο νομοσχέδιο προωθείται με το πρόσχημα ότι οι τεχνητοί ύφαλοι θα «συμβάλλουν στην ανάπτυξη της βιοποικιλότητας, στην ανάκαμψη των ιχθυοαποθεμάτων και στην προσέλκυση καταδυτικού τουρισμού» (Άρθρο2: «Ερμηνεία»).

Το Τμήμα Αλιείας και Θαλασσίων Ερευνών (ΤΑΘΕ) του Υπουργείου Γεωργίας, Φυσικών Πόρων και Περιβάλλοντος, έχει από το 2012 θεσπίσει, και ξεκινήσει να εφαρμόζει σχετική στρατηγική για τη δημιουργία θαλάσσιων προστατευόμενων περιοχών με τεχνητούς υφάλους. Έχουν ήδη εκδοθεί 6 διατάγματα για απαγόρευση αλιείας και διέλευσης σκαφών σε καθορισμένες θαλάσσιες περιοχές, με βάση το Άρθρο 5Α («Έκδοση διατάγματος απαγόρευσης της αλιείας ή/και της διέλευσης σκαφών») του «Περι Αλιείας Νόμο (ΚΕΦ.135)» [³]. Τα διατάγματα αυτά αφορούν τις ακόλουθες περιοχές: Θαλάσσια Προστατευόμενη Περιοχή Παραλιμνίου [4], Θαλάσσια Περιοχή Τεχνητού Υφάλου στην Αγία Νάπα [5], Ναυάγιο Ζηνοβία στη Λάρνακα [6], Θαλάσσια Προστατευόμενη Περιοχή Αμαθούντας στην Λεμεσό [7], Θαλάσσια Προστατευόμενη Περιοχή στο Δασούδι στην Λεμεσό [8] και Θαλάσσια Προστατευόμενη Περιοχή Τεχνητού Υφάλου Γεροσκήπου στην Πάφο [9].

Σύμφωνα με την Ειδική Έκθεση της Ελεγκτικής Υπηρεσίας της Κυπριακής Δημοκρατίας για τη «Διαχείριση Θαλάσσιων Προστατευόμενων Περιοχών στην Κύπρο», η «απουσία ενιαίας εθνικής στρατηγικής στην Κύπρο για τη διαχείριση των θαλάσσιων προστατευόμενων περιοχών και ο καταρτισμός επιμέρους στρατηγικών εγγράφων ενδεχομένως να οδηγεί σε κατακερματισμό των προσπαθειών της Δημοκρατίας για την προστασία των περιοχών και των ειδών και οικοτόπων που απαντώνται σε αυτές» [10]. Η Ειδική Έκθεση επίσης αναφέρει ότι «διαπιστώνονται ανεπάρκειες στους μηχανισμούς παρακολούθησης της κατάστασης των προστατευόμενων περιοχών με τεχνητούς υφάλους, ενώ ο βαθμός εφαρμογής των καθορισμένων μέτρων διαχείρισης και η αποτελεσματικότητά τους στη διατήρηση των προστατευόμενων ειδών και περιοχών, δεν φαίνεται να αξιολογούνται» [11].

Το συγκεκριμένο νομοσχέδιο δεν θα βοηθήσει ως προς την εφαρμογή μιας ενιαίας εθνικής στρατηγικής για θαλάσσιες προστατευόμενες περιοχές στην Κύπρο, η οποία πρέπει να έχει προτεραιότητα. Αντίθετα, θα αποτελέσει ένα επιπλέον εμπόδιο, καθώς αντί να κηρύσσονται θαλάσσιες προστατευόμενες περιοχές με βάση οικολογικά κριτήρια, θα δημιουργούνται στη βάση ιδιωτικών συμφερόντων και επενδυτικών προγραμμάτων.

 

Θαλάσσιος Χωροταξικός Σχεδιασμός

Το συγκεκριμένο νομοσχέδιο προωθείται ενώ αναμένεται να ολοκληρωθεί ο Θαλάσσιος Χωροταξικός Σχεδιασμός (ΘΧΣ – Maritime Spatial Planning, MSP), ένα από τα βασικά εργαλεία της Ολοκληρωμένης Θαλάσσιας Πολιτικής της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης. Σύμφωνα με την Γενική Διεύθυνση Περιβάλλοντος της Ευρωπαϊκής Επιτροπής, με την έννοια του ΘΧΣ υποδηλώνεται «ο σχεδιασμός του χρόνου και του τόπου άσκησης ανθρώπινων δραστηριοτήτων στη θάλασσα, προκειμένου να διασφαλίζεται η αποτελεσματικότητα και η βιωσιμότητά τους στον μέγιστο δυνατό βαθμό. Κατά τη διαδικασία αυτή, όλα τα ενδιαφερόμενα μέρη συνεργάζονται με διαφάνεια με στόχο τον σχεδιασμό των θαλάσσιων δραστηριοτήτων» [12]. Η Κυπριακή Δημοκρατία εναρμονίστηκε με την Οδηγία 2014/89/ΕΕ του Ευρωπαϊκού Κοινοβουλίου και του Συμβουλίου της 23^ης Ιουλίου 2014 Περί Θεσπίσεως Πλαισίου για τον Θαλάσσιο Χωροταξικό Σχεδιασμό με την ψήφιση από την Βουλή των Αντιπροσώπων του περί Θαλάσσιου Χωροταξικού Σχεδιασμού και άλλων Συναφών Θεμάτων Νόμου του 2017 [Ν. 144(I)/2017] [13] στις 29/9/2017 και τη δημοσίευση του στην Επίσημη Εφημερίδα της Δημοκρατίας στις 13/10/2017.

Σύμφωνα με το Άρθρο 2 του σχετικού Νόμου, «Θαλάσσιο Χωροταξικό Σχέδιο» σημαίνει το «εθνικό σχέδιο ή σχέδια που καταρτίζονται, εγκρίνονται και δημοσιεύονται ως αποτέλεσμα της διαδικασίας του θαλάσσιου χωροταξικού σχεδιασμού» («Ερμηνεία»). Επιπρόσθετα, σύμφωνα με το Άρθρο 17(2) («Κατάρτιση του Θαλάσσιου Χωροταξικού Σχεδίου»), η θέσπιση του Θαλάσσιου Χωροταξικού Σχεδίου «θα πρέπει να καταρτιστεί το συντομότερο δυνατό και το αργότερο έως την 31η Μαρτίου 2021».

Σημειώνεται ότι στις 25/10/2017 και ενώ η Ευρωπαϊκή Επιτροπή είχε ανοίξει υπόθεση παράβασης του κοινοτικού κεκτημένου, η οποία βρισκόταν σε επίπεδο Αιτιολογημένης Γνώμης, για μη εναρμόνιση με την σχετική Οδηγία [14], το Υπουργικό Συμβούλιο ενέκρινε και εξουσιοδότησε τον Υπουργό Γεωργίας, Αγροτικής Ανάπτυξης και Περιβάλλοντος όπως καταθέσει τους προτεινόμενους Κανονισμούς στη Βουλή των Αντιπροσώπων για έγκριση.

Η ψήφιση των προτεινόμενων Κανονισμών από την Βουλή των Αντιπροσώπων και η προώθηση επενδύσεων υπό μορφή ιδιωτικών τεχνητών υφάλων θα δημιουργήσει τετελεσμένα εν τω μέσω της διαδικασίας κατάρτισης του θαλάσσιου χωροταξικού σχεδιασμού.

 

Εισηγήσεις

Έχοντας ως γνώμονα το γεγονός ότι η θάλασσα αποτελεί κοινό αγαθό και δημόσιο πλούτο, θεωρούμε ότι σε κρατική ακίνητη ιδιοκτησία πρέπει να αδειοδοτούνται αποκλειστικά σχέδια, προγράμματα ή/και έργα, τα οποία εξυπηρετούν υπέρτερους λόγους σημαντικού δημοσίου συμφέροντος και αιτιολογούνται επαρκώς, με αναφορά σε συγκεκριμένα πραγματικά περιστατικά. Προτεραιότητα της Κυπριακής Δημοκρατίας θα πρέπει να είναι μια Ολοκληρωμένη Θαλάσσια Πολιτική βασισμένη σε οικολογικά πρωτίστως κριτήρια, αλλά και κοινωνικά, και όχι σε δυνητικές επενδύσεις οι οποίες θα οικειοποιηθούν δημόσιο πλούτο για παραγωγή κέρδους από ιδιώτες επενδυτές.

Η οικειοποίηση και αποξένωση των κοινών αγαθών – της γης, των δασών, των παραλιών, της ακτογραμμής και της θάλασσας – δεν νομιμοποιείται ηθικά, κοινωνικά και πολιτικά. Στη βάση των πιο πάνω, η Πρωτοβουλία για τη Διάσωση των Φυσικών Ακτών  διαφωνεί με τους υπό συζήτηση Κανονισμούς και εισηγείται την απόσυρση τους από το Υπουργείο Γεωργίας, Αγροτικής Ανάπτυξης και Περιβάλλοντος ή την καταψήφιση τους από την Κοινοβουλευτική Επιτροπή Περιβάλλοντος και την Ολομέλεια της Βουλής των Αντιπροσώπων.

 

Λευκωσία, Τετάρτη, 10/10/2018

Πρωτοβουλία για την Διάσωση των Φυσικών Ακτών

 

 

Υποσημειώσεις και Παραπομπές

[1] Practical Guidelines for the Use of Artificial Reefs in the Mediterranean and the Black Sea. Studies and Reviews. General Fisheries Commission for the Mediterranean. No. 96. Rome, FAO 2015; p.2.

[2] UNEP(DEPI)/MED IG.23/21. 20^th Ordinary Meeting of the Contracting Parties to the Convention for the Protection of the Marine Environment and the Coastal Region of the Mediterranean and its Protocols Tirana, Albania, 17-20 December 2017. Agenda item 3: Thematic Decisions Draft Decision IG.23/15: Updated Guidelines for Regulating the Placement of Artificial Reefs at Sea.

[3] Ο περί Αλιείας Νόμος (ΚΕΦ.135)

[4] Κ.Δ.Π. 404/2017.

[5] Κ.Δ.Π. 220/2015.

[6] Κ.Δ.Π. 73/2018.

[7] Κ.Δ.Π. 445/2017.

[8] Κ.Δ.Π. 403/2017.

[9] Κ.Δ.Π. 489/2014.

[10] Ελεγκτική Υπηρεσία της Δημοκρατίας. Ειδική Έκθεση αρ. ΠΕ/03/2018. Διαχείριση Θαλάσσιων Προστατευόμενων Περιοχών στην Κύπρο. 25 Ιουνίου 2018; σελ. 1.

[11] Ό.π. σελ.2.

[12] Γενική Διεύθυνση Περιβάλλοντος της Ευρωπαϊκής Επιτροπής. Ευρωπαϊκή Επιτροπή > Θαλάσσια πολιτική > Ολοκληρωμένη Θαλάσσια Πολιτική > Θαλάσσιος Χωροταξικός Σχεδιασμός

[13] CYLaw > Ο περί Θαλάσσιου Χωρταξικού Σχεδιασμού και άλλων Συναφών Θεμάτων Νόμος του 2017 (144(I)/2017)

[14] European Commission > Press Releases Database > Δέσμη Παραβάσεων Ιουλίου – Μέρος 1: Κυριότερες Αποφάσεις – Βρυξέλλες, 13 Ιουλίου 2017. 11. Θαλάσσια Πολιτική και Αλιεία.

BARAKA OKUMA-TARTIŞMA GRUBU “AYNALAR” KİTABINA BAŞLIYOR

Baraka Okuma – Tartışma Grubu, bir süredir okuduğu  Stefan Zweig  tarafından kaleme alınmış “Satranç” kitabını tamamlayarak, okunacak yeni kitabı belirledi. Yeni Kitap: "Aynalar"  

“Ben hatırlama takıntısı olan bir insanım,” diyor Eduardo Galeano, tarihçi olarak anılmasına itiraz ederek. “Her şeyden çok da Amerika’nın, unutkanlıktan mustarip Latin Amerika’nın geçmişini hatırlama takıntım var.” Ancak bu kez dünyanın bütün coğrafyalarını dolaşarak, fiziki olduğu kadar zihinlerdeki sınırların da ötesine geçerek, unutulmuş ya da öğretilmemiş bambaşka bir tarihi hatırlatıyor Galeano. Her şeyin özüne inmeye çalışan minimalist ve nüktedan diliyle, fazladan tek bir kelime kullanmayarak; eski çağlardan günümüze tarihi, edebi, politik anekdotlarla ve başka bir bakış açısıyla “Neredeyse Evrensel Bir Tarih”. Alternatif tarih yazımının en güzel örneklerinden biri olan Aynalar, insanlık tarihinin acı ancak umut dolu bütün ayrıntılarında soluk aldırarak, dünyaya bakışınızı değiştirmeyi vaat ediyor ve Eduardo Galeano bir kez daha “dünyanın vicdanı” olmaya devam ediyor.

  İsteyen herkesin dahil olabileceği Okuma – Tartışma Grubu, 24 Ekim Çarşamba’dan başlayarak her çarşamba saat 18.20-19.30 arasında okumalarına devam edecektir. Dileyen herkesi, insanlık tarihini anlatan bu harika kitabı birlikte okumaya bekleriz.

Kriz, Federal Kıbrıs ve Taşın Altındakiler – Mehmet Adaman

Argasdi dergimizim "Kiriz" dosya konulu 52. sayısından bir makale...

Kriz koşullarında ayakta kalmaya çalışan "Argasdi"nizi, Baraka aktivistlerinden ve  Khora Kitap Cafe'lerden ısrarla isteyiniz...

Ülkemizde yıllardan beridir güvencesiz, kaderi patronunun iki dudağı arasında, yoksulluk sınırının altında, asgari ücretle çalıştırılan çok sayıda insan yaşamaktadır. Özellikle, son zamanlarda TL’nin değer kaybetmesi ve ekonomik krizi sebep göstererek hükümet tarafından yapılan peşi sıra zamlar nedeniyle zaten kıt kanaat yaşayan emekçiler, ekonomik krizden en büyük zararı gören kesimi oluşturuyorlar. Öte taraftan birkaç yıl öncesine bakıldığında, asgari ücretliye oranla nispeten daha iyi bir yaşam standardına sahip kamu çalışanları ise, özellikle “Göç Yasası”nın ardından giderek yoksullaşmaya başlamışlardı. Yaşanan bu son ekonomik kriz ise artık onları da yoksulluk sınırının altına itmiş durumda. Kısacası hepimiz, giderek daha da yoksullaşıyoruz. Hükümet Ne Yapıyor? Dörtlü koalisyon hükümeti, TL’deki değer kaybına bağlı olarak yükselen döviz kurlarını bahane ederek elektrikten, benzinden tutun da temel yaşam ürünlerine kadar her şeye yüklü miktarda zam yapıyor. Kısacası zaten gerek “Göç Yasası” ile gerekse de yoksulluk sınırının altındaki asgari ücretle yaşamaya çalışan emekçiler bu zamlarla birlikte daha da yoksullaşıyor. Krize çözüm olarak sunulan sözde önlemler ile birlikte fatura hep halka kesiliyor. Elini taşın altına koyması gereken, fedakarlık beklenen, zaten günden güne daha da yoksullaşan halk oluyor. Öte yandan krizi fırsata çevirmeye çalışan tüccarlar ise gününü gün etmeye devam ediyor. Hükümet, halkını değil halk düşmanı patronları koruyor. Kriz için hükümetin aldığı sözde önlemleri incelersek, halkın çıkarlarını değil tüccarların, büyük inşaat şirketlerinin yani sermayedarların çıkarlarını koruduğunu görürüz. Peki tersi mümkün mü? Evet mümkün. Bankalarda yüklü miktarda mevduatı olanların bir defaya mahsus olmak üzere servetinin bir kısmına el konularak işsizlik, sosyal yardım ve kamu altyapı yatırımları için oluşturulacak fonlara aktarılabilir. Dahası büyük otel sahiplerinin servetlerinin bir kısmı bir defaya mahsus olmak üzere yerli üretimi teşvik fonuna aktarılabilir. Mesela devlete ait arsaların, arazilerin ve binaların komik bedeller karşılığında sermayeye peşkeşi durdurulup büyük sermayeye sağlanan arsa, arazi ve binaların kira bedelleri artırılabilir. Bu ve buna benzer pekçok öneri Bağımsızlık Yolu tarafından hükümete hali hazırda sunulmuş bulunmaktadır. Kısacası halkı ezmekten başka çareler de var ama bunu yapabilecek siyasi vizyona ve iradeye sahip bir hükümet yok. Euro’ya Geçersek Krizden Kurtulur muyuz? Yaşadığımız ekonomik krizden kurtuluş için Federal Kıbrıs’tan veya Euro’ya geçmekten başka hiçbir şey yapılamayacağını savunanlar da var. Ekonomi bilimi açısından bir anda para biriminizi değiştirmek mümkün mü değil mi, sonuçları ne olur vs. o apayrı bir tartışma konusu… Yukarıda küçük bir miktarını saymaya çalıştığımız, patronların değil halkın çıkarlarını koruyacak önerileri aslında aynen hükümet gibi görmezden gelen bir kesimce bu öneri sürekli dile getiriliyor. Açıkçası Euro’ya geçmek (Euro’nun bu kadar değerlendiği bu günlerde) oldukça güzel duyuluyor değil mi? Hele ki tek çare olarak Federal Kıbrıs’ı savunmak? O daha da güzel. Bunlar güzel ama yoksullaşan halk için gerçekten doğru çıkış yolu bunlar mı? Bugün hali hazırda Euro kullanan Yunanistan, İspanya, Portekiz gibi AB ülkelerine ve pek çok Güney Amerika ülkesine baktığımızda bu ülkelerde de faturanın halka kesilmeye çalışıldığı ekonomik krizler yaşandığını görürüz. Yani söz konusu kriz sadece Türkiye’ye veya kktc’ye özgü bir kriz değildir. Bu kriz her ne kadar AKP ve Erdoğan’ın yanlış politikalarıyla katlansa da, özünde kapitalizmin krizidir ve farklı biçimlerle farklı farklı coğrafyalarda ortaya çıkmaktadır. Kısacası bazı kesimlerce ekonomik krize çözüm olarak gösterilen Federal Kıbrıs veya Euro’ya geçiş, ekonomik krizden çıkış değil; yeni ekonomik krizlere yelken açma riski taşımaktadır. Bunu, yağmurdan kaçarken doluya tutulmak olarak da düşünebiliriz. Bizler krizin sebeplerini doğru tahlil edemezsek ve krizden çıkış için sadece “Çare Federal Kıbrıs” dersek hoş ama boş konuşmuş oluruz. Çünkü kktc’de yoksul olmakla Federal Kıbrıs’ta yoksul olmak arasında hiçbir fark yoktur. Federal Kıbrıs veya yeniden birleşme elbette ki uğruna mücadele verilmesi gereken ve ülkemizdeki “siyasi krizin” çözümü ile alakalı bir konudur. Oysa ki günümüzde yaşanan bir ekonomik krizdir ve burada esas mesele halkın yoksulluktan kurtulması olmalıdır. Kısacası tek çarenin Federal Kıbrıs olduğunu söyleyenler ekonomik kriz ile siyasi krizi aynı şey gibi kabul etmektedir ve bu hatalı bir bakış açısıdır. Yoksulluktan kurtulmadan varılacak bir Federal Kıbrıs hedefi, halklar için yeni ve hatta geçmiştekilerinden çok daha büyük çaplı bir hayal kırıklığı yaratır. Ne Yapabiliriz? Yaşadığımız ekonomik krizin farklı şekillerle pek çok ülkede yaşandığı gerçeğini ve oralarda verilen mücadeleleri göz önünde bulundurarak, krizden dolayı yoksullaşan halkın yani biz emekçilerin, sınıfsal temelli bir mücadele vermekten başka bir çaresi bulunmamaktadır. Yani krizin faturasının emekçilere değil, sermayedarlara çıkarılması için mücadele etmeliyiz. Krizin bedelini emekçilere değil patronlara ödetmek için örgütlenmeliyiz. Bunu yaparken aynı dertlerden farklı şekillerde muzdarip Kıbrıslı Elenlerle de ezilen ve gittikçe yoksullaşan halklar olarak sınıfsal temelli bir dayanışma kurmalıyız. Ve emin olun ki bu, Federal Kıbrıs ve yeniden birleşme için de büyük bir adım olacaktır.

Ödenmeyecek Ödemiyoruz – Nazen Şansal

Argasdi dergimizin "Kimin Krizi Kimin Fırsatı?" dosya konulu 52. sayısından bir yazı...

Tiyatro eylemdir! Belkide tiyatro kendi içinde devrimci değildir ama hiç kuşku yok ki tiyatro bir devrim provasıdır. (Augusto Boal)

    En güçlü sanat dallarından biridir tiyatro. Seyircisiyle göz göze, yan yanadır. Nabzını tutar salonu paylaştığı izleyicisinin; yani içinde yaşadığı, var olduğu toplumun. Aynı atmosferi solur tüm insanlarla ve estetize ederek geri verir, yansıtır soluğunu. Belki sanatçı duyarlılığı, aydın sorumluluğuyla birkaç adım ileridedirama "önde gideni Şam'da görürler" misali kopmamalıdır halktan. Yol göstermeli, esin vermelidir ilham aldığı insani değerlere, beslendiği toplumsal meselelere... "Sanata politika karıştırmayalım" diyenlerin, sistemin devamından yana olduğunun farkına vararak, taraf olmalıdır güçlüden değil, haklıdan yana.Ve çekinmeden söyleyebilmelidir politik sözünü tiyatral araçlarla. İşte bu yazıda böyle bir yaşam felsefesine ve tiyatro anlayışına sahip olan Dario Fo'nun bir oyunundan bahsedeceğiz. Dario Fo (1926-2016), halk tiyatrosunun itici gücünün ve mizahın, kitleleri düşündürme ve dönüştürme üzerindeki etkisinin bilincinde bir yazardı. Belki de bu nedenle tiyatro karikatürcüsü ve radikal palyaço olarak da anılmaktadır. Ülkemizde çeşitli oyunları sahnelenmiş olan Fo'nun en çok bilinen ve sevilen oyunlarından biri "Ödenmeyecek Ödemiyoruz" isimli politik güldürüdür. Bu oyun 2002-2003 sezonunda Lefkoşa Belediye Tiyatrosu, 2013 yılında ise Baraka Tiyatro Ekibi tarafından ülkemiz seyircisiyle buluşmuş ve büyük ilgi görerek kapalı gişe oynamıştır. Ağlanacak halimize güldüren oyunda, ekonomik kriz ve zamlar karşısında halkın tepkisi konu alınır ve tiyatral bir abartı ile işlenir. Başta kadınlar olmak üzere, geçim sıkıntısı çeken yaşlılar, gençler, işçiler, fiyatların zamlanmasına karşı hep birlikte eski fiyatlar üzerinden alışveriş yapmaya karar verirler ve "Ödenmeyecek! Ödemiyoruz!" diyerek süpermarketteki yiyeceklere el koyarlar. Bir yanda, yaptıklarını birbirinden gizlemeye çalışan karıkocalar,  diğer yanda evlere baskınlar düzenleyen polisleri atlatmak için çevrilen dolaplar... Sistemi eleştiren fakat aynı zamanda sistemin kurallarını savunan bir koca karşısında, kalkıştığı eylemi savunabilmek için türlü oyunlara girişen bir kadın... Kaotik bir ortamda yaşama mücadelesi veren, sendikasına, partisine güvenmeye çalışan iki işçi ailesi... "Bu insanlar, ekonomik sıkıntılar, yönetimdeki yozlaşma gibi sorunlar içerisinde, sahip oldukları ahlaki değerlere ve inandıkları ideolojilere tutunmaya çalışırken, sonradan aslında bunların içlerinin boşalmış olduğunu, inandıkları siyasi partilerin bile kendilerini kurtarma yolunda onları yapayalnız bıraktığını görüyorlar. Pahalılık nedeniyle isyan eden kadınlar tarafından başlayan oyun, yapılan eylemin cesaretsizce saklanmaya çalışılmasından cesarete ve yapılan eyleme karşı çıkanların da buna katılmasıyla bütüncül bir uyanışa doğru ilerliyor."(1) On yıl arayla ve farklı yorumlarla, dönemin güncel olaylarını da katarak sahnelenen bu oyunun Kıbrıslı Türk halkı tarafından çok sevilmesinin bir nedeni olsa gerek... Sadece Kıbrıs'ta değil, oynandığı tüm ülkelerde beğeni ile izlenmesi de manidardır.Halk tiyatrosu, bazen halkın yapmak isteyip yapamadığını yüzüne vurur, "keşke" dediğini kurgusal gerçekliğe dönüştürür. Sahnede bütün tabular yıkılır, yasalar delinir, korkular ve baskılar alay konusu olup alt edilir.Seyirci tersten bir şekilde katarsis yaşar; başına felaketler gelen başkahramanının yaptıklarından, korku ve acıma duygusuyla kaçınmak yerine,izlediği karakterlerin yerinde olmayı ve onlar gibi davranabilmeyi arzular. Hele ki sahnede gördükleri kendi yaşantısını çağrıştırıyorsa, bu etki katlanarak büyüyecektir. 1970'lerde İtalya Torino'da grev yapan işçilerin durumuna, sendikaların kayıtsız kalması üzerine yazılan oyunda, bir taraftan acımasız kapitalizm eleştirilirken diğer taraftan sendikalar ve aymazlıkla politikacılara güvenen halk sorgulanmaktadır. Çaresizlik içindeki ev kadınları ise hem kocalarına, hem büyük market patronlarına, hem de devlete kafa tutmaktadır. Kadının fendi sistemi yenmektedir. Oyunun yazıldığı 70'li yıllarda başgösteren petrol krizi ile ekonominin sarsılması, içinde yaşamaya çalıştığımız, krizlerle malul sistemde farklı sebeplerle sık sık tekrar ediyor."Hepimiz aynı gemideyiz" safsatasına karşın ekonomik bunalımlar, hükümeti arkasına alan sermaye için fırsata dönüşmekte, süpermarketler kendilerini korumaya alıp karlarını katlamakta, ceremeyi orta ve dar gelirli kesimler çekmektedir. "Ödenmeyecek Ödemiyoruz oyunu, yaşadığımız toplumsal, ekonomik ve politik sorunlara korkusuzca değinirken, bunları düzeyli ve çarpıcı bir ironik güldürü konusu yapar. Oyundaki eleştiriler, taşlamalar sadece iktidara değil muhalefete, sendikalara, vatandaşa kısaca tüm topluma yöneliktir. Ödenmeyecek Ödemiyoruz, sonucu gülünç olacak kadar acı olan bir meydan savaşıdır."(2) Ezilenlerin tiyatrosunun yaratıcısı Augusto Boal, tiyatroyu bir eylem olarak tarif eder ve devrimin provası benzetmesini yapar. Kapitalizmin kronik hastalığı olan ekonomik krizlerin faturası halka ödetilmeye çalışılır, hepimiz zamlar ve geçim derdi altında ezim ezim ezilirken bir meydan savaşının tam vakti değil midir? Nazen Şansal nazen_sansal@yahoo.com   (1)Aliye Ummanel, Bir Tiyatro Şöleni, Kıbrıs gazetesi, 11 Mart 2003 (2)Yaşar Ersoy, Sevdasıyla Kavgasıyla Bir Ülkenin Yaşamında Rol Almak, Khora Yayınları Baraka Tiyatro Ekibi'nin yorumuyla oyunu seyretmek için: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1GI6TM5wP6A

11. Uluslararası Kıbrıs İşçi Filmleri Festivali Pazartesi Başlıyor

Bu yıl 11.’si düzenlenecek olan Kıbrıs İşçi Filmleri Festivali (İFF) 3 Aralık Pazartesi 19.30’da, Gönyeli Belediyesi’nde gerçekleştirilecek açılış kokteyli ve Sol Anahtarı’nın müzik dinletisi ile başlıyor. Festival bu yıl “Sistem Krizde! Mücadele Kadrajda” sloganıyla düzenleniyor. “Tavuklar Firarda” isimli bir de çocuk filminin gösterileceği festivalde, Lefkoşa’nın yanı sıra, Değirmenlik, Mağusa, Akdoğan (LYSİ), ve Akçay’da  da gösterimler yer alacak. Program şöyle; 3 Aralık Pazartesi, 19.30: Açılış Kokteyli, Sol Anahtarı’ndan Müzik Dinletisi, Film: Madencilerin Anıları –Gönyeli Belediyesi   4 Aralık Salı, 18.00: Film: Ben Daniel Blake -DAÜ Mustafa Afşin Salonu   5 Aralık Çarşamba, 19.30: Film: Gıda Kooperatifi -Gönyeli Belediyesi   7 Aralık Cuma, 19.00 Film: 9’dan 5’e -Değirmenlik Belediyesi Özle Türkel Sosyal Aktivite Merkezi Konferans Salonu   8 Aralık Cumartesi,11.oo Film: Tavuklar Firarda (Çocuklara Özel) -Arabahmet Kültür Evi   10 Aralık Pazartesi, 19.30 Film: Güneşli Pazartesiler -Mağusa Gelişim Akademisi   11 Aralık Salı, 19.30 Film: 9’dan 5’e Gönyeli Belediyesi   12 Aralık Çarşamba, 19.30 Film: Ev Kira, Semt Bizim -Akçay Kültür Sanat Derneği   13 Aralık Perşembe, 19.30 Film: Madencilerin Anıları -Akdoğan Fikir Sanat Atölyesi   13 Aralık Perşembe, 19.30 Film: İnsan Kaynakları -Gönyeli Belediyesi   15 Aralık Cumartesi, 11.00 Filmler: Tavuklar Firarda (Çocuklara Özel) -Değirmenlik Belediyesi Özle Türkel Sosyal Aktivite Merkezi Konferans Salonu     15 Aralık Cumartesi, 19.30 Film: Güneşli Pazartesiler -Gönyeli Belediyesi.   Festival hakkında detaylı bilgiye “iffkibris.org” sitesinden ulaşabilirsiniz.