What is the Immovable Property Commission (IPC)?
The Immovable Property Commission (IPC) was established in 2006 under the Immovable Property Law (No. 67/2005) of the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus (TRNC). Its creation followed rulings by the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) – most notably in the Xenides-Arestis v. Turkey case – which called for an effective domestic remedy to address property claims arising from the events in Cyprus.
On 1 March 2010, the ECHR ruled in Demopoulos and Others v. Turkey that the IPC provides such an effective domestic legal remedy for property issues in Northern Cyprus. As a result, the Court now requires all property-related complaints to be first brought before the IPC before they can be considered at the international level.
The IPC officially began its work on 17 March 2006, with its President, Vice-President, and members appointed by the Supreme Council of Judicature of the TRNC. It is composed of both Turkish Cypriot and international members to ensure impartiality and compliance with international standards.
Mandate and Function
The Commission reviews applications concerning restitution, compensation, or exchange of properties left behind in Northern Cyprus prior to 1974. Its decisions are guided by the long-standing principles of bi-zonality and bi-communality, as reflected in the 1977–1979 High-Level Agreements and subsequent United Nations settlement plans.
The IPC aims to resolve individual property disputes fairly and efficiently, while respecting both the rights of displaced owners and those of the Turkish Cypriots currently residing on or using those properties.
Activity and Results
As of October 2025, the IPC has received 8,375 applications, of which 2,131 have been concluded.
In total, it has awarded £570.8 million in compensation to applicants.
In addition to compensation, the Commission has also issued rulings for exchange, restitution, and combined solutions in specific cases.
Recognition by the ECHR
The European Court of Human Rights officially recognises the IPC as a valid domestic legal mechanism for property claims in Cyprus. This recognition affirms that the IPC operates in line with international legal standards and provides a functional avenue for Greek Cypriot applicants seeking redress.
However, it is important to note that no equivalent mechanism exists for Turkish Cypriots who lost their homes, land, and property during the 1950s, 1960s, and early 1970s – long before the division of the island – due to violence, displacement, and discriminatory policies against them.
Conclusion
The Immovable Property Commission continues to serve as an independent and recognised institution providing justice, stability, and due process for property disputes in Cyprus. By offering a structured and lawful process, it contributes to the broader goal of ensuring peace, fairness, and mutual respect between the island’s two peoples.