The 1960 Constitution of the Republic of Cyprus established a bi-communal partnership between the two communities. However, since 1964, the doctrine of necessity invoked to justify the non-application of certain constitutional provisions relating to Turkish Cypriots has become a major subject of debate within the Cypriot constitutional order. This study examines the nature of the doctrine of necessity invoked by the Supreme Court in its 1964 decision in Ibrahim and Others and its implications for constitutional law.

In the Cypriot setting, the doctrine of necessity differs in nature from traditional state of emergency regimes or derogation mechanisms in international human rights law. The issue, therefore, concerns not merely the temporary restriction of certain rights but the effective non-application of the constitutional partnership arrangement with respect to one of the communities. Originally presented as a temporary solution, the continued application of this doctrine for more than half a century raises the question of whether the state of necessity has effectively evolved into a permanent practice of governance.

Against this background, the 2004 Annan Plan referendum is regarded as a significant political turning point in which the willingness of the two communities to reach a bi-communal settlement was tested, and the results of the referendum added a new dimension to debates concerning the continuity of the doctrine of necessity. In the Cyprus dispute, both communities have mutual concerns regarding issues such as security, economic functioning, and political equality, which make the emergence of a comprehensive solution more difficult. Nevertheless, the transformation of the state of necessity into a permanent practice of governance appears as a development with significant implications for human rights.

The study also discusses whether the doctrine of necessity has become the legal basis for the unilateral restructuring of the constitutional order. In this respect, the relationship between the doctrine and the system of the European Convention on Human Rights is examined, together with the question of whether it has produced, in the long term, a structural regime of rights deprivation and isolation for Turkish Cypriots.

You can access the Turkish version of the policy note here.