occupied land — The Republic of Cyprus is urgently seeking to overturn a French court ruling that released Iranian property developer Behdad Jafari, raising concerns over the implications for the state’s jurisdiction over Turkish-occupied territories.
On 10 December 2025, the Court of Appeal in Aix-en-Provence declined to extradite Jafari, the head of ISATIS Construction Group, who faces accusations of constructing seven luxury developments on land unlawfully taken from Greek Cypriots in Famagusta. The court’s decision was based on its interpretation of European law, stating it cannot be enforced in regions lacking what it deemed “effective control” by the Republic.
This ruling has provoked alarm among Cypriot officials, who assert that it undermines decades of established international law. They argue that the French judiciary’s stance disregards the authority of the Republic’s courts, particularly in light of the landmark Apostolides v Orams case, which affirmed the Republic’s legal jurisdiction across the entire island.
Jafari, who had been residing in Nice, fled to the occupied north via Istanbul shortly after the ruling. Upon arrival, he issued a statement praising the French judiciary’s “impartiality” and dismissed the Republic’s European Arrest Warrant as a “politically motivated” effort to hinder development in the north. His escape has intensified concerns regarding the potential for the ruling to set a legal precedent that could encourage further encroachments on Greek Cypriot property.
In legal circles, the lack of a robust argument from the French prosecution regarding the Republic’s sovereign rights has been highlighted as a critical factor in the court’s decision. Observers suggest that the French judges’ refusal to acknowledge the Republic’s effective control has inadvertently provided a symbolic win for those advocating for the legitimacy of construction projects on occupied land.
This situation stands in stark contrast to the Republic’s recent success in the Aykut case, where individuals were prosecuted for similar land exploitation. During the Jafari proceedings, the defence successfully contended that the Republic was “criminalising civil matters” for political purposes, although the judges did not officially endorse this view. Nevertheless, their ruling has bolstered arguments from those seeking to validate developments on property owned by displaced persons.
Evidence collected by Cypriot authorities indicates that Jafari oversaw the construction of multiple holiday complexes and an apartment block on land owned by Greek Cypriots. These projects were marketed internationally as legitimate under the laws of the self-declared regime in the north.
With Jafari now beyond the jurisdiction of European law enforcement, the Republic is focusing on a high-level appeal to rectify the legal narrative and assert its rights over the occupied territories. The Law Office and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs are reportedly pressuring the French General Prosecutor to contest the ruling in a higher court. This appeal aims not only to pursue Jafari but also to prevent the argument of effective control from being utilised by other developers facing international warrants.
