Case No. CO-2850-2005

57.The decision to impose the ban was taken after the complaint from Mr Coleman and a complaint in similar terms from the Mayor. It follows that their complaints were based on the fact of non-recognition and an erroneous belief that “… Turkey … [have] illegally occupied the territory for the past thirty years”. I would be minded to disregard the error, notwithstanding that it amounts to a regrettable allegation against a friendly sovereign state, which has been adopted as a reason for the decision. It might be excused on the part of Mr Coleman and the Mayor, but it was adopted as part of the first decision and remained as part of the reasoning for the decision contained in the second decision letter dated 13th April 2005, impliedly because Mr Coleman’s complaint was relied upon and expressly in the following passage:“Taking into account the fact that TRNC is not internationally recognised and Turkey’s occupation of North Cyprus is considered internationally to be illegal, TfL fails to see how the decision is inconsistent with the provisions of section 404 of the Greater London Authority Act 1999”.It is true another part of the letter alleged that TRNC is “in illegal occupation of a part of the territory of the Republic of Cyprus” (see the extract in paragraph 20(2) above). Whilst this has the merit of being legally accurate, it leaves this aspect of the decision in confusion.58.In the course of the history of the Cyprus dispute since July 1974, it has been from time to time a contention on the part of the Greek Cypriot community that Turkey landed armed forces in North Cyprus, not in discharge of the Treaty of Guarantee between Greece, Turkey and the United Kingdom, as Turkey asserted, but in order to occupy the territory (see the account in Hesperides Hotels p. 219 D-E). Its adoption by Mr Coleman and then the defendant as a reason for the decision does call into question the true purpose and character of the ban and has an impact on the impartiality and rationality of the defendant, which has sought to justify the taking of its decision to avoid “political controversy”.