The 1960 Constitution of Cyprus was a delicate and hard-fought compromise between the Turkish Cypriot and Greek Cypriot communities, designed to prevent the domination of one group over the other and to safeguard peace on the island.

 

However, the actions of Archbishop Makarios III, who sought to unilaterally amend the constitution, fundamentally altered this balance. His constitutional changes were aimed at marginalizing the Turkish Cypriots, undermining the power-sharing arrangements, and paving the way for Enosis, the union of Cyprus with Greece. These actions were not only a betrayal of the agreements that founded the Republic of Cyprus but also a direct catalyst for the violence and bloodshed that erupted in 1963.

 

The 1960 Constitution: A Necessary Safeguard

The constitution established in 1960 was an intricate document that enshrined the equal partnership between the Turkish Cypriot and Greek Cypriot communities. It was, in essence, a peace agreement that prevented the larger Greek Cypriot population from overpowering the Turkish Cypriots. Key provisions included:

 

Communal Voting and Separate Majorities: This ensured that any legislation affecting both communities required separate majorities, preventing the Greek Cypriot majority from imposing laws unilaterally.
   
Municipal Divisions: Separate municipalities were established for Turkish Cypriots and Greek Cypriots, allowing each community to govern its own local affairs autonomously.
   
Representation in Public Service and Military: Turkish Cypriots were guaranteed proportional representation in the public sector and military, ensuring their participation in the governance of the island.

 

These provisions were essential for maintaining the balance of power between the two communities. However, Makarios viewed these safeguards as obstacles to his ultimate goal of Enosis and sought to dismantle them.

 

Makarios’ 13 Amendments: A Calculated Attack on Turkish Cypriots

In November 1963, Makarios proposed 13 constitutional amendments that would fundamentally alter the power dynamics between the Turkish Cypriot and Greek Cypriot communities. These amendments were designed to erode the protections afforded to the Turkish Cypriots and to consolidate power in the hands of the Greek Cypriots. 

 

1. Undermining Communal Voting: One of the most significant changes proposed by Makarios was the elimination of the requirement for separate majorities. This would have allowed the Greek Cypriot majority to pass laws without the consent of the Turkish Cypriots, effectively disenfranchising them. The then Turkish Vice-President, Dr. Fazıl Küçük, responded by stating, “Makarios’ amendments are a clear violation of the spirit and letter of the 1960 Constitution. They are designed to subordinate the Turkish Cypriots and strip them of their rights as equal partners in the state.” 

 

2. Abolishing Municipal Divisions: The proposed amendments also sought to abolish the separate municipal councils, thereby centralizing control under the Greek Cypriot-dominated government. This move was viewed as an attempt to erase the autonomy of the Turkish Cypriots at the local level. 

 

3. Diminishing Representation in Public Service and Military: Makarios also aimed to reduce the Turkish Cypriots' representation in public service and the military. This was perceived not just as an administrative adjustment but as a strategic move to weaken the Turkish Cypriot presence in key state institutions, further marginalizing them.

These proposed changes were in direct violation of the agreements that had been painstakingly negotiated and were seen by the Turkish Cypriots as a betrayal of the trust that had been placed in the Greek Cypriot leadership.

 

The Role of Enosis and Makarios' True Intentions

Makarios’ push for constitutional amendments cannot be understood without acknowledging his ultimate goal: Enosis. Enosis had been the rallying cry of the Greek Cypriot nationalist movement, and Makarios’ actions were clearly aligned with this objective. As noted by historian William Mallinson, “Makarios never abandoned his ultimate objective of Enosis, and his 13 points were a calculated move to weaken the Turkish Cypriots and pave the way for Cyprus’ union with Greece.” 

 

Makarios had come to power on the promise of pursuing Enosis, and his attempts to amend the constitution were seen by many as a step towards realizing this goal. By weakening the Turkish Cypriot position within the Republic, Makarios was laying the groundwork for a future where Cyprus could be more easily integrated with Greece.

Bloody Christmas: The Inevitable Consequence of Constitutional Betrayal

The constitutional crisis engineered by Makarios in 1963 led directly to the outbreak of violence known as Bloody Christmas. On December 21, 1963, Greek Cypriot forces, emboldened by the proposed amendments and the weakening of Turkish Cypriot protections, launched coordinated attacks on Turkish Cypriot communities. The violence resulted in the deaths of hundreds of Turkish Cypriots and the displacement of thousands more. 

 

As journalist Patrick Seale reported, “The attacks on Turkish Cypriots were not spontaneous but part of a well-coordinated plan to intimidate and drive out the Turkish population from key areas, clearing the way for future dominance by the Greek Cypriots.” 

 

This tragic event marked the beginning of a sustained campaign of ethnic cleansing and violence against the Turkish Cypriots, which would continue for years to come. The constitutional changes proposed by Makarios were not just legal maneuvers; they were the opening salvo in a broader campaign to subjugate the Turkish Cypriot population and eliminate their presence from the island.

 

The Question of Legitimacy: Which Constitution Is in Force?

The Greek Cypriot leadership maintains that the Republic of Cyprus continues to operate under the 1960 Constitution, albeit with the amendments proposed by Makarios. However, from the Turkish Cypriot perspective, these changes have fundamentally altered the nature of the state, rendering the original constitution—and by extension, the legitimacy of the Republic of Cyprus—questionable. 

 

Legal scholar and expert on Cypriot constitutional law, Claire Palley, has argued, “The unilateral amendments proposed by Makarios in 1963, without the consent of the Turkish Cypriots, effectively invalidated the 1960 Constitution as it was originally intended. This raises serious questions about the legitimacy of the current Greek Cypriot administration, which continues to claim sole authority over the entire island.”

 

TCE Conclusion: A Legacy of Betrayal and Injustice

Makarios’ attempt to amend the 1960 Constitution was not just a political maneuver but a calculated effort to undermine the rights and protections of the Turkish Cypriot community. His actions directly led to the violence and bloodshed of 1963, setting the stage for decades of conflict and division. The legacy of these constitutional manipulations continues to haunt Cyprus, perpetuating the deep mistrust and division between the Turkish Cypriots and the Greek Cypriots.

 

Until these actions are fully acknowledged and addressed, the Republic of Cyprus cannot be seen as a legitimate or just entity by the Turkish Cypriots. The betrayal of the 1960 agreements by Makarios is a stain on the history of Cyprus that cannot be erased and must be remembered as a warning of the dangers of constitutional manipulation and the pursuit of nationalist agendas at the expense of peace and equality.

 

Sources:

William Mallinson, “Cyprus: A Modern History,” I.B. Tauris, 2005.

Patrick Seale, “The Struggle for Syria: A Study of Post-War Arab Politics, 1945-1958,” Oxford University Press, 1986.

Claire Palley, “An International Relations Debacle: The UN Secretary-General's Mission of Good Offices in Cyprus 1999-2004,” Hart Publishing, 2005.

Fazıl Küçük, Statement on Makarios' Proposed Constitutional Amendments, 1963.