4 CYPRUS v. TURKEY JUDGMENT arrangements for the hearing. The respondent Government, although invited, did not attend the meeting. 12. The hearing took place in public in the Human Rights Building, Strasbourg, on 20 September 2000 (Rule 59 § 2). The respondent Government did not notify the Court of the names of their representatives in advance of the hearing and were not present at the hearing. In the absence of sufficient cause for the failure of the respondent Government to appear, the Grand Chamber decided to proceed with the hearing, being satisfied that such a course was consistent with the proper administration of justice (Rule 64). The President informed the Chairman of the Committee of Ministers of this decision in a letter dated 21 September 2000. There appeared before the Court: (a) for the applicant Government Mr A. MARKIDES, Attorney-General of the Republic of Cyprus, Mr I. BROWNLIE QC, Mr D. PANNICK QC, Ms C. PALLEY, Barrister-at-Law, Mr M. SHAW, Barrister-at-Law, Mrs S.M. JOANNIDES, Senior Counsel of the Republic of Cyprus, Mr P. POLYVIOU, Barrister-at-Law, Mr P. SAINI, Barrister-at-Law, Mr N. EMILIOU, Consultant, Agent, Counsel, Adviser; (b) for the respondent Government The respondent Government did not appear. The Court heard addresses by Mr Markides, Mr Brownlie, Mr Shaw, Mr Pannick and Mr Polyviou. THE FACTS THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE A. General context 13. The complaints raised in this application arise out of the Turkish military operations in northern Cyprus in July and August 1974 and the

Select target paragraph3