Global Report on Human Settlements 2007 - PoA-ISS

Policy responses to tenure insecurity
151
Box 6.20 Security of tenure case law: European Court of Human Rights
Among the many cases addressed by the European Court of
Human Rights, perhaps the most prominent is the inter-state
complaint case of Cyprus versus Turkey (1976) which addressed
evictions as a violation of the right to ‘respect for the home’, and
thus provided significant protection against this violation of internationally
recognized housing rights.
In Akdivar and Others versus Turkey (1996), the court found
that ‘there can be no doubt that the deliberate burning of the applicants’
homes and their contents constitutes … a serious
interference with the right to respect for their family lives and
homes and with the peaceful enjoyment of possessions’.
In the case of Spadea and Scalabrino versus Italy (1995), the
court opined that the failure of the public authorities to evict
elderly tenants from the homes owned by the applicants was not a
violation of the right to peaceful enjoyment of possessions – in
effect, protecting the rights of the tenants to remain in the accommodation.
In Phocas versus France (1996), the court held that there
had been no violation of Article 1 of Protocol No 1 in the case
where the applicant’s full enjoyment of his property had been
subjected to various interferences due to the implementation of
urban development schemes since the said interference complied
with the requirements of the general interest.
In Zubani versus Italy (1996), a case concerning expropriation,
the court held that there had been a violation of Article 1 of
Protocol No 1 since no fair balance had been struck between the
interest of protecting the right to property and the demands of the
general interest as a result of the length of the proceedings, the
difficulties encountered by the applicants to obtain full payment of
the compensation awarded and the deterioration of the plots
eventually returned to them.
In Connors versus United Kingdom (2004), the court stated
clearly that:
… the eviction of the applicant and his family from the
local authority site was not attended by the requisite
procedural safeguards … and consequently cannot be
regarded as justified by a ‘pressing social need’ or
proportionate to the legitimate aim being pursued.
There has, accordingly, been a violation of … the
Convention.
CIVIL SOCIETY RESPONSES
TO SECURITY OF TENURE
AND FORCED EVICTIONS
A growing number of non-governmental organizations
(NGOs) at international, national and local levels have
become involved in efforts to support the provision of
security of tenure and opposing forced evictions in recent
years. Their efforts have ranged from lobbying national
governments and delegates at international conferences and
meetings, to providing advice or direct support to local
communities. Among the most prominent NGOs that have
been working at the international level for several years are
the Asian Coalition for Housing Rights (ACHR), the Centre
on Housing Rights and Evictions (COHRE) and the Habitat
International Coalition (HIC). At the national level, the
efforts of NGOs have often been supplemented by those of
other civil society actors, including local universities, as in
the case of Pom Mahakan in Bangkok (see Box 11.6).
Acts of forced eviction – whether carried out to
construct a large dam or a new road, in the context of ethnic
cleansing or simply to gentrify a trendy neighbourhood – are
almost invariably accompanied by attempts by those affected
to resist the eviction and to stay in their homes. Although
perhaps most initiatives to stop forced evictions before they
occur eventually fail, there are no shortage of inspiring and
courageous cases where planned evictions have been
revoked and the people allowed to remain in their homes on
their lands.
A few examples of strategies against planned evictions
are summarized below. Any number of additional examples
of strategies against planned evictions could be provided; but
even this cursory examination reveals that evictions can be
prevented by using a wide range of measures, all of which
are premised on the human rights of the persons and
communities affected: 48
• Zambia. Some 17,000 families (at least 85,000 people)
were spared planned eviction in 1991 due to the
efforts of a local women’s rights organization, the
Zambia Women and Shelter Action Group (ZWOSAG).
Basing claims on international human rights standards
on eviction in negotiations with government officials,
ZWOSAG was able to obtain a suspension order from
the minister for local government and housing, who
went on national television and radio to announce the
suspension, and who urged local authorities throughout
Zambia to refrain from carrying out forced
evictions.
• Nigeria. The Social and Economic Rights Action Center
submitted complaints to the World Bank Inspection
Panel, attempting to prevent mass evictions in Lagos
that would result from the World Bank-funded Lagos
Drainage and Sanitation Project (see also Box 6.21).
• Brazil. As discussed in Chapter 11, anti-eviction
campaigners utilize ‘special social interest zones’ (urban
areas specifically zoned for social housing) as a means of
preventing evictions. Moreover, the efforts of the
national housing movements have also had a major
impact on policies related to security of tenure (see Box
6.27).
• The Philippines. Various strategies have been employed
to halt evictions before they are carried out. In addition
to community organizing and popular mobilization, the
use of the media, lobbying efforts, the use of human
rights arguments based on international law and other
measures, as well as legal strategies based on the 1992
Acts of forced
eviction … are
almost invariably
accompanied by
attempts by those
affected to resist the
eviction and to stay
in their homes