Global Report on Human Settlements 2007 - PoA-ISS

Enhancing tenure security and ending forced evictions
269
Similarly, ‘special social interest zones’ can now be
declared in urban areas in Brazil. These zones are efficient
tools for municipalities to avoid forced evictions. The main
candidates to be defined as such zones are urban areas
occupied by favelas, cortiços, 28 collective residences, popular
subdivisions, and vacant and underutilized urban areas. Such
zones are typically declared in areas where there are a high
number of landownership conflicts or housing that will
result in forced evictions of low-income groups. Once such
areas have been identified, municipal law can define them to
be special social interest zones. This provides legal guarantees
to social groups living within the zone and recognizes
these as residential areas for low-income groups. Based on
this tool, judges can deliver judgements in favour of these
social groups when they consider requests for eviction and
removal of families occupying public or private areas. They
can then establish a process of negotiation between the
owner of the area, the residents and the government to
regulate the legal situation of the population and promote
improvement of these areas. Some Brazilian municipalities –
such as Recife, Diadema, Porto Alegre, Santos and Santo
Andre – have utilized this land regulation tool to combat
forced evictions.
Thailand is another country where innovative tenure
options have been introduced to address the concerns of
low-income groups. Low-income residents of Bangkok
experience one of the main effects of globalization and
urbanization, increasing pressures for more ‘efficient’ use of
land in inner-city areas. Box 11.6 provides an example of
such attempted ‘development’ in Bangkok. Despite local
government efforts to evict and relocate the community of
Pom Mahakan, the residents were able to resist eviction and
obtain security of tenure in a negotiated settlement that
included elements of land sharing. The experience of this
community exemplifies how development can be achieved in
a process incorporating both human rights and community
design/development concerns.
On the basis of the wisdom associated with innovative
approaches to the security of tenure question, it is appropriate
to consider a ‘twin-track’ approach to improving tenure
security. First, implementation of such innovative
approaches can improve living conditions for current slum
dwellers. And, second, the revision of regulatory frameworks
can reduce the need for future slums by significantly improving
access to legal land and housing. 29 The latter is perhaps
even more important than the former as urban growth
‘Special social
interest zones’ …
are efficient tools
for municipalities
to avoid forced
evictions
Box 11.6 Eviction prevention in Pom Mahakan, Bangkok
In Pom Mahakan in Bangkok (Thailand), a community of about 300
residents in the Rattanakosin area of the city has been successfully
resisting eviction for several years. This area of the city is the original
settlement of Bangkok, and today there are some 200,000
people who live and work in Rattanakosin.
Historically, there have been a number of plans to develop
the area, and the most recent set of plans, ratified by the Bangkok
Metropolitan Administration in 2001, began to have a progressively
destructive impact on the security of tenure for many of the
communities who make the Rattanakosin area their home. The plan
– The Master Plan for Land Development: Ratchadamnoen Road and
Surrounding Area – was partly motivated by the 1997 economic
crash and the consequent desire to capture more tourism income
for the city of Bangkok.
Rattanakosin – with the Grand Palace and Wat Po as international
attractions – was the main focus of this tourism initiative.
The master plan was meant to ‘beautify’ this local environment
essentially as a tourist attraction and, in so doing, to improve
property values (most of Rattanakosin is Crown Land administered
by the Crown Property Bureau). The idea was that if the city was
made more attractive, tourists would stay longer and thus leave
more money behind, speeding the economic recovery of Bangkok.
Thus, in January 2003, the city planning department posted
eviction notices on all the houses in Pom Mahakan. The residents
were told to vacate their homes and were offered relocation to a
place 45 kilometres away, on the outskirts of Bangkok. The evictions
were spearheaded by the governor of Bangkok, supported by the
Board of the Bangkok Metropolitan Administration, the Crown
Property Bureau, the National Economic and Social Development
Board and other organizations, such as the Tourism Authority of
Thailand.
Source: Bristol, 2007b
Despite this pressure, residents began holding protests,
building barricades and organizing a night-watch system. They also
acted pre-emptively. Assisted by a coalition of academics based at
the local university, non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and
human rights activists, they put forward a highly innovative landsharing
plan as an alternative to eviction and relocation. The plan
included the renovation of the older buildings and the integration of
the residences within a historical park. The residents even started
implementing part of this plan, and many outsiders rallied to the call
to support them in this process.
Despite the above efforts, in August 2003 an administrative
court ruled that the eviction was legal and could go ahead. In
January 2004, the authorities started work on the unoccupied areas
of Pom Mahakan. The authorities repeatedly announced their intention
to evict the entire community. Some lost hope and left; but the
majority continued their attempts to negotiate with the authorities
and to put forward alternatives.
Eventually, although after yet another attempt to implement
the evictions, the governor finally agreed to resolve the issue
through negotiations. On 19 December 2005, the governor
confirmed that negotiations between the community, the Bangkok
Metropolitan Administration and other stakeholders had resulted in
an agreement to preserve and develop the area as an ‘antique
wooden house community’.
This agreement led to the development of a community
plan that included preservation and rehabilitation of existing buildings
and landscape in the community. Furthermore, it was agreed
that the people will stay where they are and that the funds that had
been allocated to the park development would go to the community
improvements that the community itself had planned.
Pom Mahakan now has security of tenure.
The revision of
regulatory frameworks
can reduce
the need for future
slums by … improving
access to legal
land and housing