246 | PRACTITIONERS GUIDE No. 6private life (Article 8 ECHR). Article 8 requires that State action whichinterferes with a person’s home or displaces them from it must be adequatelyprescribed by law, serve a legitimate aim, be necessary in ademocratic society and be proportionate to the aim pursued. However,the Court has emphasised that Article 8 does not recognise a right tobe provided with a home. 999 The Court also held that, in applying theproportionality test, “it is highly relevant whether or not the home wasestablished unlawfully.” 1000 Moreover, if no alternative accommodationis available the interference is more serious than where such accommodationis available. 1001 Article 8 also requires procedural safeguards tobe available to ensure a fair decision process in cases where the right torespect for the home is at issue. 1002The European Convention also affords protection for housing rightsthrough the right to property (Article 1 Protocol 1 ECHR). However, inorder to fall within the application of this provision, there must be aproperty right in the home itself. 1003 Article 1 of Protocol 1 prohibitsarbitrary deprivation of possessions. It recognises that States are entitledto control the use of property in accordance with the public interest.1004 Any such interference with property rights must be adequatelyprescribed by law and be proportionate to the public interest served. 1005The African Commission has found that arbitrary eviction and expropriationof houses constitutes a violation of the right to property (Article 14ACHPR). 1006 Although the Charter does not contain an express right999 Chapman v. United Kingdom, ECtHR, GC, Application No. 27238/95, Judgment of 18 January2001, para. 99. See also, Beard v. United Kingdom, ECtHR, GC, Application No. 24882/94,Judgment of 18 January 2001, para. 110; Coster v. United Kingdom, ECtHR, GC, ApplicationNo. 24876/94, Judgment of 18 January 2001, para. 113; Lee v. United Kingdom, ECtHR, GC,Application No. 25289/94, Judgment of 18 January 2001, para. 101; Smith v. United Kingdom,ECtHR, GC, Application No. 25154/94, Judgment of 18 January 2001, para. 106.1000 Chapman v. United Kingdom, ECtHR, op. cit., fn. 999, para. 102. See also, Beard v. UnitedKingdom, ECtHR, op. cit., fn. 999, para. 113; Coster v. United Kingdom, ECtHR, op. cit.,fn. 999, para. 116; Lee v. United Kingdom, ECtHR, op. cit., fn. 999, para. 104; Smith v.United Kingdom, ECtHR, op. cit., fn. 999, para. 109.1001 Chapman v. United Kingdom, ECtHR, op. cit., fn. 999, para. 103. See also, Beard v. UnitedKingdom, ECtHR, op. cit., fn. 999, para. 114; Coster v. United Kingdom, ECtHR, op. cit.,fn. 999, para. 117; Lee v. United Kingdom, ECtHR, op. cit., fn. 999, para. 105; Smith v.United Kingdom, ECtHR, op. cit., fn. 999, para. 110.1002 See, Connors v. the United Kingdom, ECtHR, op. cit., fn. 936, para. 83.1003 The situation of “possession” will not have to be established de jure by showing property titles,but, in absence of adverse claims, can be established also by situations de facto, such as thefact that the occupants built the house or lived there for generations (the last being rarely applicableto migrants). See, Dogan and Others v. Turkey, ECtHR, Applications Nos. 8803–8811/02,8813/02 and 8815–8819/02, Judgment of 29 June 2004, paras. 138–139.1004 See, Article 1 Protocol 1 ECHR.1005 Chassagnou and Others v. France, ECtHR, GC, Applications Nos. 25088/94–28331/95–28443/95, Judgment of 29 April 1999.1006 Malawi African Association and Others v. Mauritania, ACommHPR, Communications Nos.54/91, 61/91, 98/93, 164/97–196/97, 27 th Ordinary Session, 11 May 2000, paras. 127–128.
MIGRATION AND INTERNATIONAL HUMAN RIGHTS LAW | 247to housing, the African Commission has stated that “the corollary ofthe provisions protecting the right to enjoy the best attainable state ofmental and physical health [. . .], the right to property, and the protectionaccorded to the family” mean that the right to shelter or housing,including protection from forced evictions are effectively engaged underthe Charter. 10072. HealthThe right to health, or, more precisely, the right to the highest attainablestandard of health, is recognised in numerous international instruments.1008 It encompasses both the liberty to control one’s own healthand body, and the entitlement to a system of health protection that providesequality of opportunity for people to enjoy the highest attainablelevel of health. 1009 As the CESCR has noted, “the right to health embracesa wide range of socio-economic factors that promote conditions inwhich people can lead a healthy life, and extends to the underlying determinantsof health, such as food and nutrition, housing, access to safeand potable water and adequate sanitation, safe and healthy workingconditions, and a healthy environment.” 1010 The right to health requiresthat healthcare be available and accessible to all without discrimination.It must be affordable, including to socially disadvantaged groups, andculturally accessible to minorities. 1011The CESCR has clarified that States have a core obligation to ensure thesatisfaction of minimum essential levels of healthcare rights. 1012 Thesecore obligations are:• To ensure the right of access to health facilities, goods and serviceson a non-discriminatory basis, especially for vulnerable ormarginalised groups;• To ensure access to the minimum essential food which is nutritionallyadequate and safe, to ensure freedom from hunger;1007 SERAC and CESR v. Nigeria, ACommHPR, op. cit., fn. 29, paras. 60–63.1008 Article 12 ICESCR; Article 25.1 UDHR; Article 5(e)(iv) ICERD; Articles 11.1(f) and 12CEDAW; Article 24 CRC; Article 25 CRPD; Article 11 ESC(r); Article 16 ACHPR; Article 10,Protocol of San Salvador; Article XI ADRDM; Article 14, Protocol to the ACHPR on the Rightsof Women in Africa; Article 14 ACRWC; Constitution of the World Health Organisation, adopted19 June to 22 July 1946. The right to health has been proclaimed by the Commission onHuman Rights, as well as in the Vienna Declaration and Programme of Action of 1993 andother international instruments.1009 CESCR, General Comment No. 14, op. cit., fn. 37, para. 8.1010 Ibid., para. 4.1011 Ibid., para. 121012 Ibid., para. 43. Definition of primary health care is also enshrined in the Declaration ofAlma-Ata, adopted 6–12 September 1978 at the International Conference on Primary HealthCare.