Download the file - United Nations Rule of Law

Policy responses to tenure insecurity149Box 6.16 The Republic of the Philippines’ Urban Development and Housing ActEviction or demolition as a practice shall be discouraged. Evictionor demolition, however, may be allowed under the following situations:• when persons or entities occupy danger areas such as esteros,railroad tracks, garbage dumps, riverbanks, shorelines, waterwaysand other public places, such as sidewalks, roads, parks,and playgrounds;• when government infrastructure projects with availablefunding are about to be implemented; or• when there is a court order for eviction and demolition.In the execution of eviction or demolition order involving underprivilegedand homeless citizens, the following shall be mandatory:• notice upon the affected persons or entities at least …30 days prior to the date of eviction or demolition;• adequate consultations on the matter of resettlement withthe duly designated representatives of the families to be resettledand the affected communities in the areas where they areto be relocated;• presence of local government officials or their representativesduring eviction or demolition;• proper identification of all persons taking part in the demolition;• execution of eviction or demolition only during regular officehours from Mondays to Fridays and during good weather,unless the affected families consent otherwise;• no use of heavy equipment for demolition except for structuresthat are permanent and of concrete materials;• proper uniforms for members of the Philippine NationalPolice who shall occupy the first line of law enforcement andobserve proper disturbance control procedures; and• adequate relocation, whether temporary or permanent.Source: Republic of the Philippines, 1992 Urban Development and Housing Act (Republic Act No 7279), Section 28Although the development of effective remedies for theprevention and redress of violations of economic, social andcultural rights, including security of tenure, has been slow,several developments in recent years have added to theseriousness given to these rights and are graphic evidence ofthe direct linkages between human rights and security oftenure. The 1997 Maastricht Guidelines on Violations ofEconomic, Social and Cultural Rights, for instance, provide agreat deal of clarity as to which ‘acts of commission’ (see Box6.17) and ‘acts of omission’ (see Box 6.18) would constituteviolations of the ICESCR. Based on these guidelines, it ispossible to develop a framework for determining thecompatibility of national and local law and policy on aspectsof tenure security with the position of human rights law.Because security of tenure and the rights forming itsfoundation continue to grow in prominence at all levels, itshould come as no surprise that official human rights bodies,including courts, at the national, regional and internationallevels are increasingly scrutinizing the practices of governmentswith respect to security of tenure. This is a positivedevelopment and, yet, is one more additional indication thata combined approach to this question between the humansettlements and human rights communities is beginning tobear fruit. Much of the pioneering work in this regard hasbeen carried out by the CESCR. As mentioned earlier, since1990 the Committee has issued dozens of pronouncementsabout security of tenure conditions in different countries.Box 6.19 provides an overview of a cross-section of thesestatements to give an idea of the extent of progress made inaddressing security of tenure as a core human rights issue.Despite the work of the CESCR, the human rightsdimensions of security of tenure are not yet widely enoughOfficial humanrights bodies … areincreasingly scrutinizingthe practicesof governments withrespect to securityof tenureBox 6.17 Violations of economic, social and cultural rights through ‘acts of commission’Violations of economic, social and cultural rights can occur throughthe direct action of states or other entities insufficiently regulatedby states. Examples of such violations include:• The formal removal or suspension of legislation necessary forthe continued enjoyment of an economic, social and culturalright that is currently enjoyed;• The active denial of such rights to particular individuals orgroups, whether through legislated or enforced discrimination;• The active support for measures adopted by third partieswhich are inconsistent with economic, social and culturalrights;• The adoption of legislation or policies which are manifestlyincompatible with pre-existing legal obligations relating tothese rights, unless it is done with the purpose and effect ofincreasing equality and improving the realization of economic,social and cultural rights for the most vulnerable groups;• The adoption of any deliberately retrogressive measure thatreduces the extent to which any such right is guaranteed;• The calculated obstruction of, or halt to, the progressiverealization of a right protected by the Covenant, unless thestate is acting within a limitation permitted by the Covenantor it does so due to a lack of available resources or forcemajeure;• The reduction or diversion of specific public expenditure,when such reduction or diversion results in the nonenjoymentof such rights and is not accompanied by adequatemeasures to ensure minimum subsistence rights for everyone.Source: Maastricht Guidelines on Violations of Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, Guideline 14