Download the file - United Nations Rule of Law

Policy responses to tenure insecurity151Box 6.20 Security of tenure case law: European Court of Human RightsAmong the many cases addressed by the European Court ofHuman Rights, perhaps the most prominent is the inter-statecomplaint case of Cyprus versus Turkey (1976) which addressedevictions as a violation of the right to ‘respect for the home’, andthus provided significant protection against this violation of internationallyrecognized housing rights.In Akdivar and Others versus Turkey (1996), the court foundthat ‘there can be no doubt that the deliberate burning of the applicants’homes and their contents constitutes … a seriousinterference with the right to respect for their family lives andhomes and with the peaceful enjoyment of possessions’.In the case of Spadea and Scalabrino versus Italy (1995), thecourt opined that the failure of the public authorities to evictelderly tenants from the homes owned by the applicants was not aviolation of the right to peaceful enjoyment of possessions – ineffect, protecting the rights of the tenants to remain in the accommodation.In Phocas versus France (1996), the court held that therehad been no violation of Article 1 of Protocol No 1 in the casewhere the applicant’s full enjoyment of his property had beensubjected to various interferences due to the implementation ofurban development schemes since the said interference compliedwith 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 ofProtocol No 1 since no fair balance had been struck between theinterest of protecting the right to property and the demands of thegeneral interest as a result of the length of the proceedings, thedifficulties encountered by the applicants to obtain full payment ofthe compensation awarded and the deterioration of the plotseventually returned to them.In Connors versus United Kingdom (2004), the court statedclearly that:… the eviction of the applicant and his family from thelocal authority site was not attended by the requisiteprocedural safeguards … and consequently cannot beregarded as justified by a ‘pressing social need’ orproportionate to the legitimate aim being pursued.There has, accordingly, been a violation of … theConvention.CIVIL SOCIETY RESPONSESTO SECURITY OF TENUREAND FORCED EVICTIONSA growing number of non-governmental organizations(NGOs) at international, national and local levels havebecome involved in efforts to support the provision ofsecurity of tenure and opposing forced evictions in recentyears. Their efforts have ranged from lobbying nationalgovernments and delegates at international conferences andmeetings, to providing advice or direct support to localcommunities. Among the most prominent NGOs that havebeen working at the international level for several years arethe Asian Coalition for Housing Rights (ACHR), the Centreon Housing Rights and Evictions (COHRE) and the HabitatInternational Coalition (HIC). At the national level, theefforts of NGOs have often been supplemented by those ofother civil society actors, including local universities, as inthe case of Pom Mahakan in Bangkok (see Box 11.6).Acts of forced eviction – whether carried out toconstruct a large dam or a new road, in the context of ethniccleansing or simply to gentrify a trendy neighbourhood – arealmost invariably accompanied by attempts by those affectedto resist the eviction and to stay in their homes. Althoughperhaps most initiatives to stop forced evictions before theyoccur eventually fail, there are no shortage of inspiring andcourageous cases where planned evictions have beenrevoked and the people allowed to remain in their homes ontheir lands.A few examples of strategies against planned evictionsare summarized below. Any number of additional examplesof strategies against planned evictions could be provided; buteven this cursory examination reveals that evictions can beprevented by using a wide range of measures, all of whichare premised on the human rights of the persons andcommunities affected: 48• Zambia. Some 17,000 families (at least 85,000 people)were spared planned eviction in 1991 due to theefforts of a local women’s rights organization, theZambia Women and Shelter Action Group (ZWOSAG).Basing claims on international human rights standardson eviction in negotiations with government officials,ZWOSAG was able to obtain a suspension order fromthe minister for local government and housing, whowent on national television and radio to announce thesuspension, and who urged local authorities throughoutZambia to refrain from carrying out forcedevictions.• Nigeria. The Social and Economic Rights Action Centersubmitted complaints to the World Bank InspectionPanel, attempting to prevent mass evictions in Lagosthat would result from the World Bank-funded LagosDrainage and Sanitation Project (see also Box 6.21).• Brazil. As discussed in Chapter 11, anti-evictioncampaigners utilize ‘special social interest zones’ (urbanareas specifically zoned for social housing) as a means ofpreventing evictions. Moreover, the efforts of thenational housing movements have also had a majorimpact on policies related to security of tenure (see Box6.27).• The Philippines. Various strategies have been employedto halt evictions before they are carried out. In additionto community organizing and popular mobilization, theuse of the media, lobbying efforts, the use of humanrights arguments based on international law and othermeasures, as well as legal strategies based on the 1992Acts of forcedeviction … arealmost invariablyaccompanied byattempts by thoseaffected to resist theeviction and to stayin their homes