Condensed: Forced evictions are defined as (a) the permanent or temporary removal against their will of individuals, families and/or communities (b) from the homes or land which they occupy , (c) without the provision of, and access to, appropriate forms of legal or other protection . Deliberate destruction of houses and household goods, including the failure to prevent such destruction by third parties constitutes forced evictions.
Forced evictions contain elements of arbitrariness, illegality, coercion, and excessive human suffering. Affected individuals and communities are entitled to legal redress including adequate compensation and alternative accommodation where they are unable to provide for themselves. Furthermore, affected individuals and communities have a right to meaningfully participate in decision related to any eviction including exploring all feasible alternatives to eviction as well as the provision of alternative accommodation if evictions do go forward. Evictions that take place in accordance with the law and in conformity with the provisions of international human rights law are not prohibited. For evictions to be justified under the ICESCR, they can (1) only be carried out in the most exceptional circumstances ; (2) after all feasible alternatives to eviction that address the exceptional circumstance are explored in consultation with the affected community ; [1 ] and (3) after procedural protections and due process are afforded the individual, group or community. [2 ]
Comprehensive: Forced evictions constitute gross violation of a broad range of human rights, and in particular the right to adequate housing. [3 ] Forced evictions are defined as:(a) the permanent or temporary removal against their will of individuals, families and/or communities;(b) from the homes and/or land which they occupy:(c) without the provision of, and access to, appropriate forms of legal or other protection. [4 ] For evictions to be justified under the ICESCR, they can(1) only be carried out in the most exceptional circumstances ; [5 ](2) after all feasible alternatives to eviction that address the exceptional circumstance are explored in consultation with the affected community ; [6 ] and(3) after procedural protections and due process are afforded the individual, group or community. [7 ]There are two exceptions to this general rule:(1) Evictions should never be carried out in a discriminatory manner; [8 ](2) Evictions should never render someone homelessor vulnerable to other human rights violations. [9 ] Evictions that take place in accordance with the law and in conformity with the provisions of international human rights law are not prohibited but these constitute exceptions to the prohibition of forced evictions. Examples of these exceptional circumstances that justify eviction include: [10 ](a) racist or other discriminatory statements, attacks or treatment by one tenant or resident against a neighbouring tenant; (b) unjustifiable destruction of rented property; (c) the persistent non-payment of rent despite a proven ability to pay, and in the absence of unfulfilled duties of the landlord to ensure dwelling habitability; (d) persistent antisocial behaviour which threatens, harasses or intimidates neighbours, or persistent behaviour which threatens public health or safety; (e) manifestly criminal behaviour, as defined by law, which threatens the rights of others; (f) the illegal occupation of property which is inhabited at the time of the occupation; (g) the occupation of land or homes of occupied populations by nationals of an occupying power. Permanent or temporary removal of people against their will takes place as a consequence of activities such as urban renewal, land acquisition or expropriation, development and infrastructure projects, among other causes. [11 ] Forced evictions for these reasons can be distinguished from involuntary forms of displacement that result from armed conflict such as population transfer, mass exodus and refugee flows, although forced evictions also can take place within these contexts. [12 ] The provision of and access to appropriate forms of legal and other protection can take many forms. For example, the CESCR is of the view that procedural protections and due process that should be available in relation to forced evictions.These include(a) An opportunity for genuine consultation with those affected;(b) adequate and reasonable notice for all affected persons prior to the scheduled date of eviction;(c) information on the proposed evictions, and, where applicable, on the alternative purpose for which the land or housing is to be used, to be made available in reasonable time to all those affected;(d) especially where groups of people are involved, government officials or their representatives to be present during an eviction;(e) all persons carrying out the eviction to be properly identified;(f) evictions not to take place in particularly bad weather or at night unless the affected persons consent otherwise;(g) provision of legal remedies; and(h) provision, where possible, of legal aid to persons who are in need of it to seek redress form the courts. [13 ]
Individuals concerned in forced evictions have a right to adequate compensation for any property that is affected. [14 ] Additionally states are required to take all appropriate measures within their available resources to ensure alternative housing, resettlement or access to productive land to those affected by forced evictions and unable to provide for themselves. [15 ] * See reparation for harm suffered (compensation, restitution, rehabilitation)* The HRC have found that forced evictions may violate article 17 of the ICCPR (right to privacy). [16 ] The ECtHR has addressed the issue of forced evictions as a violation of the right to respect for private life and family life and the right to property. [17 ] In Selçuk and Asker v Turkey the Court found that the destruction of the applicants’ houses by security forces, thus obliging them to leave their village constituted a violation of the right to private life and property, and the right to property. [18 ] In Hajrizi v Yugoslavia , the Committee against Torture held that the forced eviction and destruction of a Roma settlement in Serbia and Montenegro constituted because of the failure by the authorities to prevent the destruction of the settlement. [19 ] See * illegal confiscation, occupation or destruction of property * . In many cases, forced evictions are facilitated by the lack of security of tenure for occupiers of homes and/or land. See *denial of tenure security to particular groups*
[WHY NO REFENCE TO THE SR GUIDELINES ON DEVELOPMENT-BASED EVICTIONS?] [1 ] CESCR General Comment 7 para 14. [2 ] CESCR General Comment 7 para 18. [3 ] CESCR General Comment 7 interpreting the right to adequate housing in art 11(1) ICESCR. See also art 17(1) ICCPR; art 8 ECHR; art 11(2) American Convention on Human Rights; See also Commission on Human Rights Resolutions 1993/77 of 10 March 1993; 2004/28 of 16 April 2004; Sub‑Commission on the Promotion and Protection of Human Rights resolutions 1991/12 of 26 August 1991, 1992/14 of 27 August 1992, 1993/41 of 26 August 1993, 1994/39 of 26 August 1994, 1995/29 of 24 August 1995, 1996/27 of 29 August 1996, 1997/6 of 22 August 1997 and 1998/9 of 20 August 1998.[4 ] CESCR General Comment 7 para 4. The CESCR acknowledges that the term ‘forced evictions’ is problematic , but other terms like ‘illegal evictions’ and ‘unfair evictions’ face similar problems in that the former presumes adequate protection by law and the latter is subjective and makes no reference to a legal framework. [5 ] CESCR General Comment 4 para 18. [6 ] CESCR General Comment 7 para 14. [7 ] CESCR General Comment 7 para 18. [8 ] CESCR General Comment 7 para 11. [9 ] CESCR General Comment 7 para 17. [10 ] CESCR General Comment 7 para 4. See also UN Fact Sheet 25[11 ] THIS FACT SHEET IS UNDER REVISION. UN Fact Sheet 25 ‘Forced evictions and human rights’. See also Forced evictions: Analytical report prepared by the UN Secretary General pursuant to Commission resolution 1993/77, E/CN.4/1994/20, 7 December 1993 para 30.[12 ] Forced evictions: Analytical report prepared by the UN Secretary General pursuant to Commission resolution 1993/77, E/CN.4/1994/20, 7 December 1993 para 17.[13 ] CESCR General Comment 7 para 15. See also Occupiers of 51 Olivia Road & Others v City of Johannesburg & Others 2008 (3) SA 208 (CC); 2008 (5) BCLR 475 (CC) The Court stated ‘[A] municipality that ejects people from their homes without first meaningfully engaging with them acts in a manner that is broadly at odds with the spirit and purpose of the constitutional obligations …’.[14 ] CESCR General Comment 7 para 14.[15 ] CESCR General Comment 7 para 17. [16 ] See Human Rights Committee, Concluding Observations on Kenya (2005) and Concluding Observations on Israel (2010). See also European Roma Rights Centre (ERRC) v Greece , complaint 15/2003 (2004); European Roma Rights Centre (ERRC) v Italy complaint 27/2004 (2005). [17 ] Art 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights and art 1 of Protocol No 1 to the European Convention on Human Rights.[18 ] Selçuk and Asker v Turkey application 23184/94, (ECtHR 1998) para 86 . See also Ayder et al v Turkey application 23656/94 (ECtHR 2004), para 119 ;The Massacres of Ituango v Colombia Series C no 148 (IACtHR 2006) para 197. See also SERAC & Another v Nigeria (2001) AHRLR 60 (ACHPR 2001) paras 60-61.[19 ] Hajrizi v Yugoslavia communication 161/1999 (CAT 2002) paras 9.2, 10.
Forced evictions are defined as (a) the permanent or temporary removal against their will of individuals, families and/or communities (b) from the homes or land which they occupy , (c) without the provision of, and access to, appropriate forms of legal or other protection . Deliberate destruction of houses and household goods, including the failure to prevent such destruction by third parties constitutes forced evictions.
Forced evictions contain elements of arbitrariness, illegality, coercion, and excessive human suffering.
Affected individuals and communities are entitled to legal redress including adequate compensation and alternative accommodation where they are unable to provide for themselves. Furthermore, affected individuals and communities have a right to meaningfully participate in decision related to any eviction including exploring all feasible alternatives to eviction as well as the provision of alternative accommodation if evictions do go forward. Evictions that take place in accordance with the law and in conformity with the provisions of international human rights law are not prohibited. For evictions to be justified under the ICESCR, they can (1) only be carried out in the most exceptional circumstances ; (2) after all feasible alternatives to eviction that address the exceptional circumstance are explored in consultation with the affected community ; [1 ] and (3) after procedural protections and due process are afforded the individual, group or community. [2 ]
Comprehensive: Forced evictions constitute gross violation of a broad range of human rights, and in particular the right to adequate housing. [3 ] Forced evictions are defined as:(a) the permanent or temporary removal against their will of individuals, families and/or communities;(b) from the homes and/or land which they occupy:(c) without the provision of, and access to, appropriate forms of legal or other protection. [4 ]
For evictions to be justified under the ICESCR, they can(1) only be carried out in the most exceptional circumstances ; [5 ](2) after all feasible alternatives to eviction that address the exceptional circumstance are explored in consultation with the affected community ; [6 ] and(3) after procedural protections and due process are afforded the individual, group or community. [7 ]There are two exceptions to this general rule:(1) Evictions should never be carried out in a discriminatory manner; [8 ](2) Evictions should never render someone homeless or vulnerable to other human rights violations. [9 ]
Evictions that take place in accordance with the law and in conformity with the provisions of international human rights law are not prohibited but these constitute exceptions to the prohibition of forced evictions. Examples of these exceptional circumstances that justify eviction include: [10 ](a) racist or other discriminatory statements, attacks or treatment by one tenant or resident against a neighbouring tenant; (b) unjustifiable destruction of rented property; (c) the persistent non-payment of rent despite a proven ability to pay, and in the absence of unfulfilled duties of the landlord to ensure dwelling habitability; (d) persistent antisocial behaviour which threatens, harasses or intimidates neighbours, or persistent behaviour which threatens public health or safety; (e) manifestly criminal behaviour, as defined by law, which threatens the rights of others; (f) the illegal occupation of property which is inhabited at the time of the occupation; (g) the occupation of land or homes of occupied populations by nationals of an occupying power.
Permanent or temporary removal of people against their will takes place as a consequence of activities such as urban renewal, land acquisition or expropriation, development and infrastructure projects, among other causes. [11 ] Forced evictions for these reasons can be distinguished from involuntary forms of displacement that result from armed conflict such as population transfer, mass exodus and refugee flows, although forced evictions also can take place within these contexts. [12 ] The provision of and access to appropriate forms of legal and other protection can take many forms. For example, the CESCR is of the view that procedural protections and due process that should be available in relation to forced evictions.These include(a) An opportunity for genuine consultation with those affected;(b) adequate and reasonable notice for all affected persons prior to the scheduled date of eviction;(c) information on the proposed evictions, and, where applicable, on the alternative purpose for which the land or housing is to be used, to be made available in reasonable time to all those affected;(d) especially where groups of people are involved, government officials or their representatives to be present during an eviction;(e) all persons carrying out the eviction to be properly identified;(f) evictions not to take place in particularly bad weather or at night unless the affected persons consent otherwise;(g) provision of legal remedies; and(h) provision, where possible, of legal aid to persons who are in need of it to seek redress form the courts. [13 ]
Individuals concerned in forced evictions have a right to adequate compensation for any property that is affected. [14 ] Additionally states are required to take all appropriate measures within their available resources to ensure alternative housing, resettlement or access to productive land to those affected by forced evictions and unable to provide for themselves. [15 ] * See reparation for harm suffered (compensation, restitution, rehabilitation)* The HRC have found that forced evictions may violate article 17 of the ICCPR (right to privacy). [16 ] The ECtHR has addressed the issue of forced evictions as a violation of the right to respect for private life and family life and the right to property. [17 ] In Selçuk and Asker v Turkey the Court found that the destruction of the applicants’ houses by security forces, thus obliging them to leave their village constituted a violation of the right to private life and property, and the right to property. [18 ] In Hajrizi v Yugoslavia , the Committee against Torture held that the forced eviction and destruction of a Roma settlement in Serbia and Montenegro constituted because of the failure by the authorities to prevent the destruction of the settlement. [19 ] See * illegal confiscation, occupation or destruction of property * . In many cases, forced evictions are facilitated by the lack of security of tenure for occupiers of homes and/or land. See *denial of tenure security to particular groups*
[WHY NO REFENCE TO THE SR GUIDELINES ON DEVELOPMENT-BASED EVICTIONS?]
[1 ] CESCR General Comment 7 para 14.
[2 ] CESCR General Comment 7 para 18.
[3 ] CESCR General Comment 7 interpreting the right to adequate housing in art 11(1) ICESCR. See also art 17(1) ICCPR; art 8 ECHR; art 11(2) American Convention on Human Rights; See also Commission on Human Rights Resolutions 1993/77 of 10 March 1993; 2004/28 of 16 April 2004; Sub‑Commission on the Promotion and Protection of Human Rights resolutions 1991/12 of 26 August 1991, 1992/14 of 27 August 1992, 1993/41 of 26 August 1993, 1994/39 of 26 August 1994, 1995/29 of 24 August 1995, 1996/27 of 29 August 1996, 1997/6 of 22 August 1997 and 1998/9 of 20 August 1998.[4 ] CESCR General Comment 7 para 4. The CESCR acknowledges that the term ‘forced evictions’ is problematic , but other terms like ‘illegal evictions’ and ‘unfair evictions’ face similar problems in that the former presumes adequate protection by law and the latter is subjective and makes no reference to a legal framework.
[5 ] CESCR General Comment 4 para 18.
[6 ] CESCR General Comment 7 para 14.
[7 ] CESCR General Comment 7 para 18.
[8 ] CESCR General Comment 7 para 11.
[9 ] CESCR General Comment 7 para 17.
[10 ] CESCR General Comment 7 para 4. See also UN Fact Sheet 25[11 ] THIS FACT SHEET IS UNDER REVISION. UN Fact Sheet 25 ‘Forced evictions and human rights’. See also Forced evictions: Analytical report prepared by the UN Secretary General pursuant to Commission resolution 1993/77, E/CN.4/1994/20, 7 December 1993 para 30.[12 ] Forced evictions: Analytical report prepared by the UN Secretary General pursuant to Commission resolution 1993/77, E/CN.4/1994/20, 7 December 1993 para 17.[13 ] CESCR General Comment 7 para 15. See also Occupiers of 51 Olivia Road & Others v City of Johannesburg & Others 2008 (3) SA 208 (CC); 2008 (5) BCLR 475 (CC) The Court stated ‘[A] municipality that ejects people from their homes without first meaningfully engaging with them acts in a manner that is broadly at odds with the spirit and purpose of the constitutional obligations …’.[14 ] CESCR General Comment 7 para 14.[15 ] CESCR General Comment 7 para 17.
[16 ] See Human Rights Committee, Concluding Observations on Kenya (2005) and Concluding Observations on Israel (2010). See also European Roma Rights Centre (ERRC) v Greece , complaint 15/2003 (2004); European Roma Rights Centre (ERRC) v Italy complaint 27/2004 (2005).
[17 ] Art 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights and art 1 of Protocol No 1 to the European Convention on Human Rights.[18 ] Selçuk and Asker v Turkey application 23184/94, (ECtHR 1998) para 86 . See also Ayder et al v Turkey application 23656/94 (ECtHR 2004), para 119 ; The Massacres of Ituango v Colombia Series C no 148 (IACtHR 2006) para 197. See also SERAC & Another v Nigeria (2001) AHRLR 60 (ACHPR 2001) paras 60-61.[19 ] Hajrizi v Yugoslavia communication 161/1999 (CAT 2002) paras 9.2, 10.