A Comparative Analysis of the Jurisprudence Regarding the Right to Housing in the Case of Forced Eviction

• Jurisdiction: South Africa
• Date: 16 August 2019
• Author: Tania Abbiate
• Citation: (2014) 1(1) Journal of Comparative Law in Africa 90
• Published date: 16 August 2019
• Pages: 90-107

A COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF THE

JURISPRUDENCE REGARDING THE RIGHT TO

HOUSING IN THE CASE OF FORCED EVICTION

TANIA ABBIATE

PhD candidate, University of Siena, Italy

Forced eviction often brings about serious human rights violations. It is widespread in

urban as well as rural context, and thus the regional mechanisms for the protection of

human rights have dealt with it quite often. This paper aims to shed light on the different

approaches developed by the regional systems of human rights protection regarding this

issue, with a special focus on the right to housing. The case law analysis will regard a case

delivered by the European Court of Human Rights (Yordanova and Others v

Bulgaria), a case delivered by the Inter-American Court of Human Rights (Ituango

Massacres v Colombia), and a case delivered by the African Commission on Human

and Peoples’ Rights (Sudan Human Rights Organisation & Centre on Housing

Rights and Evictions v Sudan). The jurisprudential analysis will be preceded by a

methodological assessment and followed by some conclusions. The analysis reveals an

indirect protection of the right to adequate housing providedby the three main mechanisms

of protection of human rights, although the normative grounds on which they rely are

deeply different.

[Le phénomène de l’expulsion forcée entraîne souvent des violations graves des droits de

l’homme. Il est très répandu dans les zones urbaines ainsi que dans le contexte rural, et

donc les mécanismes régionaux de protection des droits de l’homme ont traité de la

question. Ce document vise à jeter la lumière sur les différentes approches développées par

les systèmes régionaux de la protection des droits de l’homme sur cette question, avec un

accent particulier sur le droit au logement. L’analyse de la jurisprudence va considérer un

cas rendu par la Cour Européenne des Droitsde l’Homme , le cas Yordanova et autres

contre Bulgarie, un cas rendu par la Cour Interaméricaine des Droits de l’Homme , le

cas Massacre de Ituango contre la Colombie, et un cas pris du contexte africain, et

rendu par la Commission Africaine des Droits de l’Homme et des Peuples, le cas Sudan

Human Rights Organisation & Centre on Housing Rights and Evictions

(COHRE) contre Soudan. L’analyse de la jurisprudence est précédée d’une

évaluation méthodologique et suivie par une conclusion. L’analyse révèle en effet une

protection indirecte du droit à un logement adéquat fourni par les trois principaux

mécanismes de protection des droits de l’homme, bien que les bases normatives sur

lesquelles ils s’appuient sont profondément différente.]

Keywords: forced eviction, right to housing, regional human rights systems

Abbreviations: ACHPR African Commission on Human and Peoples’

Rights

CESCR UN Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural

Rights

COHRE Centre on Housing Rights and Evictions

ECtHRE European Court of Human Rights

IACtHR Inter-American Court of Human Rights

SHRO Sudan Human Rights Organisation

90

(2014) 1(1) Journal of Comparative Law in Africa 90

© Juta and Company (Pty) Ltd

Introduction

Forced eviction is condemned by international human rights and humanitar-

ian law as a ‘gross violation of human rights’, and the United Nations (UN) as

well as intergovernmental bodies have underpinned such condemnation by

clearly expressing the state obligations in relation to the right to adequate

housing in the case that forced eviction should occur.

1

According to the UN Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural

Rights (CESCR), forced eviction can be def‌ined as ‘the permanent or

temporary removal against their will of individuals, families and/or commu-

nities from the homes and/or land which they occupy, without the provision

of, and access to, appropriate forms of legal or other protection’ (CESCR

1997: para 3).

The right to adequate housing, in turn, has been interpreted by the

CESCR in General Comment 4 as having a broad meaning beyond ‘the

shelter provided by merely having a roof over one’s own head’; it is ‘the right

to live somewhere in security, peace and dignity’ (CESCR 1991: para 7).

The CESCR (1991: para 8) identif‌ied a number of factors to be taken into

account in determining the right to adequate housing: the availability of

services, materials, facilities and infrastructure; and affordability, habitability,

accessibility, location and cultural adequacy. It is recognised that circum-

stances may exist in which forced eviction can be considered necessary or

unavoidable, but it is made clear that, even so, the right to housing has to be

properly preserved. In its General Comment 7 on the rights to adequate

housing in the case of forced evictions,the CESCR has identif‌ied procedural

requirements to be applied (CESCR 1997: para 15). 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 should be

present during an eviction; (e) all persons carrying out the eviction should be

properly identif‌ied; (f) evictions not to take place in particularly bad weather or

at night unless the affected persons consent otherwise; (g) there should be

provision of legal remedies; and (h) provision, where possible, of legal aid to

persons who are in need of it to seek redress from the courts.’

1

The obligation of states to refrain from, and protect against, forced evictions

from homes and land arises from several international legal instruments including the

Universal Declaration of Human Rights; the International Covenant on Economic,

Social and Cultural Rights (art 11, para 1); the Convention on the Rights of the

Child (art 27, para 3); the non-discrimination provisions found in art 14, para 2(h) of

the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women;

and art 5(e) of the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of

Racial Discrimination. For more information on the international legal framework

see Langford & Du Plessis (2006), Terminski(2011) and Kucs, Sedlova & Pierhurov-

ica (2008).

THE RIGHT TO HOUSING IN THE CASE OF FORCED EVICTION 91

© Juta and Company (Pty) Ltd