quick guide 4: eviction

8/12/2019 Quick Guide 4: Eviction

1/50


2/50

Quick Guide 4: Eviction

Copyright United Nations Human Settlements Programme(UN HABITAT), 2011

All rights reservedUnited Nations Human Settlements Programme (UN-HABITAT)PO Box 30030, Nairobi, KenyaTel: +254 2 621 234Fax: +254 2 624 266www.unhabitat.org

DISCLAIMERThe designations employed and the presentation of the material in thispublication do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on thepart of the Secretariat of the United Nations concerning the legal statusof any country, territory, city or area, or of its authorities, or concerningdelimitation of its frontiers or boundaries, or regarding its economic systemor degree of development.

The analysis, conclusions and recommendations of the report do notnecessarily reflect the views of the United Nations Human SettlementsProgramme, the Governing Council of the United Nations HumanSettlements Programme or its Member States.

HS Number: HS/183/10E

ISBN Number:(Volume) 978-92-1-132319-1ISBN Number(Series): 978-92-1-131926-2

Cover photos : A Grimard

The publication of the Housing the Poor in African Cities series was madepossible through the financial support of Cities Alliance.

Published byUnited Nations Human Settlements Programme (UN-HABITAT)Training and Capacity Building Branch (TCBB)E-mail: [email protected]

Printing and Prepress: UNON/Publishing Services Section/Nairobi, ISO 14001:2004-certified


3/50


4/50

QUICK GUIDES FOR POLICY MAKERS 4 EVICTION

This series of Quick Guides has been inspired by and prepared on the basis of a similar series onHousing the Poor in Asian Cities, which was published jointly by UN-HABITAT and UNESCAP in2009. The series is the adaptation of the Asian version to the realities and contexts of the sub-Saharan African countries, and will be available in English, French and Portuguese. This has beenmade possible through the financial contributions of Cities Alliance and UN-HABITAT.

The guides have been written by the team of experts from the African Centre for Cities (ACC)led by Edgar Pieterse, with the substantive contributions of Karen Press, Kecia Rust and War-ren Smit. The experts in the team who have contributed to invaluable background reports forthe guides are: Sarah Charlton, Firoz Khan, Caroline Kihato, Michael Kihato, Melinda Silver-man and Tanya Zack. Project management support was provided by Bruce Frayne, and design

was ably handled by Tau Tavengwa. A number of colleagues from UN-HABITATs Training andCapacity Building branch, Shelter branch, and the Regional Office for Africa and Arab States,have contributed to the design, development, and review of the guides. They include GulelatKebede, Cynthia Radert, Claudio Acioly, Jean DAragon, Rasmus Precht, Christophe Lalande,Remy Sietchiping and Alain Grimard. The guides have benefited from the contributions madeby a range of experts who participated in the Expert Group Meeting held in November 2009 inNairobi, Kenya: Benjamin Bradlow, Malick Gaye, Serge Allou, Barbra Kohlo, Ardelline Masinde,Esther Kodhek, Jack Makau, Allain Cain, Sylvia Noagbesenu, Kecia Rust, Babar Mumtaz, AlainDurand Lasserve, Alan Gilbert and Tarek El-Sheik.

All these contributions have shaped the Quick Guides series, which we hope will contribute tothe daily work of policy makers in the sub-Saharan Africa region in their quest to improve hous-ing and access to land for the urban poor.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS


5/50

3QUICK GUIDES FOR POLICY MAKERS 4 EVICTION

ACCEPTING INFORMAL SETTLEMENTS IN THE CITY 5

5 REASONS WHY EVICTIONS HAPPEN 7

ME FA T AB UT P R PE PLE IN ITIE 1

IFFERENT NEED , DIFFERENT PRI RITIE 1

HOW EVICTION AFFECTS THE POOR 15

WOMEN AND FORCED EVICTIONS 16

EVI TI N IN A TIME F HIV AND AID 1ENURE E URITY AN BRIN P WERFUL MARKET F R E INT A P R MMUNITY 1

HOUSING IS A HUMAN RIGHT AND FORCED EVICTION IS A VIOLATION OF THAT RIGHT 22

HOUSING RIGHTS ARE NOT ABSTRACT 23

ALTERNATIVE T EVI TI N

E RE TEN RE AND N- ITE P RADIN 2

RESETTLEMENT 32

WAY T AV ID EVI TI N

REND T MAKE D U E F...

9 TOOLS COMMUNITIES USE TO NEGOTIATE ALTERNATIVES TO EVICTION 38

RESETTLEMENT GUIDELINES 40

THE ADVISORY GROUP ON FORCED EVICTIONS AGFE 42

REFERENCES 4

SUGGESTED FURTHER READING 46

WEBSITES

CONTENTS

CONDITIONS

CONCEPTS

APPROACHES

TOOLS AND GUIDELINES

RESOURCES


6/50


EVICTION: ALTERNATIVES TO THE DESTRUCTION OF

URBAN POOR COMMUNITIES

Despite decades of work by housing and human rights organizations, NGOs, multilateral insti-tutions and community organizations, the eviction of poor households and poor communitiesis increasing in African cities, causing displacement, misery and impoverishment for millions ofurban citizens. The causes of these evictions are varied, but the underlying theme which linksthem is the increasing role market forces are playing in determining how urban land is used.

The vast majority of these evictions are unnecessary. This guide looks at the various causes ofevictions, and their effects on the lives, livelihoods and housing choices of the urban poor. Thedistinction between different types of evictions is discussed and the legal context of eviction

within the key international human rights covenants is examined.

The guide explores how communities facing eviction have organized themselves, and drawn onthe support of community-based networks and institutions in Africa and globally to find alterna-tives to the destruction of their settlements. As the case studies in the guide show, poor com-munities are central, creative partners in the search for lasting solutions to their citys problemsof affordable land and housing solutions which do not require that they be pushed out.

Finally, the guide presents guidelines to help governments and policy makers to develop betterformal procedures to minimize evictions.

In Africa urbanization is happening faster than in any other region of the world. The combinedforces of urbanization, globalization and commercialization of urban land are increasingly forc-

ing the poor out of their houses and off their land. There are cases where evictions cannot beavoided, but even when evictions are justified by being carried out in the public interest, theyusually do not conform to the rules of international law.

In sub-Saharan Africa an estimated 72% of the urban population live in slums, while in NorthAfrica the figure is 28%. At the same time, across Africa hundreds of thousands of people eachyear are forcibly evicted, in many cases being left homeless, losing their possessions withoutcompensation and/or being forcibly displaced far from sources of employment, livelihood oreducation, all in violation of international law, including the African Charter on Human andPeoples Rights.

QUICK GUIDE FOR POLICY MAKERS NUMBER 4

Informal settlement,Cape Town, South Africa


7/50


COND

ITIONS

ACCEPTING INFORMAL

SETTLEMENTS IN THE CITY

T e sett ements t at poor peop e constructin cities are o ten de ned as in ormal set-tlements because they do not come intoexistence as a result of formal governmentdecisions and processes, and they oftenprovi e ow-qua ity ousing an poor asicservices or the residents. By calling thesesettlements informal, the government canargue t at t ey are on y temporary anina equate ways to meet ousing an ot er

sett ement nee s, an s ou e removefrom the city. But it can also be argued thatinformal settlements are a socially legiti-mate response to rea nee s, an representmany positive eatures. In terms o thisargument, the in ormal settlement shouldbe seen as a communitys creative use ofavai a e resources an opportunities, an

its imitations an pro ems s ou e over-come through government support or thecommunity to improve and formalize theexisting settlement: Overall there is a needor a different approach to informality inuman sett ements t at recognizes t e pos-

itive elements o so-called in ormal action,accepts that such settlements are valid andva ua e, an wor s to mitigate an over-come t eir negative e ements, in con unc-

tion wit t e resi ents an ot er re evantstakeholders.2

Informal settlement, Cape Town, South Africa


8/50

QUICK GUIDES FOR POLICY MAKERS 4 EVICTION6

COND

ITIONS

Evictions are complex, multi-faceted processes and it is difficult to capture them through one

single definition. The legal context and dominant driving forces of evictions are the most obvi-ous determinants. When used in this Guide, the term eviction includes the following twomain forms of eviction:

Forced eviction has been defined by the international community in the context ofhe Commission on Human Rights:3The permanent or temporary removal against their

will of individuals, families and/or communities from the homes and/or land they occupy,without the provision of, and access to, appropriate forms of legal or other protection.The prohibition on forced evictions does not, however, apply to evictions carried out byorce in accordance with the law and in conformity with the provision of the International

Covenants on Human Rights.

Evictions that are not forced in the strictest legal sense, but not voluntary either, usually

occur in the form of negotiated removal of individual occupants when the terms of nego-iation are unfair for poor households due to their weak tenure status, or to the fact thathey may not be complying with planning and development laws or construction norms

and standards. One of the most frequent driving forces for such evictions is market pres-sure (see REASONS WHY EVICTIONS HAPPEN on page 7 of this Guide).

No matter what their legal nature and driving forces are, most evictions are disruptive and un-necessary, and cause the same impoverishment and destruction of housing investments andsocial support systems. When an eviction is completely unavoidable, it must be carried out inaccordance with both the law and the international standards set out in General Comment 7of the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (CESCR). These standards are set outon page 26 of this Quick Guide. No eviction should render people homeless, or place them in aworse situation than they were in before.

DEFINING EVICTIONS

An important resource for communities,po icy ma ers an NGOs supporting strug-gles for the right to adequate housing isthe Fact Sheet on the Right to AdequateHousing issued by the United Nations Of-fice of the High Commissioner for Human

Rig ts an UN-HABITAT, w ic exp ains t ehousing-related rights and obligations con-tained in many international human rightsconventions.5


9/50


COND

ITIONS

. Increasing urbanization: As the paceof ur anization accelerates an morepeople and more investment are flow-ing into cities, informal settlementsw ic use to e to erate are no on-ger acceptable, because the formal cityincreasingly appropriates the space theyoccupy for development.

2. Large infrastructure projects: ManyAfrican cities compete with other cities

in Africa and elsewhere in the world toattract global capital investment. A lotof money is going into improving ur-

an infrastructure to make cities moreattractive to investors who want to seeconditions like those in the cities of in-dustrialised countries: freeways, sew-ers, water supply, electricity grids, masstransport systems. T ere is no questiont at cities nee t ese improvements asthey grow, but the way they are be-

ing planned, financed and carried outis isp acing t e poor on an increasingscale. Authoritarian, top-down planningand lack of state support for the poorexcludes them from participating in theplanning of new infrastructure so thatit can meet their nee s as well as theneeds of other stakeholders in the city.The infrastructure projects are often de-signed to improve conditions in moreaffluent areas of the city but do not

benefit people living in poorer neigh-bourhoods and informal settlements.

3. Market forces: Market forces are in-creasing y etermining ow space isused in cities. Current dynamics ac-companying the liberalization o landmarkets in many African countries, andnationwi e an tit ing programmes car-ried out in the name o economic de-ve opment an poverty re uction are

ncreasing the market pressure on ur-an low-income settlements. Many of

these market-driven displacementsare not recor e as evictions ecausethey do not require the use of force, or

ecause some form of compensation isai to t e isp ace ouse o s, re-

gardless of how fair and equitable thiscompensation may e. Mar et evic-tions, also referred to as gentrifica-

tion, encompass all situations wheredisplacements are the direct or indirectconsequences of a development aimingto make a more profitable use of thean .6 Governments are catc ing on tothis trend and the public land they man-age is increasingly being used for profit-a e rat er t an socia purposes. Privateand owners, keen to realise the bene tsof the appreciation in land values, try

to clear their plots of informal settle-

5 REASONS WHY

EVICTIONS HAPPEN


10/50


COND

ITIONS

ments t at ave eve ope t ere. Sothe poor, who cant afford housing atmarket rates, are being evicted from theprivate an pu ic an t ey ave occu-

pied or rented or generations, to makeway or higher-pro t uses like shoppingmalls, superstores and luxury residential

eve opments, an in some cases t eexploitation of mineral resources. Thescale and frequency of evictions hasincreased as globalization has broughtinternational finance to more and moreA rican cities.

4. City beautification: Many cities are

trying to clean themselves up to attractinvestment and market themselves asworld class cities. Its no surprise thatunsightly squatter settlements andpoor people in general do not fit intothis new vision of what many city au-thorities feel their cities should look like.So city beautification campaigns have

ecome another cause o evictions.

. ne ective laws and institutionsLegislation, procedures and related in-stitutions to protect communities fromeviction or to provi e tenure security

do not exist in many A rican countries.Even w ere some goo aws o exist,they are freely broken because of un-equa power re ations etween poorcommunities an t e governments andevelopers, and because o weak insti-tutions. Poor communities usually can-not afford the costs involved in usingt e ega system to c aim an protectt eir sett ement rig ts, an t ey se om

ave access to reliable legal advice to

rotect them against corrupt officials oreve opers w o manipu ate t e tenure

system to t eir own a vantage. W erethere is an absence o ormal tenurerights for people in slums and informalsett ements, t ey ave a most no pro-tection against evictions carrie out atthe behest o power ul interest groupsn t e cities. See the case study o PortHarcourt on page 8 of this Guide.)

According to the Rivers State Government (RSG), the population of Greater Port Harcourt in2009 stood at 1.2 million. The city has experienced spontaneous and uncontrolled physicalgrowth arising from rapid urbanization. Faced with the high cost of inner-city rentals and scar-city of housing, many households, especially rural migrants, resorted to land reclamation ofswamps along the waterfronts and their subsequent occupation via self-help housing construc-tion. This process of growth was not foreseen by the 1975 Master Plan that aimed at providing

infrastructure and orderly development for the fast-growing city. This Master Plan was neverfully implemented and the numerous informal waterfront settlements (waterfronts) toler-ated and tacitly recognized by the RSG for decades through continued renewal of TemporaryOccupation Licences.

Justified through an ambitious urban renewal programme and re-establishment of developmentcontrol in line with the 1975 Master Plan, the RSG in 2008 embarked on a citywide demolitioncampaign. Residential structures of different kinds have been destroyed as part of the clear-ances: unauthorized extensions and transformations of originally legal structures in plannedneighbourhoods, e.g. walls outside legal plot boundaries, additional buildings within plots, and

FORCED EVICTIONS CAUSE LARGE-SCALE HOMELESSNESS IN PORT HARCOURT,NIGERIA


11/50


COND

ITIONS

full buildings encroaching on road reserves and other public spaces (owners not entitled tocompensation); buildings whose owners hold valid land titles, approved building plans and per-mits (owners legally entitled to compensation); and unplanned waterfront settlements (residentsnot legally entitled to compensation).

Apart from the general urban renewal justification given by the RSG, one specific reasonfor some of the demolitions is the Silverbird Showtime project, a stand-alone 8-screen cinemawith related commercial developments. According to the public-private partnership agreementbetween the RSG and Silverbird Ltd, all settlements located within 2 km of the project have toundergo urban renewal. The RSG is interpreting this as demolition; other options such asin-situ upgrading have not been considered. It is estimated that the Silverbird project alone willlead to land clearance affecting between 100 000 and 150 000 people.

Since the beginning of the urban renewal programme, the Rivers State Governor has announcedthe demolition of all waterfronts. Another justification is that the waterfronts allegedly harbourcriminal elements. The demolition of all waterfronts is expected to cause at least 200 000 resi-dents to lose their homes. When the occupants of structures in other parts of the city affectedby this clearance policy are added, the homes of up to 300 000 Port Harcourt residents willprobably be destroyed by the RSGs urban renewal programme.

The RSG has not implemented most of the provisions of the Rivers State Physical Planning andDevelopment Law of 2003, and the demolitions do not comply with the legal and institutionalframework provided by this law. Most importantly, the Urban Renewal Board has not been setup and the waterfronts have not been declared Improvement Areas. This would facilitate theparticipation of affected residents in transparent planning of the upgrading and rehabilitation

of their communities. There is also a failure to observe the statutory rights of tenants whenevictions take place. The RSG does not have any guidelines on how to carry out evictions anddemolitions. A Federal High Court order against the Commissioner for Urban Development tohalt the demolitions was ignored and the forced eviction executed by the RSG.

Abonnema Wharf Waterfront, with Shell Petroleum Development Company Kidney Island operation site in thebackground (left) and houses in Abonnema Wharf Waterfront demarcated for demolition


12/50


COND

ITIONS

FACT: The poor migrate to cities for goodn

For decades, the flow of population in mostAfrican countries has been out of rural ar-eas and into cities. This huge tide of mostlypoor migrants is a demographic fact no gov-ernment has been able to reverse, althoughmany keep trying.

People are leaving their villages for goodreasons. Changes in how land is armed and

owne an increasing y tie to g o a mar-kets are leaving more rural people in crip-pling debt, without land, work, money orany hope of surviving. At the same time, in-creasing numbers o natural disasters are de-stroying rural livelihoods and impoverishingmore and more households. With TV, cheapmo i e p ones an easy communications,people in the most remote villages now knowwhat cities have to o er, and their choice to

migrate is usually a well informed one.They are coming into cities for equally goodreasons. In cities they find job opportunitiesas well as markets for their own informalusinesses, making and selling cheap goods

and services. And the money they make incities is usua y enoug to support t em-selves and their households, as well as sendmoney home to relatives still in the village.In cities t ey ave etter access to sc oo s,

health care, Western-style culture like filmsand concerts, and opportunities for a futureno village could ever offer.

FACT: Cities nee t e poor to prosper

Periods of industrialization which make coun-tries ric er ave a ways re ie on uge, ow-paid work orces. The large supply o cheaplabour allows or the development o various

city-based economic activities in many differ-en sec ors:

Industrial labour: The poor provide theool of skilled and unskilled labour that

makes dangerous and difficult econom-c activities attractive for investors.

Construction labour: The poor form theabour force for the housing, infrastruc-ture and commercial construction proj-ects t at a growing city nee s.

Public sector labour: It is the poor whosweep the streets, carry away its gar-

age, maintain its sewer system andar s, an repair amage to t e ur an

environment caused by natural disasterssuch as floods and fires.

Service sector labour: It is also the poorw o are t e c i care wor ers, omes-tic staff such as cleaners and gardeners,maintenance workers, cooks and wait-ers, taxi and bus drivers and all the other

eople who keep the city running.

FACT: The poor have no choice but tolive in informal settlements

With land prices rising, unavailability o a -ordable housing and large numbers o peo-

ple converging on cities at the same time,

the poor are finding themselves increasinglypriced out of any formal land or housingmarket. In most A rican cities, planners andgovernments at a eve s ave een una eto cope with this influx of poor workers andwith the natural growth of the urban poorpopulation, and to recognize or to plan fortheir need or land, a ordable housing andasic services.

It is hard to find examples in Africa of suc-

SOME FACTS ABOUT POOR

PEOPLE IN CITIES


13/50


COND

ITIONS

cess ul programmes to address the housingneeds of the poor. When governments havedeveloped programmes to provide subsi-ize socia ousing, t ese programmes

have o ten ailed to solve the problem orsevera reasons:

The number of housing units producedby these government programmescould only meet a tiny fraction of actualnee s.

The housing units were often badly lo-cated, poorly built and inappropriately

esigne .

The allocation of these housing unitswas mismanaged, so that in the end itwas mainly better-off groups that actu-a y move in.

The monthly payments for these unitsand the attached services were oftentoo high for the very poor, so they wereforced to sell off their rights to better-off househol s.

Partnering with the private sector to

provide housing for the poor has re-sulted in houses being built that are farfrom affordable for poor people.

FACT: In ormal settlements are a solu-tion to housing problems

Nobody would argue that a crowded, dirty,unp anne sett ement is an i ea iving situ-

ation, with its poor quality housing, inade-quate or absent infrastructure and insecureland tenure. But if you take a look at whatis really going on in informal settlements,ou will often find them to be places of sup-

port and hope and growth, not places ofdespair at all. In act, these makeshi t settle-ments evolve quickly into vital and complexlife-support systems for the poor: affordablehousing, workspace for traders or service

providers, social support systems of neigh-bours and friends, and access to goods andservices they can afford, provided by thoseliving in the settlement.


14/50


COND

ITIONS

Meeting the humanitarian challenge of Mau-

ritanias unpredictable climate is no longer justa question of long forays across the tracklessdesert to locate and assist remote villages. Moreand more rural Mauritanians are packing up andheading for urban areas to scratch out a living.People who have lost everything but can still af-ford the handful of cash for a jolting ride acrossthe country, flock there to look for work. Formen its carrying water and unloading trucks.For women its serving and cooking.

Foitima Oloune, 55, a divorced mother of fourfrom Keoleoloute village near Nema in the farsouth-eastern corner of the country, made thelong trek to the countrys capital, Nouakchott.After successive years of drought her animals alldied and her food reserves could not sustain herto get through to this years growing season.

Accepting an offer from relatives to stay withthem in the El Mina slum on the capitals out-skirts, she gathered her children and a fewpossessions and travelled the 1 300 km acrossthe country. Everyone in the village left, shesaid. Those who could, came to Nouakchott.

The rest, who could not afford a bus, walkedto ema.

In the country when it rains there is no prob-lem. We have meat, milk, couscous, and wehelp each other. Here there is nothing unlessyou work hard for it. But I would still prefer tobe here if there are no rains because at least Ican do something to survive, she said.

Aid agencies say there are no statistics availablefor how many people there are like Foitima,struggling to survive in Nouakchott and other

urban areas like Rosso, Nema, Keidi and Nouadi-bou. Locals say it is sometimes hard to tell thedifference between where slums start and theplanned city begins.8

MAURITANIAS URBAN SLUMS OFFER NO SUPPORT TO RURAL NEWCOMERS

Drought conditions are forcing more and moreBedouins and rural Mauritanians to abandon theirtraditional way of life and settle in urban areas.(Photo: Nicholas Reader/IRIN)

El Mina slum on the outskirts of Mauritaniascapital city Nouakchott (Photo: Nicholas Reader/RIN)


15/50


COND

ITIONS

W at o t e poor ooor when they search or

housing?

The priorities a poor household considers

when looking for shelter will be quite dif-ferent from their better-off neighbours, whomay think more about things like status,comfort, design, convenience or potentialresale value. When governments and de-velopers ignore these differences and makewrong assumptions about what poor peo-ple need in their housing, it leads to housingpolicies and pro ects that fail to reach thepoor. What aspects of housing are impor-tant for poor people?

1. Location: Being close to jobs and earn-ing opportunities is the top factor inw ere t e poor c oose to ive. Beingnear markets, factories, business dis-tricts, transport hubs and constructionsites means better incomes, more earn-ing opportunities an ower transporta-tion costs. Many ousing programmesfail to attract or retain the poor becausethey are built too far from city centres,

n ustria areas, sc oo s, c inics an so-cial services. Thats why inner city slums,no matter how crowded or insecure, are

referable to the poor.

2. Space for work: For many poor peo-

e, ousing provi es more t an spaceto live. It is also a space for income-generating activities. T ese mig t in-clude tailoring, craft production, food

reparation for market stalls or streetvending, repair shops, light manufac-turing, ouse o provisions stores,

airdressers, laundries, restaurants, barsand rental rooms. Ground-floor housingalways offers the most flexibility for this

lending together o living and earning

activities. This is why blocks of mid-riseflats often drastically diminish a house-

olds capacity to earn, because theyseldom include spaces for these activi-ties to ta e p ace.

. Commun ty support systems: ouse-olds in informal settlements rely on

networks of family, friends and neigh-ours for all kin s of mutual assistance

and support not only in times o emer-

DIFFERENT NEEDS,

DIFFERENT PRIORITIES


16/50


CONC

EPTS

gency. W at o t ese community- asesupport systems and complex networksof local relationships offer? Informal ac-cess to e ectricity, a ysitting, e p in

nding jobs, in ormation, sources ocredit in emergencies, and help in xingwhatever is broken. Evictions that sepa-rate households who have formed suchoca re ations ips estroy many vitasupport systems.

4. ost: Housing nance pro essionalsusually assume that about 2530% of ahouseholds monthly income can reason-ably be devoted to housing costs: rent or

mortgage payments. This average mightwork for middle income households, butit is very different for many poor house-

o s, w o spen muc arger propor-tions of their income on essentials likeood, medical care, transport and emer-

gencies. Even low-end rental housing of-

ten requires sizea e eposits w ic t eoor cant afford. The poorer a house-old is, the less they can afford to payor their housing as a percentage of their

mont y income. T at is w y an incre-mentally built shack in an informal set-tlement may be the most suitable hous-ng for a poor household the housingw ic a ows t em gra ua y to ui upt eir economic ase.


17/50


CONC

EPTS

HOW EVICTION AFFECTS

THE POOR

Eviction creates poverty rather than al-leviating it. It contributes to housingproblems in our cities rather than solv-ing them. In almost every way, EVICTIONI THE PP ITE F DEVEL PMENT.

Poor communities are the greatest targetsfor evictions in African cities. They are alsothe group worst prepared to weather theeffects of eviction and least able to find af-fordable land and housing alternatives in

the formal sector.Besides losing their investments they haveput into their houses and belongings thatoften get lost or destroyed during the evic-tion, t e poor ose t eir community supportsystems in an eviction. Many also lose their

jobs and means of earning. Evicted house-holds are more likely to fall into debt in theprocess of setting up new dwellings.

Evictions put additional burdens of time

an transport expenses on t e poor. T eyare distanced from proper health care andeducational facilities as well as employmentopportunities, an expose to situationsof alienation an conflict that can increasecrime and violence.

Forced evictions may be a way of eliminat-ing the informal settlements the rich dontwant to see, ut t ey o not ing to reso vethe housing shortages which forced people

to live there in the first place. In fact, byeaving peop e ome ess, t ey ma e t eproblems worse. When households are orc-ibly evicted from their homes without beinggiven any viable alternative shelter, they arelikely to create new squatter settlementson the periphery of the city or move intoexisting settlements. This negates the de-velopment outcomes of the developmentprojects for which informal settlements are

moved out of the way.

overnment and city authorities often usti-y the eviction of squatters from public and

private land with claims that these commu-nities block important infrastructure projectsi e new roa s, rains, e ectricity an watersupply grids all badly needed to serve theneeds of the city. But evictions in Africa areincreasingly clearing both public and privateland for commercial development like shop-ping ma s an upmar et ousing estatesthat are neither essential nor in the larger

ublic interest.

Community organizations, civi societygroups and donors are increasingly ques-tioning a practice that impoverishes somany and causes such suffering, in thename of civic order and national develop-ment. The laws may be on the side of theega an owners, an t ey may p ace t erig ts to own property a ove t e rig t toadequate housing for all, but eviction is the

least constructive way of resolving the con-icting needs of a city to develop and the

poor to find housing.

Aftermath of an eviction in johannesburg, (Photo :Ismail Farouk)


18/50


CONC

EPTS

Women in Africa suffer disproportionatelyfrom forced evictions because, in additionto the large-scale evictions of informal set-tlement and slum communities, they oftenexperience eviction at t e ouse o eveby family and community members. Be-ing evicted from land or property to whichthey do not hold formal title because ofgender-based legal discrimination, domes-tic con icts or the stigma o HIV/AIDS thatcan make it difficult for HIV-positive womento stay in their family homes leaves manywomen extreme y vu nera e.

Governments need to recognise that orwomen, housing often means much morethan a roof over their heads it is the placewhere they raise children, and often thebase for the economic activity that supportsthe househol . Article 16 of the Protocol tothe African Charter on the Rights of Wom-en in Africa , adopted by the Conference ofHeads of State and Government in 2003,states t at a women ave t e rig t to a -equate housing. Violation o this right as aresult of forced evictions can mean a viola-

tion of all the other legal and human rightso which women are entitled.

How eviction a ects childrenForced evictions that a ect women almostinvariably involve the eviction of children as

ell, as women are most often the primarycare givers of the children in the household.Such evictions have especially serious impli-cations for children. Too often, forced evic-tions are c aracterise y vio ence, particu-larly against women and children, who arethe ones most likely to be at home when

suc an eviction is carrie out. A stu y onUr an C i ren an t e P ysica Environ-ment found that the impacts of evictionor family stability and for childrens emo-

tiona we eing can e evastating; t e ex-perience has been described as comparableto war or children in terms o the develop-mental consequences. Even when evictionsare followed by immediate relocation, theeffects on chil ren can e estructive anunsettling.9

WOMEN AND FORCED

EVICTIONS

Some children surrounded by the aftermath of a forced eviction, or sleeping rough in the city streets(Photo : A. Grimard)


19/50


CONC

EPTS

Some c i ren w o ave experience evic-tion from their homes are reported to sufferfrom feelings of helplessness, powerlessnessand loss of hope. Other children are reported

to have abandoned the hope o continuingt eir sc oo ing ecause t ey ave no a ter-native but to sleep or stay on the streets orvacant an at east temporari y, an poten-tially even or the long term.

Exposure to the increased stress, and oftenviolence, that accompanies orced evictioncan lead to a range of negative emotionalconsequences in families. Children inter-viewed by researchers recounted increased

inci ents of violence an chil a use withintheir own homes after a forced eviction hadtaken place. Thus, forced evictions are notonly a focal point for violence, they alsoree violence in the lives of chil ren an

their amilies. As a result o losing theirome and community, children enter aorld of insecurity in which they tend to be

even more vu nera e to t ose w o wou

a use t em.In exceptional cases where evictions aredeemed to be justified under internationalhuman rights standards and are unavoid-able, every effort should be made not to dis-rupt childrens schooling and to ensure thatthe distressing e ects o eviction on childrenare minimised. This may mean, for example,that trained counsellors must be made avail-able to the affected children before, during

and after any eviction takes place. Further-more, evictions should not take place in par-ticularly bad weather or at night, nor whenchildren are home alone, nor at a time whenchildrens schooling would be disrupted.10

More than 7 000 people were left homeless in Cameroons capital, Yaound, when city officialsbegan tearing down slums to make space for development projects. The city is also cleaning

up areas prone to flooding and landslides. The initiative has led to displacement and protests.Three shantytowns were pulled down in 2009 in what city officials called a cleanup operation.When the project is finished, the former slums will be transformed into public gardens or sold toprivate developers. Plans have also been made to improve drainage on the ancient riverbeds toprotect new structures against flooding. Authorities call the plan The Paris Dream.

Since 2006, Yaound has been undergoing a transformation never before seen in the country.New roads have been opened, sidewalks have been paved, wild unoccupied lands have beentransformed into public gardens and garbage collection has greatly improved. But many say thedemolitions are overshadowing these operations. For homeless residents like Daniel Essono, theParis Dream is a nightmare. Only the rich and their children will benefit from the proposedgardens, he said. What we want is shelter and food. When you send us into the streets, you

are taking even the little that we have away. You do not expect us to be happy.

Authorities have promised to resettle some of those who can produce title deeds and buildingpermits. But they make up less than 2% of all the affected residents and it would make very littledifference to others losing their homes. The city government says it recognizes the problem butsays it cannot resettle most of them because they are squatters.

Critics of the operation have sprung up from all walks of life. In September 2009 the Govern-ment banned public debates on the subject planned by a coalition of NGOs.

With a population of more than two million, uninhabited land has become scarce and expen-sive. New slums are springing up every year. And the urban population continues to grow.

MAKING PEOPLE HOMELESS TO BEAUTIFY YAOUND


20/50


CONC

EPTS

HIV and AIDS are a reality for urban andrural communities across Africa. For peopleliving in informal settlements, the physicaland emotional suffering caused by HIV andAIDS, an t e re ate economic ar s ips,are all the harder to bear because of theshortage and inadequacy of basic servicesand infrastructure, and the insecure condi-tions in which households live.

People in informal settlements typically do

not have sufficient access to health or otheremergency services to treat infections likesexually transmitted infections, which is vi-tal to decrease the possibility of future HIVinfection. In instances where people areHIV-positive, water is a so ute y essentiafor their health and also for taking adequatecare of ill household members. Food has to

e prepare wit c ean an s an in a sani-tary environment, an water is a so nee eto deal with opportunistic infections which

might cause diarrhoea and vomiting thatmust e proper y c eane , an t e omesanitised, to protect other family membersfrom the risk of illness. People also needadequate amounts of water to take theirmedication, and to replace the fluids lostwhen they have diarrhoea or vomiting inor er to prevent e y ration. Having t emeans to stay clean and comfortable alsocontributes to the dignity and overall well-being of persons sick with AIDS-related ill-

nesses. Yet in many informal settlements,water is commonly provided via communalstandpipes. These are often far away ormig t e in ar ene areas w ere womenand young girls (most likely responsible forwater collection) may be at risk o being at-tacked or raped (in itself a further cause ofthe spread of HIV).

In situations o such need, households de-velop strategies or surviving and helping

eac ot er t at are ase on neig our-hood networks of support and shared re-sources. People needing treatment often

ave to go through complicated processesto get access to medication, including be-ing registered for treatment at a specific

clinic or hospital. If an eviction takes place,it can estroy t e existing support networ sor households with sick members, and

even make it impossible for people to re-ceive t e me ica treatment t at is eepingthem alive. Access to health care facilities,a stable supply of healthy food and clean

ater, and support from social networks int e sett ement are a remove y evictionof the household, loss of their economic re-sources, and destruction of the settlement.

EVICTION IN A TIME OF

HIV AND AIDS


21/50


CONC

EPTS

TENURE SECURITY CAN BRING

POWERFUL MARKET FORCES INTO A

POOR COMMUNITY

Rather than destroying in ormal settlementsin the name of creating a healthier city,a more constructive response to the poorliving conditions of these settlements is in

situ upgrading, in the orm o increasedservice provision and support or existingHIV and AIDS care networks and facilities.Access to clean and adequate sources ofbasic services would allow people to leadhealthy lives and prevent their immune sys-tems from being compromised, which in-creases their vulnerability to HIV infection.Because in ormal settlements tend to beon margina an /or perip era an , roa sin rastructure and improved access to pub-

lic transport are particularly important, sot at emergency me ica ve ic es can etter

respond to calls or emergency trans ers opeople with AIDS-related illnesses to a hos-pital or clinic.12

Women infected with HIV suffer particular-

ly badly in many parts o sub-Saharan A -rica where they do not have legal rights tohousing, as they are often evicted by theiramilies once their HIV+ status is known.

Housing security for women, through ten-ure rights and freedom from eviction, leadsto improved living conditions or them andtheir families and makes them better ableto cope with the detrimental effects of thedisease.

Security of tenure gives people freedomfrom fear of forced eviction. It is not re-stricted to ownership, and includes full legalprotection against arbitrary eviction for alloccupiers of a property, including tenants. Itis best guaranteed via speci c laws and reg-ulations, but also by policy decisions againstforced evictions.

Many argue that as the rich and the middleclasses have the right to buy and sell the

land they have paid for, the poor shouldalso be entitled to have formal tenure rightsand capitalize on their land assets. There areenefits an raw acks that come with for-

malizing the land assets of the poor. Oncethey have legal rights to the land they oc-cupy, people can use those rights to get ac-cess to public services, to get bank loans,to start small home- ase usinesses an tolegitimize their status in the city.

But one of the paradoxes of social develop-ment an poverty a eviation programmes isthat tenure insecurity can actually protectoor people from market forces. As soon

as you make an informal settlement moresecure by ormalizing user rights or givingland title to its residents, those tiny plots

ic use to e insecure an unattractivesuddenly enter the formal urban land mar-ket an ecome marketa le commo ities.Richer people will be queuing up to offer

large sums of money to buy the poor peo-le out.

Of course many slum dwellers will be tempt-e to tra e in their houses for more cashthan they could make in several years. It isin the nature of poverty that when criseshappen (debts, medical emergencies anddeaths in the household), people often haveno choice but to sell off whatever they haveof value in order to survive, including their


22/50


CONC

EPTS

new y secure an , an move into anot erinformal settlement where they have nosecure rights. This market-driven displace-ment can also be seen as a form of eviction a much softer form in which there is nosingle person or agency or villain to point

the finger at, no messy demolitions andcon ict with the authorities, and it happensgradually, one household at a time.

A growing number of poverty alleviationprogrammes are being launched in whichinformal land assets used by the poor are be-ing formalized. Some of these programmesend up making the housing problems of thepoor much worse, as market forces pushvu nera e, poor ouse o s out.

In ivi ua or co ectiveenure?

In ivi ua an tit e is increasing y ecomingthe primary orm o land ownership aroundthe world especially in cities, where mar-

ket access to land is crucial for economicexpansion. Lan tenure systems suc ascustomary rig ts, or co ective owners ip ycooperatives, have proven to be obstaclesto speculation and economic expansion. Sothese alternative tenure systems are beingsystematically replaced around the world,a ong wit t e peop e w ose s e ter, ive i-oo an surviva t ey protecte . T e way

tenure is organized in poor settlements can

e a crucial factor in whether those com-munities are able to resist these powerfuleconomic orces and protect their poor resi-dents. (See Quick Guide 3 on Land.)


23/50


CONC

EPTS

Between 1991 and 2002, the urban population of Kigali increased greatly, due to the combinedeffects of natural growth, rural-urban migrations, and the return to the country, mainly to Kigali,of Rwandan refugees living in the neighbouring countries. Since then the population of the cityhas continued to increase. Before 1994, the supply of urban land for the low-income populationwas mainly provided by customary owners on the urban fringe. The new government thatcame into power following the 1994 genocide did not recognise the customary land marketbut did not suggest any alternative policy for housing the poor, and took a series of actions toprevent the formation of new slums. This situation has resulted in a growing pressure on existinginformal settlements, mainly for rental housing.

The land and housing development policy currently implemented by the City of Kigali is pushingthe majority of the urban population into illegality. Until the new land law adopted in Novem-ber 2004 is implemented, land remains the property of the state or the City of Kigali, whichallocates land required for any development project in the city. Individual housing construction

is authorised on land leased by public authorities, provided it conforms to the official state de-velopment norms and standards. Few households can manage this. Most have no choice but torely on informal land markets, and are thus exposed to eviction. At present, restrictive planningand development standards are directly responsible for the exclusion of 7580% of householdsfrom legal access to land and housing.

The main objective of the City of Kigali is to carry out urban renewal projects in order to makeprime land available for development. The City of Kigali evicts households from irregular settle-ments in order to carry out infrastructure, development and urban renewal projects, especiallyin the central part of the city. In addition to the risk of expropriation by the public authorities,the pressure of the market on urban and suburban land increases tenure insecurity. Informalsettlements may be the target of a development project initiated by private investors, who can

obtain approval from the City of Kigali for a project on a site already informally occupied, andnegotiate the voluntary departure of the occupants or their eviction. Compensation paid bythe private investors will later be deducted from the price investors will have to pay the city toobtain a land title so in effect the city is subsidizing the cost of the eviction.

This practice generates a large number of conflicts. Eighty per cent of households in Kigali arepotentially exposed to this form of expropriation or market-driven eviction. The compensationpaid to households corresponds to the cost of the dwelling unit built on the plot, as assessed bythe city council, but not the cost of land, which remains the property of the state or the City ofKigali. Moreover, only households who own their dwellings (42.7% of households in Kigali in2002) can receive compensation. Those who rent receive nothing at all. The cost to a householdof gaining access to another dwelling unit is very much higher than the amount of compensa-tion it receives. If the compensation rate were to be re-evaluated, the City of Kigali would nothave the required resources to compensate and resettle expropriated households.

The registration system currently used, which emphasises tenure regularisation in the form ofindividual ownership rather than security of land tenure, tends to worsen the situation, as reg-istration is on a voluntary basis and depends entirely on the ability of the individual to bear thecost. Limited resettlement alternatives offered to evicted households are worsening the impactof market eviction processes. The practice of eviction without fair compensation or without of-fering resettlement options is creating a population of homeless families.13

MARKET-DRIVEN DISPLACEMENTS AND EVICTIONS IN KIGALI


24/50


CONC

EPTS

HOUSING IS A HUMAN RIGHT AND FORCED

EVICTION IS A VIOLATION OF THAT RIGHT

Evictions are often presented as the processby which people who have illegally occu-pied a piece of land or a house belongingto someone else are removed from thatland, by due process o law. In this view, thesquatters are the criminals and the prop-erty owners are their victims. This doesntcapture the human reality of an eviction,which is almost always painful, violent andimpoverishing or those being evicted. Andit also doesnt capture the unjust systems of

land use and property ownership in manycountries which allow few to enjoy greatproperty wealth and leave many with littleor not ing at a .

Even in countries where forced evictions areunlawful or unconstitutional under domes-tic law, the legal and political systems stilloften try to avoid these laws, and to placethe rights of property owners above theright to adequate housing in order to se-

cure the speedy eviction of residents who,t ey argue, are o structing eve opmentpro ects or urban upgrading. The courtsgenerally do not support the evictees, andmunicipal, state and national governmentsregularly conduct evictions in violation ofinternational conventions on human rights,and sometimes even in contravention oftheir own laws and constitutions.

Force evictions are i ega

Since the United Nations was founded in1945, one of its tasks has been to addressinequities through declarations, covenantsand agendas which would guarantee cer-tain basic human rights and address theeconomic an socia isparities w ic existwithin so many countries systems o gov-ernance. The majority of African countries

ave signe t ese covenants an commit-

te t emse ves to onouring t eir prin-ciples.

Article 25 of the Universal Declarationo Human Rights states that Everyone

as the right to a standard of living ad-

equate for the health and wellbeing, ofimself and of his household, including

food, clothing and housing.

The International Covenant on Eco-nomic, Social and Cultural Rights (CE-SCR) is the key legal source of housingrights under international human rightsaw. Article 11(1) of the Covenantc ear y recognizes t e rig t to a equate

ousing. The CESCRs General Com-

ments No. 4 and No. 7 explain the rightto adequate housing and to be pro-tected from forced evictions. GeneralComment No. 7 states that the Statetself must refrain from forced evictionsan ensure that the law is enforceagainst its agents or third parties whocarry out forced evictions. It also stateshat Evictions shoul not result in in-

dividuals being rendered homeless orvulnerable to the violation of other hu-


25/50


CONC

EPTS

HOUSING RIGHTS ARE NOT

ABSTRACT

man rig ts; an prescri es protectivemechanisms for evictees in the highlyexceptional circumstances where evic-tion is unavoi a e.

Article 16 o the Protocol to the A ri-can Charter on the Rights of Womenin Africa adopted by the Conferenceo Heads o State and Government inMaputo in 2003 states: Women shallhave the right to equal access to hous-

ng an to accepta e iving con itionsn a healthy environment. To ensure thisright, States Parties shall grant to wom-en, w atever t eir marita status, access

to a equate ousing.

The right to housing, as defined withininternational law, concerns basic humannee s w ic a ow us a to survive. Goohousing contributes to the wellbeing o

ouse o s an to a countrys roa er eco-nomic and social development. Accordingto the UN Universal Declaration of HumanRig ts; Genera Comment 4, T e Rig t to

Adequate Housing (1991), the minimumrequirements o decent housing are:

Legal secure tenure: In their hous-ing, people must be protected fromeviction, arassment an ot er t reats.States must provide and enforce tenuresecurity, in consultation with affectedgroups.

Availability of services and infra-

s ruc ure: Housing s ou inc u efacilities essential for health, security,comfort, and nutrition: safe drinkingwater, energy for cooking, heating,lighting, sanitation facilities, refuse dis-posal, storage and emergency services.

Affordability: The cost of adequatehousing should not be so high that itcompromises the ability of a householdto satisfy other basic needs.

Habitability: Housing must protect itsnhabitants from cold, damp, heat, rain,or ot er ea t t reats an structura

azar s. It must a so provi e a equatespace or them.

Accessibility: All people are entitled toadequate housing, and disadvantagedgroups in particu ar must e accor eull and sustainable access to housing,

which may mean granting them prioritystatus in housing allocation or land use

anning.

Location: Housing s ou e ocaten areas with access to employmentoptions, health care services, schools,chil care an other social facilities. Thisapp ies equa y in ur an an rura areas.Housing should not be built on or near

olluted sites or sources of pollution.

Cultural adequacy: Activities gearedtowards development or moderniza-tion of housing should ensure that thecultural dimensions of housing are notsacrificed, while simultaneously ensur-ng modern technical acilities.


26/50


CONC

EPTS

In 2000, the Constitutional Court of South Africa issued an important judgment that relates tothe right to adequate housing.14 In the landmark Grootboom case, the Constitutional Court

considered a petition lodged on behalf of a poor community of some 390 adults and 510children. The community had been living in extremely poor conditions in Wallacedene squattercamp, near Cape Town. Out of desperation, the community decided to move to vacant land.However, they were soon evicted from that land. Living in misery, the community launched anurgent application for the provision of adequate and sufficient basic temporary shelter and/orhousing under Section 26 of the South African Constitution, which provides that everyone hasthe right to have access to adequate housing. They argued that under Subsection 28(1)(c) of theConstitution, which provides that every child has the right to, inter alia, shelter, their childrenhad an unqualified right to shelter. They further argued that Subsection 28(1)(c) imposed a dutyon the State to provide shelter not only for the children but also for their parents, on the basisthat it is in the childrens best interests to remain in a family unit.

Consistent with international human rights law, the Court found that the State was required totake steps towards the progressive realisation of the right to adequate housing. This includedthe obligation to devise, fund, implement and supervise measures, within its available resources,to provide relief to those in desperate need.15 The South African Government accepted thisverdict in principle, but the slow pace of housing and infrastructure delivery has meant that inpractice, the community of Wallacedene continues to struggle for adequate access to securehousing.

THE CONSTITUTIONAL DUTY TO FULFIL HOUSING RIGHTS


27/50


CONC

EPTS

In Johannesburg, the Centre on Housing Rights and Evictions (COHRE) has worked in alliancewith a number of local partners, to try to stop the eviction of more than 25 000 residents of

buildings in the inner city. These so-called bad buildings are in the process of being cleared, aspart of the Johannesburg Inner City Regeneration Strategy aimed at creating an African WorldClass City and attracting investment. While there is no doubt that the conditions in many ofthe buildings are appalling, the procedures being used by the municipality are grossly unfair,including the use of apartheid-era laws and regulations, instead of much more appropriaterecent legislation in the form of the Prevention of Illegal Eviction from and Unlawful Occupationof Land Act (the PIE Act). In addition, affected people are not consulted or offered any viablealternatives. In the name of safety and health in the buildings, residents are made homeless andleft on the streets to fend for themselves.

In response to this, COHRE and its partners including the Centre for Applied Legal Studies,the Wits Law Clinic, the Inner City Resource Centre, organised groups of residents, and others

developed a joint strategy using a combination of tools, including: detailed research; publicrelease of the report; letters of protest and media releases; dialogue with officials on alternativesto the evictions; drafting of evictions and tenure security frameworks, laws and policy; conven-ing panels of experts; training and networking workshops; legal action.

However, after more than a year of trying to initiate meaningful dialogue with the City in orderto convince them that what they were doing was not only illegal and grossly unfair, but alsohighly unlikely to succeed, it became clear that legal action was inevitable. With pro bono legalsupport, more than 300 residents from buildings in Berea and a disused panel-beating work-shop in the city centre challenged the Johannesburg Metros practice of evicting poor peoplefrom allegedly unsafe buildings onto the inner city streets.

On 3 March 2006, the High Court of South Africa ruled that the City of Johannesburgs housing

programme failed to comply with section 26 of the South African Constitution which providesfor the right of all to have access to adequate housing. This ruling was due to the Municipalitysfailure to provide suitable relief for, and to give adequate priority and resources to, the inner citypoor living in a crisis situation or otherwise in desperate need of accommodation.

The Judge ordered the city to devise and implement a comprehensive and coordinated pro-gramme to progressively realise the right to adequate housing of people living in the innercity of Johannesburg who were in desperate need of accommodation. He dismissed the evictionapplications brought by the City against the residents of bad buildings. He also interdictedthe City from evicting or seeking to evict the residents until such time as adequate alternativeaccommodation in the inner city area had been provided. This judgement advances the impor-tance of the South African Constitution as an international model for how a country should

provide protection against forced evictions and uphold the right to adequate housing.The City of Johannesburg appealed against the judgement, and the Supreme Court of Appealsubsequently ordered the residents to vacate the buildings concerned, and also ordered themunicipality to provide those residents who needed it with alternative shelter where they maylive secure against eviction. This judgment is a partial victory for the inner city poor. The lawis now clear on the point that they cannot be evicted without any alternative accommodation.However, the judgement has effectively denied the right of inner city residents to live near theirplace of work.16

CHALLENGING BAD BUILDING EVICTIONS IN JOHANNESBURG


28/50


APPRO

ACHES

Almost all evictions arepreventa e

In many p aces an in many ways, t e ur-an poor continue to e treate i e s a e

areas on a development map, to be liftedup ere an paste own again t ere not like human beings with real needs, realhouseholds and real aspirations, living in

real communities. Very few urban decisionma ers are intereste in as ing t em w attheyd like to do or in making an investmentin finding solutions to their housing needst at are win-win, ecause t at ta es aong time to o.

Deve opment p ans w ic eci e w ats go-ing to happen, where and when, in a city,are often described as technical documents,w ic on y tec nica peop e can un erstan

and whose preparation is a purely technicalexercise of arranging roads, zones, drainageand access with the greatest e ciency. Yett e eve opment p ans w ic cause evictionare not engraved in stone. The process ofur an p anning is ig y po itica an s oube considered as such. Every aspect of thoseplans is negotiable.17

T ere are many interme iate options w icoffer alternatives to forced eviction alter-natives which work for both the city andt e poor. T ese options are eing exp ore ,re ned, added to and scaled up right now,in cities around the world. The solution toeviction lies in finding strategies which al-low people to be part o the planning whicha ects their lives. This might involve legiti-mizing the rights o the poor people to stay

here they are now, or it might involve re-

ALTERNATIVES TO EVICTION

Almost all the eviction happening today is preventable. None of the misery eviction brings or the wrongful planning

decisions, disregard for equity or misdirected development imperatives behind it are inevitable.


29/50


APPRO

ACHES

SECURE TENURE AND ON-SITE

UPGRADING

The best eviction alternative is one that pre-serves the community in the SAME PLACEand gives people secure tenure rights tothat land. One of the best ways for cities tohelp their poor citizens access better hous-ing and living conditions is by providingsecure tenure in the informal settlementswhere they already live (including protec-

tion from predatory land speculators), andthen working with them to upgrade theirsettlements together. While poor communi-ties have known this for a long time, gov-ernments an ur an ecision makers havebeen very slow to recognize the benefits ofon-site upgra ing, an to accept t at e p-ing people to secure their land and improvet eir ousing con itions, rat er t an evict-ing t em, is in t e est interests not justof the urban poor but of the whole urbaneconomy.

When cities and poor communities worktogether to secure and upgrade existingsettlements, it is a humane, economical andpragmatic way to protect and expand thecitys largest stock of affordable housing forits workforce. It is a way of resolving hous-ing shortages that are a problem not onlyor the poor, but for the city as a whole. The

process of upgrading is also a powerful wayof transforming mutually antagonistic re-ationships between city governments andoor communities into pro uctive re ation-

ships of mutual trust and collaboration.

ocating t em to an w ic a ows t em tocontinue developing their lives or manyother options in between. The energy andresources that many communities in African

cities have to devote to ghting o threatso eviction could also be used to engageconstructively with the city planners andgovernment, to eve op creative so utionsto t eir ousing nee s t at a so ta e ac-count o the broader development needs othe city.


30/50


APPRO

ACHES

n 2002, approximately 1 500 people living on the Naguru and Nakawa estates in Kampala,Uganda, were threatened with eviction by the Kampala City Council which intended to use theand for the construction of retail and middle-income housing.

The community was assisted locally by Evelyn Nassuna, Naguru and Nakawa Estates TenantsOrganization. The organization was supported in its efforts by a Member of Parliament, and alsoby COHRE, which on their request submitted a protest letter to the Government of Uganda, the

ampala City Council, and Members of Parliament on the committee that needed to approve theevictions, and the media.

few weeks after the submission of the protest letter, the following correspondence was re-ceived from a local COHRE contact: I am happy to inform you that...the President of Uganda[has just] intervened to stop the eviction of tenants from both Estates. He did not agree with the

ampala City Council, when it argued that people had to be evicted so that KCC should erect amodern satellite city in the area. Instead, he said that housing units for low income people should

be put up. The challenge now is whether Government is really committed to redeveloping thearea in favour of the tenants.

Such successes may be small but they are significant. They illustrate the importance of a com-munity-driven process, supported by organizations at different levels, each playing their part inconvincing the relevant authorities that an alternative to eviction is possible. However, simplyalting an eviction is not sufficient. Further work would be required to gain security of tenureor the residents, and also to initiate processes to realize all dimensions of their right to adequateousing.

Since 2003 UN-HABITAT has engaged with the Government of Uganda and other stakeholders,ncluding community organizations, in a Secure Tenure Campaign that has brought together allprotagonists. The aim of the campaign is to ensure that the urban poors right to the city is recog-

nized and protected and that no forced evictions will take place in Kampala or any other Ugandancity or town. The campaign is supported by a Cities without Slums programme in Kampala toranslate the outputs of the campaign into concrete actions, including the revision of the existingand and tenure systems, and capacity building of all partners to engage in city-wide, participatoryslum upgrading programmes. 1

n December 2008 the Government of Uganda published its National Slum Upgrading Strategyand Action Plan, which includes strategies for tenure regularization and affordable land, supplyof affordable housing, urban infrastructure and basic services, a slum-sensitive urban planningramework, financing slum upgrading, inclusion and participation of slum residents, cost alloca-ion, cost recovery and affordability, and stakeholder/ actors participation and coordination.

n the Plan, the Government states that this National Slum Upgrading Strategy is about tak-ng key steps to manage and guide the process of urbanization so that so many people do notnjustly suffer from inadequacies in the most basic of human requirements such as water,

sanitation, shelter, health and education. The key to reaping from the proposals contained in thestrategy is political will to recognize the nature and scale of the challenge, and to firmly commito justly dealing with the needs of slum residents and this requires a sincere and long-term com-

mitment. It is important to remember that slums do not form only due to problems of poverty oraffordability on the part of communities or governments; they often form due to lack of politicalwill, bad policy and inadequate planning.

This National Slum Upgrading Strategys main thrust is turning around the current status quo byensuring that slum upgrading or improvement efforts are integrated into national policies, legisla-ion, programmes and plans to enable their implementation. Slum Upgrading should be part ofhe broader national development plans and not [a] special aspect (often a poor cousin) of

medium-term and long-term planning and development goals.

MOVING BEYOND EVICTIONS IN KAMPALA


31/50


APPRO

ACHES

In 2000, Lusaka City Council (LCC) identified security of land tenure as an important prerequisitein the squatter upgrading process. A study carried out by the LCC revealed that without legaltitle to land, most residents of Improvement Areas (former squatter settlements) would notinvest in the improvement of the structures in which they lived. The LCC decided to carry out aPilot Programme to improve the security of land tenure of residents in Improvement Areas, start-ing with the Pilot Area Chaisa which had a population of about 28 000. The Pilot Programmesmain objective was to develop and test a method to improve the LCCs land delivery services.The lessons learned in the Pilot Programme would be used to refine the method for providingsecure land tenure, and the land delivery services would be extended to other ImprovementAreas in Lusaka.

The Pilot Programme had three components:

(i) Community communication and participation aimed at full involvement of the commu-nity in the project and promoting awareness on the importance of security of land tenure

among residents; this included drama performances to convey messages about occupancylicences and the ills of property grabbing from the estate of a deceased person by greedyrelatives. Each performance attracted 7001 000 people. During the performances as wellas during fieldwork, information leaflets in both English and Chinyanja (the local language)were handed out;

(ii) Surveying and mapping to create a geographic database for establishing property ownersand boundaries, by linking spatial data (graphics) and attribute data; and

(iii) Computerization of the LCC Deeds Registry and improvement of the record-keeping systemfrom settlement level up to the Councils head office where title deeds are issued.

The overall objective of the Programme was to enhance the economic and social developmentof residents through ensuring secure land rights for women and men in Lusaka, in the form of

security of land tenure in unplanned settlements. The LCC has concluded that the Programmewas broadly successful in achieving this objective. However, the fact that properties on titlehave gained market value on the land market means that there is a potential danger for mar-ket forces to lead to future evictions as part of a gentrification process. (See the case study ofKigali on page 23 of this Guide.)

THE LUSAKA CITY COUNCIL LAND TENURE INITIATIVE


32/50


APPRO

ACHES

Since 2003, the Federal Capital Development Authority (FCDA) of Nigeria has been carrying outmass forced evictions in Abuja in an attempt to re-initiate a Master Plan that was approved in1979. The Minister of the Federal Capital Territory has ordered mass demolitions of businesses andhomes, including over 49 informal settlements.

The Master Plan was developed when the Government decided to move the national capital fromLagos to Abuja, and was designed to guide the creation of the new capital and development ofthe capital territory until 2000. The Master Plan called for the resettlement of people living intraditional villages in the capital territory to neighbouring states. However, the Government neverfully carried out the resettlement plan. Instead, those living on the land when the Federal Capi-tal Territory (FCT) was created generally termed indigenes were allowed to remain. Thesesettlements have expanded in the past 30 years as indigenes allocated land or rented housing tonon-indigenes who moved to Abuja for employment and were unable to access affordable formalhousing. This resulted in the formation of extensive informal, unplanned and unauthorised settle-

ments within the area designated for the capital city.Hundreds of thousands of people, including civil servants, advocates, journalists, retail workers,taxi drivers and people working in the informal sector, live in these informal settlements, due toa lack of affordable housing in the formal market. The FCDA has demolished homes, schools,clinics, churches, mosques and businesses without adequate consultation with communities, andwithout providing adequate notice, compensation, or adequate resettlement. The evictions haveresulted in the massive displacement of hundreds of thousands of people from entire commu-nities with a spiralling effect on health, education, employment and family cohesion. Some ofthe demolitions were accompanied by violence perpetrated by heavily armed security operativestowards residents and owners of businesses. The FCDA draws a distinction between indigeneand non-indigene residents when carrying out evictions and demolitions. The demolitions havetargeted homes in which non-indigenes live, regardless of whether the buildings were owned by

indigenes or non-indigenes.

The FCDA has a policy to provide full resettlement to indigenes, in keeping with the original inten-tions of the Master Plan. However, there is no such policy for non-indigenes living in Abuja. Aftera public outcry in late 2005, the Minister began discussions about evictions with a human face.Prior to this, many non-indigene residents were forcibly evicted before an enumeration processtook place. Since late 2005, the FCDA has been attempting to enumerate non-indigenes beforedemolitions and has offered those affected access to plots of land in relocation sites. Only a hand-ful of those evicted have been able to access plots at these sites, and even fewer have been ableto afford to build new homes.

Nigerian organizations, most notably Women Environmental Programme (WEP); Community Ac-tion for Popular Participation (CAPP); Justice, Development and Peace Commission; and the Social

and Economic Rights Action Center (SERAC) have been active in documenting the forced evic-tions, raising international attention towards the ongoing rights violations and advocating for ahalt to the evictions until the FCDA can produce a plan, in agreement with affected people, toimplement the Master Plan in a way that does not violate human rights.

Local associations and churches have also responded with the Break the Silence on Evictions:Defend housing rights in Nigeria! appeal launched by the Nigerian Coalition for Zero Evic-tions, which has demanded a halt to demolitions and expulsions; compensation and immediatealternative accommodations for the homeless; and condemnation of the privatization efforts andMaster Plan for Abuja. This appeal has also requested the blockage of all foreign investmentswhich ultimately result in the violation of human rights, and that the funds resulting from theannulment of the countrys foreign debt be channelled towards the Peoples Fund for the Rightto Land and Housing.

RESETTLEMENT IN THE NAME OF A MASTER PLAN IN ABUJA


33/50


APPRO

ACHES

Since 2008, a more positive approach to the situation of those facing forced eviction in Abuja hasbegun to emerge. The collaborative efforts of the Institute for Housing and Urban DevelopmentStudies (IHS) and Cordaid have led to the formation of a coalition of NGOs, CBOs and Govern-ment departments, with the aim of mitigating the effects of forced eviction and demolition onthe urban poor within Abuja.

poor, and enhancing their capacities to deal proactively with the issue of forced evictions.Intensive dialogue is being conducted between the Government, CSOs and the affected com-munities on the best approaches to take in future eviction situations. Government now con-siders the CSOs as partners, rather than as an opposition group, as it originally did.

government officials at the highest level, with the aim of getting Government acceptance ofthe action plan presented by the coalition.

themselves into cooperative groups. Through thrift contributions they are saving money forthe eventual building of their houses when land is made available by the Government. Thecoalition is trying to enter into partnerships with microfinance institutions to see how moneycan be leveraged for starting up a pilot project.24


34/50


APPRO

ACHES

RESETTLEMENT

Although on-site upgrading may be thebest option for the poor, there will alwaysbe cases where staying in the same place isabsolutely not possible. It could be that thelocation is too dangerous or upgrading (inriver beds, along railway tracks, or on steeplysloping land prone to landslides), or it lies inthe way of a municipal infrastructure projectthat cannot be changed or moved.

In these cases, resettlement may be the only

option. But resettlement is never an easytransition for the poor, with all the upheav-als, high costs and disruption of livelihoodand support systems it entails. Most Africancities have a dark history of brutal reloca-tion initiatives, in w ic t e poor ave eenforced out of their settlements and dumpedon undeveloped land on the outskirts of thecity or even on unservice rura an , witno assistance or compensation to e p t emrebuild their houses and lives. This kind of re-

settlement only deepens poverty and makesa citys ousing pro ems muc worse.

In situations w ere evictions are unavoi -a e, states s ou ensure, prior to carryingout any eviction, that all feasible alternativesare explored so that use of force is avoided,or at east minimise . W en an eviction iscompletely unavoidable, it must be carriedout in accordance with the law, and with theinternational standards set out in General

Comment 7 of the CESCR. These stan ar s

an opportunity for genuine consultationwith those affected;

adequate and reasonable notice for alla ected persons prior to the scheduleddate o eviction;

information on the proposed evictionsand where applicable, on the alternative

urpose for which the land or housing isto be used, to be made available in rea-sonable time to all those affected;

especially where groups o people arenvolved, government officials or theirrepresentatives to be present during aneviction;

all persons carrying out the eviction toe properly identi ed;

evictions not to take place in particularlyad weather or at night, unless the af-ected persons consent otherwise;

rovision of legal remedies;

rovision, where possible, of legal aid toersons who are in need of it to seek

re ress from the courts.

States parties shall also see to it that allthe individuals concerned have a right toadequate compensation for any prop-erty, ot persona an rea , w ic isaffected.

Where those affected by eviction arenable to provide or themselves, the

State party must take all appropriatemeasures, to the maximum of its avail-a e resources, to ensure t at a equatealternative housing, resettlement or ac-cess to pro uctive an , as t e case maye, is avai a e.25

When resettlement is not

One o the most requently cited reasons orevicting people from their informal settle-ments is to clear the land for constructiono large-scale urban in rastructure projects.A lot of these pro ects are not part of the


35/50


APPRO

ACHES

norma city p anning process ut are eingdesigned, marketed and financed by inter-national development loans or joint venturesbetween local investors and international fi-

nance companies. O ten these projects arerus e t roug t e approva process wit -

out any civic scrutiny. And o ten they are notnecessary, are too expensive and skewedto benefit only the citys better-off citizens.When poor communities are forced to re-

locate to make way or such projects, theyave every rig t to o ject.

The settlement of Agbogbloshie/Old Fadama is on the left bank of the Odaw River, in the KorleLagoon area in Accra, Ghana. It is sometimes called Sodom and Gomorrah by its detractors whowant the area cleared. In 2005 the Accra Metropolitan Assembly (AMA) and the Government ofGhana (specifically the Ministry of Tourism and Modernisation of the Capital City) were seekingo evict the community of this settlement. Residents responded with an appeal to the High Courtor an injunction to restrain the AMA from following through on the eviction. The court case that

followed centred on the issue of illegal occupation of the land.

nother reason for the eviction given by the Government was the settlements physical location.The Korle Lagoon and the banks of the Odaw River are an environmentally sensitive area. The Gov-ernment and the AMA had developed a programme to restore this vital marine and river system toa cleaner and more natural ecological state. Agbogbloshie was said to be the main source of pol-ution for the lagoon. It was also argued that the settlement of Agbogbloshie presented a seriousealth risk for the residents. However, visits by COHRE to the settlement revealed that the commu-

nity was well organised, and had taken the initiative to organise its own services and managementsystems, such as arrangement of water points, wash houses, digging of drains and fire-fighting.There was also a complex, diversified economic sector active in the settlement, including a largewholesale food market frequented by many customers from outside the settlement.

nitial resistance to the eviction was organised by internal community groups, with legal assistanceand some support work by the Centre for Public Interest Law, assisted by COHRE. Subsequently,ocal groups (supported by Peoples Dialogue, Shack Dwellers International and COHRE) movedbeyond resistance to try to open up spaces for the residents to negotiate directly with the Gov-ernment. An independent investigation concluded that all the Governments concerns about thesettlement could be resolved satisfactorily and still allow the community of Agbogbloshie to remainwhere they were living; that Agbogbloshie could be used to develop a new policy of informaland management in Accra that would make a major contribution to solving its land crisis; andhat Agbogbloshie could remain at its present site without threatening the future viability of theagoon restoration project. Furthermore, the projects reputation would be enhanced internation-ally if it could show that it was able to integrate the urban poor into an environmental restorationproject.

But the struggles of the Old Fadama residents did not end there. In 2009 the city authorities againried to forcibly evict them, in the name of cleaning up Sodom and Gomorrah and removing

criminal elements and pollution. But media and public opinion had shifted in favour of thesettlements right to remain where it is, and recognized that the problems experienced there werea result of more general economic and planning failures. The central Government encouraged the

ccra city authorities to engage with residents and find solutions with a human face, rather thanbulldoze the settlement and force people to move elsewhere. In October 2009 the Old FadamaDevelopment Association (OFADA), representing the residents, had a first face-to-face meetingwith the mayor, and after that OFADA, the mayor and the central Government began preparinghe ground to start finding solutions, by re-introducing the idea of community-city-government

partnerships. 7

NEGOTIATING TO AVOID RESETTLEMENT IN AGBOGBLOSHIE, ACCRA


36/50


TOOLSANDGUIDELINES

Almost all eviction that is happening in Af-rican cities today is unnecessary and couldbe prevented. None of the misery and im-poverishment that eviction brings, or thewrong ul planning decisions, disregard orequity or misdirected development impera-tives behind evictions are inevitable. Thereare actually many intermediate optionswhich offer alternatives to forced eviction alternatives which work well or the poor,and well for the cities they live in. And there

are many things that governments, NGOs,support institutions and aid agencies can doto open up space for these alternatives tobe developed, re ned and scaled up.

1. Recognize t at t e poor are on y tryingto survive, and that when they squaton land illegally, it is because they haveno ot er options. T ey now t e ris sand drawbacks associated with informalsettlements, but they have many good

reasons for staying there.

2. Do not punish the urban poor by forci-bly evicting them from the places wheret ey can provi e t eir own s e ter anlivelihood, by mechanically enforcinglaws. The better, fairer and longer-last-ing solutions to structural problems oland and housing will come only whencities can work with the poor as key de-velopment partners.

3. Learn to listen to the voices an i easof communities facing eviction beforedeveloping policies or plans which af-fect them. This listening and learningcan a so appen on a nationa an re-giona sca e, y visiting an earningrom some o the many alternatives to

eviction an compromise so utions t athave been tried and tested in other cit-ies an countries so utions in w ic

t e poor ave een ey actors.

. Support the strengthening and ex-ansion of community organizations,

networks and federations, in order tocreate a platform for the poor to share

eas an sca e up so utions w ic aveeen successful in certain places. This is

where the seeds of the most creative,ragmatic and sustainable solutions to

eviction will be sown.

5. Prepare urban development plans in col-

aboration with poor communities, sothat projects planned for the city can bedesigned to leave room for affordableand for housing, in locations that areclose to employment opportunities. Un-

erta e participatory socia an sett e-ment mapping, including enumeration,with settlement dwellers to benefit fromt eir now e ge an to ma e sure t eyare fully involved in planning develop-ments that will affect them.

6. Introduce better land management andadministration systems to make it ex-

ensive to o empty ur an an spec-latively, and make it pro table to use

vacant land for affordable housing.

7. Work wi

quick guide 4: eviction

Documents