Forced evictions in Luanda, Angola
MAY 16, 2007 --- Human
Rights Watch has reported forced evictions - including "surprise
evictions" - in the Luanda area during the period 2002-2006, affecting
an estimated 20,000-30,000 people. Legal Examiner has reviewed these measures within the context of the Advocate-General's Basic Principles for Governance (BPG).
BPG § I. Transparency
Evictees typically received no prior notice at all. In some cases,
there were indications (overwhelming force, timing) that
these were deliberately "surprise evictions." In cases where residents
had a hint that something was going to happen (e.g. because properties
had been marked for unspecified purposes), their requests for an
explanation were often denied.
It was reported that officials provided inconsistent explanations about
who indeed owned the land, apparently in an attempt to dissuade
evictees from pursuing their rights.
The government failed to inform evictees who were responsible for the
forced evictions. Moreover, the government used harassment to dissuade
those seeking such information from obtaining it.
While the government's stated reasons for the evictions (especially,
the need to clear land for beautification projects and land
development) may be legitimate, the manner in which the evictions were
conducted indicate that these measures were not the result of careful
deliberations taking into account the full consequences.
The evictees received no monetary compensation and, in most cases, the
government did not provide for relocation. Evictees were subjected to
harassment in an attempt to dissuade them from exercising their rights.
In many cases, the properties singled out for destruction appear to
have been based upon more or less random decisions made by individuals.
No clear information was provided to evictees about the specific
criteria being used to make such decisions.
In contravention of Angolan law, the evictees did not receive prior
notice about the evictions, nor did they at any time receive
information about the laws purportedly authorizing the measures. Some
evictees were improperly detained without probable cause.
The evictions were marred by utter lack of transparency. Moreover, some
evictees were improperly detained without probable cause and without
being advised of their right to seek legal counsel.
BPG § II. Non-discrimination
It was reported that in some areas, residents who happened to be at
home when government representatives showed up had their homes marked
and were subsequently relocated, whereas residents who happened to be
absent did not have their homes marked and were subsequently not
relocated. Such differential treatment without proper justification
constitutes flagrant discrimination.
BPG § III. Consistency
The evictions violated domestic laws as well as official government policy.
The evictions violated UN conventions as well as regional rules.
The pattern of evictions appear to be concentrated upon certain areas;
however, what areas are ultimately targeted and what areas are spared
remains unclear, causing some residents to live permanently in fear of
being evicted.
BPG § IV. Proportionality
Evictions without appropriate compensation are unduly harsh.
Furthermore, the evictions were reported to have been accompanied by
excessive use of force, arrests, and detentions on a large scale;
apparently in an attempt to intimidate evictees from exercising their
rights, measures which violate Angolan and international laws. All of
which contravenes Angolan and international laws.
Many families are reported to have been left homeless and destitute as
a direct consequence of the evictions without resettlement. These
severe side-effects would have been avoidable with proper planning.
BPG § V. Efficiency and effectiveness
While the measures were "effective" in the narrow sense that land was
cleared as was the stated objective, they were ultimately ineffective
when viewed within their proper context, as they created severe social
problems affecting not only the evictees but society as a whole.
BPG § VI. Miscellaneous
Rather than living up to its responsibilities, Angola appears to have
authorized its officials and private contractors to carry out evictions
through a combination of threats, violence, unwarranted detention, and
other forms of harassment.
The evictions were carried out not only in a single incident or a few
related incidents, but repeatedly in a number of incidents spanning
several years, which constitutes an aggravating factor. Furthermore,
the pattern of threats, violence, unwarranted arrests, and other forms
of intimidation apparently was a deliberate attempt to dissuade
evictees from exercising their rights. Such conduct is unethical, which
is an aggravating factor.
|
|
|