Connect with us

NGO WORK

UN-Habitat policy statement on the prevention of evictions and relocations during the COVID-19 crisis

Published

on

Nairobi, 14 May 2020 – As COVID-19 spreads around the world, billions of people have been told to stay at home, practice physical distancing, wash their hands regularly and wear masks. However, these simple preventive public health measures are almost impossible to follow for those who are homeless, or who live in unsafe or overcrowded conditions.

In the face of this pandemic, the lack of adequate housing has repercussions on society as a whole and is a direct threat to everyone’s health and safety. Ensuring secure housing for all and the provision of essential services are crucial components of national efforts to contain the spread of the pandemic and prevent the loss of life.

UN-Habitat applauds the efforts of the numerous national and local governments that have issued bans on evictions and instituted moratoriums on payment of mortgages and rents, and those that have continued providing for the needs of their residents and communities.

However in some countries and cities, evictions and relocations continue. These principally affect the poorest and most vulnerable populations living in deprived neighbourhoods, informal settlements and slums.

Such evictions and relocations are a violation of the fundamental right to adequate housing and protection against forced eviction enshrined in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. They also create significant additional risks in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Member States have an obligation to respect, protect and fulfil the right to adequate housing as a component of the right to an adequate standard of living. Denying residents and communities this right during the COVID-19 pandemic can have devastating consequences.

These include increased exposure to COVID-19 and other infections in addition to exposure to insecurity and violence, the loss of income and limited access to socio-economic safety nets and basic services including health care.

The relocation and eviction of long-term residents and communities, particularly from informal settlements, during the pandemic would not only violate their fundamental rights, but could also expose both them and the rest of the local population to an increased threat of exposure to the virus.

Therefore, UN-Habitat urges Member States and governments at all levels to stop all relocations and evictions at this time.

In exceptional cases where relocations or evictions are unavoidable, for example to prevent new land invasions, they must be conducted in accordance with international human rights obligations, as well as the relevant national laws, and the maximum possible protections should be provided to ensure the health and safety of those affected. In such exceptional cases, evictions must, at a minimum:

Be proportional and provide for the evaluation of the decision’s impact on and potential benefit for various groups, including through an eviction impact assessment and community consultations. Evictions and relocations justified by planned physical development, or to repossess public land, should not be carried out during the COVID-19 crisis as they would put the health of residents and the entire population at risk and disproportionately affect their right to health;

Promote general welfare and show evidence of such an outcome. Accordingly, during the COVID-19 crisis, only evictions and relocations directly aimed at preventing contagion among residents should be allowed. Furthermore, the expected benefits for affected populations and measures to mitigate the risks of contagion should be clearly and publicly outlined. UN-Habitat also urges national, regional and local governments to:

Take immediate and substantial measures to secure the right to adequate housing for all, including through moratoriums on evictions due to rental and mortgage arrears; deferrals of mortgage payments; moratoriums on forced evictions of informal settlements; introduction of rental stabilization or reduction measures; suspension of utility costs and surcharges for the duration of the pandemic; and creation of emergency funds to reduce exposure for categories at risk; Provide for the basic needs of vulnerable communities or neighbourhoods, particularly food, water, sanitation and hygiene essentials, and primary health care. Nationally appropriate social protection systems can also address causes of homelessness and inadequate housing by preventing poverty particularly associated with lack of employment and by contributing to improved health. UN-Habitat is available and ready to assist national and local government in these efforts, including by investigating and devising alternative solutions and mitigating measures for the residents of informal and low-income communities. UN-Habitat has developed tools, measures and guidelines for dealing with situations where relocation has to be carried out as a matter of last resort. UN-Habitat has also developed guidelines for local governments leading inclusive and integrated citywide response planning for COVID-19 mitigation in informal settlements.

For more information contact

Robert Lewis-Lettington, UN-Habitat Chief of Land, Housing and Shelter Section, Urban Practices Branch, Global Solutions Division

Robert.Lewis-Lettington@un.org

Original Post: UN Habitat

NGO WORK

No Heritage Without its People: Why Ngorongoro Cannot be a World Heritage Site and an Eviction Zone

Published

on

The Tanzanian government, under the guise of “conservation,” restricts Maasai livelihoods and denies access to essential services forcing Indigenous residents away from their ancestral lands and turning their heritage into a playground for safari tourists.

As the 48th Session of the World Heritage Committee begins July 19, UNESCO continues to legitimize the continued forced displacement of the Maasai from Ngorongoro. If UNESCO cannot ensure that the World Heritage designation protects the rights of its Indigenous custodians, then the Committee must remove the Ngorongoro Conservation Area from the World Heritage List.

Increased international pressure is imperative to hold UNESCO accountable and protect the lives and rights of the Maasai!

Read our Open Letter to the World Heritage Committee.

Source: oaklandinstitute.org

Continue Reading

NGO WORK

Rush: Global Scramble for Minerals Wages War on People and Planet

Published

on

As governments and corporations scramble to secure critical minerals, a new Oakland Institute report exposes the forces fueling today’s unprecedented mining boom. RUSH: Global Scramble for Minerals Wages War on People and Planet dismantles the dominant narrative that massive amounts of minerals are needed for the energy transition, revealing instead a potent convergence of political, military, and corporate interests racing to control the resources that underpin modern warfare and artificial intelligence.

“Securing access to critical minerals is reshaping international relations and foreign aid as competition between the US and China becomes a new geopolitical battleground,” said Anuradha Mittal, Executive Director of the Oakland Institute. “The costs are being borne by communities around the world as this global race drives wars and violence, results in land grabs, forced displacement, devastating pollution, and the irreversible destruction of lands and livelihoods,” Mittal continued.

With the Pentagon shifting towards an “AI-first” warfighting stance, the US military-industrial complex is rapidly integrating tech and AI firms with a mutual interest in locking down critical mineral supplies. The report exposes key players positioned to profit from a resource boom already drawing trillions in investment. These include ventures tied to the Trump family, billionaire-backed outfits such as KoBold Metals, an AI-driven mining firm supported by Bill Gates, and defense-tech companies like Palantir and Anduril, among others.

To justify a massive scale up of mineral extraction, governments, corporations, and international financial institutions like the World Bank, frame critical minerals as indispensable to the green transition and as a pathway to prosperity for the Global South. However, RUSH documents that more than 70 percent of critical mineral demand today comes from industries unrelated to the energy transition, including the automotive, aerospace, military, communications, and technology sectors. Rapid growth in artificial intelligence, data centers, surveillance technologies, and military spending is expected to increase this demand massively.

“Renewable energy deployment, such as wind and solar, requires only a fraction of the minerals that corporations plan to extract in the coming decades,” said Andy Currier, Oakland Institute Policy Analyst and report co-author. “But growing military demand and stockpiling of materials like copper, lithium, nickel, and cobalt will undermine the energy transition, diverting critical resources away from urgently needed climate solutions,” Currier continued.

RUSH warns that the acceleration of resource extraction poses a catastrophic threat to both ecosystems and human survival. In response, Indigenous groups and frontline communities are leading a vital, global resistance to defend their territories. It is, however, undermined by a dangerous myth that expanding extraction is necessary to fix the climate crisis.

“The report issues a resounding call to challenge this false narrative to stop the untenable rush for minerals before it becomes an irreversible global catastrophe,” warned Oakland Institute Policy Director and report co-author, Frederic Mousseau. “The stakes could not be higher. If left unchecked, the global mining rush will trigger hundreds of new mines in a short period. The resulting human and planetary devastation will be at a scale never seen before – livelihoods will be destroyed, millions will be displaced, and environmental destruction will become irreversible,” concluded Mousseau.

Read the report

Source: oaklandinstitute.org

Continue Reading

NGO WORK

Acholi land dispute threatens Shs3bn govt-backed Cassava Factory in Pader

Published

on

Affected residents demonstrate at acholibur town council offices over a disputed 179-acre piece of land earmarked for a government and gulu archdiocese-backed cassava processing factory in pader district.

Pader, Uganda: A protracted land dispute in Acholibur Sub-county, Pader District, is threatening to stall a Shs3 billion cassava processing factory project jointly backed by the Government of Uganda and the Gulu Archdiocese, raising fears over the future of one of northern Uganda’s most significant agro-industrial investments.

The proposed cassava factory, which is being spearheaded by the Gulu Archdiocese with support from the Uganda Development Corporation (UDC), is expected to boost value addition, create employment opportunities and improve household incomes for thousands of cassava farmers across the Acholi sub-region.

At the centre of the dispute is a 179-acre piece of land claimed by two families, the estate of the late Ignatius Lakere Latigo and that of the late Odwong Joseph Lagoro, both of which maintain ownership rights over the property earmarked for the project.

The dispute escalated following a court-directed boundary opening exercise conducted by a joint security team led by Pader Resident District Commissioner Amos Banyizi. Several affected families have since protested the exercise, claiming it was carried out without their knowledge or participation.

Families question boundary exercise

Mr. Latigo Morris, administrator of the estate of the late Ignatius Lakere Latigo, said his family was never notified about the recent boundary demarcation despite earlier agreements that required all stakeholders to be involved.

He recalled that a stakeholders’ meeting held last year, attended by Archbishop Emeritus John Baptist Odama of the Gulu Archdiocese and other parties, had resolved that any future activities on the disputed land would involve all affected families.

According to Morris, his family was shocked to find the RDC accompanied by armed security personnel carrying out activities on land they claim belongs to them.

“We expected dialogue and participation of all stakeholders before any action was taken,” Morris said.

Local leaders have also questioned how the exercise was conducted.

The LCIII Chairperson of Acholibur Town Council, Okumu Robert, said his office was neither informed nor requested to mobilise residents before the boundary opening exercise.

Mr. Ocen Paul, one of the affected stakeholders, appealed to government to intervene, warning that nearly 150 families could lose land if the matter is not handled transparently.

He further alleged that influential individuals could be influencing the ongoing demarcation despite what he described as valid documentation showing that the affected families still hold an active 49-year lease over the land.

Source: dailyexpress.co.ug

Continue Reading

Resource Center

Legal Framework

READ BY CATEGORY

Facebook

Newsletter

Subscribe to Witness Radio's news and report updates



Trending

Subscribe to Witness Radio's news and report updates