|
|
|
|
Home
Management
|
Selected News Articles
During last 6 months (Jan 2001 - June 2001) more than 1850 houses were bulldozed in six different settlements by the government agencies including KMC, KDA. Over 3,700 families (comprising more than 15,000 people) were displaced in one case. These bulldozing operations took place in a) 700 housing units Rati Lines railway colony on 8 - 10 January 2001, b) 50 houses in Liaquatabad on 14th January 2001, c) 200 huts in Block E North Nazimabad on 8th May, d) over 400 housing units in Masoom Shah railway colony near Kala Pul on 10th May 2001, e) 200 housing units in Ghazi Goth Gulistan Johar on 26th May 2001, f) 300 housing in Bilal colony sector 7A and Mateen Shah colony sector 7B in North Karachi on 7th and 8th June 2001. Reasons of these recent evictions were encroachment removal campaign and development project like road extension and Nala Development; The surveys show that in Karachi evictions take place in most brutal way, the government agencies displace poor families in over nights without any notices, compensations and alternatives. After evictions the poor families would not only loose their houses but also livelihoods, education of their children and neighborhood environment built over the years. According to URC investigations most of these bulldozing operations in past were carried out to grab land for the construction of high-rise buildings or use for commercial purposes. The builders and developers use government agencies for this purpose. No prior notices are issued to the affected families. Detailed case studies of the eviction cases are being prepared by URC. According to estimation population of 4.5 million people is living in katchi abadis (informal settlements) in Karachi. A further 1.0 million have taken refuge in shelters located in “danger zones” such as along riverbeds, railway lines, coastal belt, under high tension wires etc.
Under threat settlements Besides these over 50,000 housing units under threat a) 26,000 Housing units in all railway colonies in Karachi and 25,000 Housing units in Lyari Nadi beds As Pakistan Railways is in serious financial trouble, the railway minister has taken a notion to cover the enormous deficit by reclaiming this occupied land and selling it off for commercial development. In the past six months 1,100 houses in two large railway settlements were demolished. None of them were in the safety zone. There was no resettlement plan or compensation. There have also been big demolitions of railway settlements in Hyderabad and Rawalpindi, and the government has plans to bulldoze another 20,000 houses in Karachi alone. Karachi’s railways communities have their own community network and are part of the All Pakistan Federation of Katchi Abadis. As communities struggle fiercely to resist the demolition squads and to negotiate with authorities in Karachi and Islamabad, they are finding public sentiment is not on their side. A recent letter-writing campaign organized by the URC flooded the PR and government offices with protests from housing rights groups around the world, and managed to elicit a pledge from the government to carry out no more evictions (see appendix) until a resettlement plan has been decided “for settlements along railway lines, river belts and other dangerous zones.“ Meanwhile, the URC is working with the railway community network to undertake a detailed survey of families living on railway land. As an organization working for Housing Rights in Karachi URC is not only documenting eviction trends in Karachi and lobbies for the housing rights of the urban poor but also provide following support to these communities:
(See table below for details for list of evictions in Karachi)
List 1: Details of the some recent Evictions cases
Total No. of Houses bulldozed Jan 97 - June 2001 4,470 Units Cumulative cases from 1992 -to 96 12,000 Units Total No. of Houses bulldozed since 1992 16,470 Units (Note: These are only the reported cases. There may be many others, which remain unreported)
URC has also been documenting incidents of fire in Katchi Abadis (informal settlements) since 1995. In the last 6 months (Jan 2001 - June 2001) 30 huts were gutted. This incident was occured in Dawood Goth Saeedabad on 16 March 2001. Since January ’97, a total number of 1,139 huts were gutted in different settlements. These incidents have rendered more than 9,185 people homeless. six minor children and a 45 year old man were also burnt alive in these incidents. (See list in appendix # 2). Two main causes are identified for these incidents; one natural and the other planned. The planned incidents are those, in which the land mafia is involved. To draw attention towards fire incidents in Karachi, URC circulates reports containing facts and figures on the issue to the press, NGOs and government agencies. URC documents the fire incidents of Katachi Abadis and try to establish an understanding on the reasons of these incidents. See list below for details;
List 2: Huts gutted in Karachi (some recent cases):
Total No. of the huts gutted Jan ’97 - June 2001 1,139 huts Cumulative cases from November 95 - December 96 2,486 huts Total No. of the huts gutted since November 95 3,625 huts
Punjab, Pakistan
By Dr Pervez Hoodbhoy
(D-7, 22/05/03)
Army holds farmers responsible: 'Trouble' at Okara military farms
By Baqir Sajjad Syed
(D-2, 01/06/03)
Law enforcing agencies are adamant to implement the rental policy, while tenants seem unswerving in securing proprietary rights of these controversial lands. ' Malki ya maut' has become the catchword of the tenants now By Amjad Bhatti
Three-year-long resistance by tenants in Okara took a new twist recently with the active participation of various political parties, legal community and, of course, with a daring articulation of the issue in question by national and international media. On the other hand, the principal parties involved in the conflict are strategising their fight and counter-fight in the light of daily happenings.
Okara Military Farm covers 17,013 acres of land, which was transferred by the Government of Punjab to the Ministry of Defense on lease for 20 years on 9-8-1913 against an annual rent of Rs15,000. The land is still under military possession. Earlier the tenants were cultivating this land on batai system in which the interests of tenants are ensured through Punjab Tenancy Act, 1887.
Through batai system tenant and landlord operates on an equal share basis. Contrarily, if a tenant cultivates land under any contract system, he can be ejected from land at any time at the will of the landlord.
In June 2000 military authorities announced a shift in policy and replaced the earlier batai system with thaika (land lease and cash rent system), which was considered to be a disempowering drive against the tenants.
"General Qamaruz Zaman Chatha introduced Thaika system and he asked tenants to pay the rent or leave the land," said Khadim Hussain a resident of Chak 5/L. Since then tenants have been resisting this policy. Seven tenants have been reportedly killed, dozens injured and hundreds, including women and children, have been jailed.
The recent murder (on 11th May) of an elderly Mohammad Amir, known as Amir Baba of Chak 5/L of Okara Military Farm, has escalated the conflict. State authorities, in response, have tightened their grip on tenants by employing various tactics. The tenants hold Rangers responsible for the killing of Mohammad Amir, while Rangers say it was a result of cross-firing between Machi and Sindhi families. Local police station has, however, registered a case under Section 302 against tenant leaders.
The official version on these killings seems a bit shaky. No one in the area is ready to subscribe to the story narrated by farm administration. The versions expressed by various law enforcing agencies varies, and at times they appear to be self-defeating and contradictory.
Farm authorities have engineered novel methods to demoralise resisting tenants. These include: setting-up pickets all around; cutting the power and food supply to the villages; picking up school-going children of the tenants and keeping them in custody to pressurise their parents; arresting relatives of tenants living in other cities; curtailing the village-to-village mobility of tenants; depriving the injured and ailing of medical treatment and so on.
Meanwhile, as observed by this scribe during the last two visits to the area, local politicians are reluctant to support tenants since they have their stakes in the power structure, which is dominated by the military establishment. The local establishment is trying to use local political elite and media in favour of their own interests; thus the point of view of tenants largely remains unsupported and unarticulated by local power centres and opinion leaders.
A petition in the Lahore High Court was disposed of by directing tenants to contact local police station to get their version recorded in an already registered FIR against them. This disappointed the tenants who moved out to mobilise political parties--mainly opposition parties--and bar associations to secure a support base for their movement. The ARD remained positive to their demands and some press statements were issued in favour of tenants' struggle last week.
The Punjab Bar Council and Lahore High Court Bar Association, apart from some local bars, have already tabled requisitions in favour of tenants' struggle. Against this backdrop the tenants' movement seems to have moved towards a new direction with the possibility of forming a broader support base for itself. This seems to have disturbed the authorities.
A recent visit to OMF by a diverse delegation comprised of lawyers, media, peoples' rights activists and members of provincial assembly. It was observed that the local authorities had a vigilant security system to stop outsiders' entry to the centres of struggle. Even the local MPA was not allowed to cross the checkpost outside Chack 4-5/L.
The tone of the OMF authorities has changed. Only two weeks ago in-charge of the OMF was telling the visitors, in a persuasive tone, that there was no problem on the farm. That everything had been settled between tenants and the farm administration and about Rs30m had been remitted by the tenants against the account of thaika. He indicated that there were only three troubled villages, which were resisting the change, because the leadership of Anjuman Muzareen Punjab (AMP) was based in these villages.
The external supporters of tenants' movement are labeled as 'anti-state' miscreants by the farm administration and law enforcing agencies. In a recent example, Sarwar Mujahid a local correspondent of an Urdu daily was arrested under terrorist act. Locals say that he was arrested on the orders of the head of Rangers on filing a story of tenants' sit-in, in which he exposed farm administration.
"I am being victimised for reporting the truth," Sarwar told this scribe in Okara Sadar Police Station. Tenants, however, ask that if official claim that 90% tenants have agreed to the rental policy is true, then why the whole area is being kept under siege?
The law enforcing agencies are adamant to implement the rental policy, while tenants seem unswerving in securing proprietary rights of these controversial lands. 'Malki ya maut' (ownership or death) has become the catchword of tenants now. This slogan is not to be looked at as a mere radical rhetoric; instead, it has its deep-seated connection with psycho-social behavioural composition emanating out of utter insecurity and trauma of imminent displacement feared by the tenants in case they surrender to official direction of agreeing to the rental system. They will be evicted from land they are tiling now, they fear.
Some of them complain that while everybody found it convenient to join in the processions protesting against "shock and awe" in Baghdad and "state terrorism" in Kashmir, no one was paying attention to the Military Farms. Sometimes, perhaps, moral stand requires a social cost, which is quite often difficult to disburse. Understandably, protest against US and Indian forces do not involve any cost yet they give more mileage to political wrestlers. Quite contrarily, though, protest against local repression, perhaps, can be pretty expensive.
However, the recent support to the tenants' cause assured by political parties and legal community may have strengthened the tenants. If they continue to muster up wider political and moral support from other sections of society, it would become harder for law enforcing agencies to keep operating egoistically.
The situation, if not handled calmly and wisely by the authorities, can result in more loss of life. It is time for authorities to rethink their position and come down from the high pedestals of ego-driven power to deal with the issue with patience. (N-2, Political Economy, 01/06/03)
Tenants body rejects army's ownership claim on farms
By Junaid Bahadur
(D-2, 02/06/03)
The significance of Okara The sad reality is that the Okara tenants will continue to be subject to state excesses well after the hue and cry over the recently released Human Rights Watch report dies down By Aasim Sajjad Akhtar
The release of a high-profile report by the premier international human rights watchdog body Human Rights Watch (HRW) last month has once again brought the conflict between Punjabi landless tenants and the state back into the spotlight. The issue received a great deal of coverage last summer when Rangers forces deputed to Okara military farms were accused by local tenants of engaging in widespread human rights abuses.
In all, four tenants have died in Okara over the past two and a half years, with at least as many dying in similar conflicts between state authorities and tenants on other farms across Punjab. As is now common knowledge, the conflict emerged when state agencies administering the farms, including the military, attempted to revoke tenancy status of farmers who have been tilling these lands for almost a century.
The HRW report details a number of horrific incidents of torture, "forced divorces", and summary dismissals from government service that have affected tenants and their relatives alike, mostly on Okara military farms. HRW's reputation as an impartial organisation with impeccable credentials is second to none, and recent reports on highly sensitive issues such as the treatment of detainees in Guantanamo Bay have caused great embarrassment to the world's most powerful people. Interestingly, the Pakistani Government has welcomed HRW reports in the past, including reports on human rights violations by Indian security forces in Kashmir. However, the release of the HRW report on Okara was immediately rejected by the DG ISPR, Major-General Shaukat Sultan as complete heresy.
Such a reaction is hardly surprising. In any case, the release of the report and developments subsequent to its release raise some serious questions about the legitimacy of the state's claims to be fulfilling its mandate to protect its citizens. At the same time, the response of the international community to the report will also reflect on the legitimacy of stipulated international norms of democracy and human rights.
In the first instance, it was noted that only one Urdu daily carried the HRW press release on the day the report was released. The English press, however, was far more generous in covering the issue, which is consistent with the general trend of the English press exercising greater autonomy than its Urdu counterpart. The following day, the DG ISPR's rejoinder was carried by virtually every English and Urdu daily, while a press conference held by representatives of the tenants in the federal capital was hardly given any coverage at all.
The situation in the Pakistani press was diametrically opposed to that of the international press: most major American newspapers, including the New York Times carried the story, while major news networks such as BBC and Reuters also provided extensive coverage of the HRW report. Furthermore, local correspondents of BBC, Voice of Germany (VoG), Times of London and Newsweek contacted tenant representatives themselves to solicit their response to the report.
While there is no verifiable evidence to suggest local press censorship by the state, the Pakistani press is well known to have exercised self-censorship in the past, particularly on issues that directly target the armed forces. The HRW report was unapologetic in asserting that the army is responsible for the human rights abuses in Okara and other farms.
Meanwhile, the HRW report also included a long list of recommendations for the government, demanding that the press be given complete freedom in covering the issue. HRW also recommended that Rangers forces be withdrawn from the area, and the dispute be handled in a transparent manner. Given the DG ISPR's heated response, it might be naive to expect the government to pay heed to any of these recommendations. The DG ISPR claimed that the vast majority of tenants in Okara and on other farms are co-operating with the authorities, and that it is a handful of conspirators that are exacerbating the conflict.
But the HRW report also detailed the fact that hundreds of FIRs are outstanding against the tenants and that the excesses of the authorities are far from over. The large number of outside parties that have visited the area, including political parties, members of foreign missions, and foreign press personnel, have verified these facts time and again. A day after the release of the report, 19 tenants were kidnapped from the Okara district court premises as they were attending a routine bail hearing. A week or so later, a local Urdu reporter was arrested and jailed under a non-bailable anti-state code for reporting in favour of the tenants.
Despite this continuing abuse of power, tenants in Okara and virtually all other state farms in the province have almost completely stopped paying tribute to the army and other agencies. The HRW also confirmed this fact suggesting that tributes are not due to the army because it does not have legal title to the disputed land. In fact, it has occupied the land in Okara for decades without a valid lease agreement with the owner of the land, the Government of Punjab. This assertion, too, was rejected by the DG ISPR who said that the army has a valid agreement with the provincial government.
But perhaps the most compelling finding of the report was that the recorded statements of the Punjab Chief Minister and the Federal Interior Minister were completely contradictory. The former asserted quite clearly that the disputed land is owned by the provincial government but that the army's control over it is a "sensitive" issue, while Faisal Saleh Hayat flatly said that the Chief Minister was wrong in suggesting the land was owned by the provincial government, insisting that the army owned it.
The chances are that there are many more contradictions that could be uncovered other than those that are strikingly obvious. Very few observers are likely to be convinced by the DG ISPR's response to HRW's allegations, but at the same time, even fewer believe that the temporary international embarrassment will lead to a change in the domestic dispensation such that the army agrees to respect the rule of law. This then raises questions about the sincerity of the international community, and in particular the donor community, when it claims to be propagating democracy and human rights through its interventions in countries such as Pakistan. If influential donors limit their criticism of the state's excesses in Okara to mild censure, while continuing to support the government at large, it is difficult to understand how the democracy promotion agenda can be taken seriously at all.
There is no doubt that geo-political considerations dictate the relations between countries in the modern world, but then why the lofty claims of democracy and human rights? It is interesting that both the Pakistani government and other country governments suggest that sovereignty cannot be compromised in any internal matter, but then what of the massive compromises of sovereignty that have taken place over the past couple of years such as the Wana operation, deployment of foreign troops in the country, or World Bank and International Monetary Fund dictated economic policies?
The sad reality is that the Okara tenants will continue to be subject to state excesses well after the hue and cry over the HRW report dies down. And this responsibility is borne not only by Pakistan's ruling elite, but also by the international community that continues to provide implicit support for blatant violations of human rights, such as those that have been documented against the landless tenants of Punjab.
(Daily The News 29 August 2004 The News on Sunday Political economy section)
The City Government's move to demolish Anwar Shah Goth is largely being perceived as an effort to facilitate the land Mafia By Rubina Jabbar "This strip of land is like a young, beautiful woman: every man desires to marry her when she becomes a widow. Just like that, several claimants have been surfacing almost daily to grab these plots since the day the City Government bulldozed our houses on April 14th," said bitterly an affectee of Anwar Shah Goth near Sector 7-C North Karachi to the crowd gathered when a team of media persons and civil society organisations visited the site of dismantled houses.
An affectee told that the demolition squad came along with a team of Rangers and police without serving prior notice around 2p.m. on April 14th, and started razing their houses, which the residents had built with their life savings. According to the residents, the Rangers beat up the families when they resisted. Seven women and eight men were injured.
The story of the affectees of Anwar Shah Goth is no different from hundreds of those streaming into Karachi for economic reasons almost daily. Majority of the affected families, with four to ten children each, are construction workers and labourers. Their women work as domestic help and are better known as maasis in Karachi.
These people had been living in jhuggis pegged on empty plots in residential areas or in katchi abaadis for the last many years. They put all their money saved over years for rainy days into buying low-cost plots, which they allege, were offered by Haji Usman Khan in Anwar Shah Goth in New Karachi Town. These plot sizes vary between 120, 80 and 60 square yards.
Ramzaan Bibi's son Hameed, a carpenter, even sold the gold jewellery of his wife to furnish the house he built for his family of five children on a 120 sq yards plot after spending Rs.200,000. Ramzaan Bibi, who lives with her other son in some other locality, was very upset about Hameed and his five children who are rendered homeless after the demolition operation. "How would these small kids do without a roof over their heads and how would my son make up his losses?" she asked, wiping her eyes.
Fazlaan is a domestic worker who washes dishes and clothes, and wipes floors and is paid Rs.250 for each work. Fazlaan sold her small piece of land in her hometown Samasatta to arrange Rs.100,000 and bought this 120 sq yards plot. She was happy to finally get rid of Rs.2,500 rent she had been paying for a jhuggi in a katchi abaadi where she was living with her three children before moving into her own house, now turned into rubble.
Razia Mai is a domestic worker while her husband is a construction worker. The couple has four children. They paid Haji Usman Khan an amount of Rs.180,000 for buying two plots each measuring 120 sq. yards about four years ago. They constructed their house on one of the plots; got electricity connection through kunda system for Rs.250 a month and paid Rs.300 a month for buying water from the tankers.
Khan Mohammad, 26, a Pushto speaking labourer, who estimated his loss to be around Rs.180,000, was away at his work when he was informed by someone that his house is being demolished. "I could not believe it; how could it be that my house that I had locked securely before coming to work was turned into rubble within a matter of few hours," griped the young labourer.
Sarafeen, who comes from a Christian family, has ten children. Her husband is a sweeper. According to her, she paid a handsome Rs.70,000 in monthly installments to Haji Usman Khan for the 120 sq. yards plot during the last two years. She spent about Rs.100,000 further for the construction of pakka house on the plot.
Gulshan Bibi, 40, a widow who works as a maasi in a school, said she managed to buy two plots for Rs.40,000 each with the financial support of the 'madam' of the school. "Where would I go now with my children empty-handed? Please, do something," the helpless woman broke down.
The families who are living under the sun near the rubble of razed homes now demand that they be allowed to reconstruct their houses before going into legal complexities. "We want compensation for the loss and we should be allowed to rebuild our shelters to live in with our families," the angry residents demanded.
But there is little hope for the affectees to get justice or even get compensation for the losses they have suffered, as different interest groups have been exploiting the issue for their own vested interests.
Some have been trying to politicise the issue under the garb of political rivalry between the two major political parties in the city, while others have been exploiting it in the name of ethnic discrimination as majority of victims come from Saraiki speaking families.
According to a research study conducted by a media person A. D. Shahid, the Anwar Shah Goth near Sector 7-C North Karachi had once been the labour colony of National Cement factory (formerly Dalmia Cement factory) established in 1969. MPA Lal Bux Bhutto requested the Sindh Chief Minister Abdullah Shah in the '90s to regularise this settlement. The chief minister asked the Deputy Commissioner (Central) Haji Mohammad Yousuf to regularise it under Sindh Goth Abad Scheme of Junejo government. The deputy commissioner leased it through a notification in the name of Anwar Shah, a young social worker of the area in 1994.
The families allege that Anwar Shah had charged them Rs.2000 each to stop the demolition operation, before it began, and assured them that not a single block will be removed. Haji Usman Khan circulated letters on the letterhead of 'Usman Welfare Association' that assured them of his support after the incident. "He charged us Rs.25 for this letter," an affectee informed.
The families allege Haji Usman Khan and Anwar Shah had an office set up in the locality, which disappeared as soon as demolition took place. The victims also named Aurangzeb, Zawahar Shah and Kishwar as accomplices.
"We will certainly take action against the land grabbers and get an FIR registered against them; you will hear about it soon," assured District Officer, Revenue Enforcement, Abdul Malik Khan. Malik said it is an unauthorised occupation and that the residents did not possess original lease documents.
District Officer (DO) Land, Najamuddin Sikandar, claimed that the demolition operation was carried out by the City District Government Karachi (CDGK) on the orders of the Ombudsman. The people who owned plots in the scheme had been running from pillar to post for the last many years to get possession of their plots. When the DO Land was asked about the sufferings of the poor families who spent their money on the buying of plots, he said: "There is not much to offer to this question."
He said many attempts had been made in vain, in the past, to evacuate this land. This time, however, Rangers' help was sought, and it was due to the presence of Rangers that the demolition operation was executed successfully. Najam said land grabbing is impossible without the connivance of the police. It is a triangle of three major players: area police, land owning authority and land grabbers.
According to Urban Resource Centre (URC), which has been monitoring evictions in the city since 1992, more than 18,981 houses have been bulldozed by various government agencies since 1992. As a result of these evictions, 154,611 people became homeless. According to URC, over 350 houses were demolished in Anwar Shah Goth under the orders of Town Nazim on April 14th.
Experts identified land Mafia as one of the main culprits behind this move by the CDGK. "The town administration played in the hands of land grabbers who wanted to vacate this land and resell it for commercial purposes. A stay order from the court not to demolish the settlement was also ignored," a URC statement pointed out.
"Usman is a notorious land grabber and we have told this to the affected families when they came to us a year ago," Mohammad Shafiqur Rehman Usmani, town nazim, New Karachi Town, told Kolachi. The town nazim also claimed that only encroachments--that is Sector 7-C/2--which surfaced during the last one year had been demolished and the actual Anwar Shah Goth had not even been touched.
According to him, a City Government team had visited the site before the demolition operation was executed. "This land belongs to the City Government. They have their land vacated and we have nothing to do with it," Shafiq declared. (The News, 02 May 2004)
Karachi Building Control Authority (KBCA) demolished 40 houses just one the night before Eid Festival on 13 November 2004 in Shah Rasool Colony Clifton Karachi The settlement was 35 years old.
Displaced people hold demo against demolition
UN Should Immediately Intervene in Pakistan Military Lands Dispute "We were produced before Major Tahir Malik. He asked why we had not made the contract payments. We answered that we had no money. They took us to the torture cell and Jallad [“tormentor”] Munir started thrashing us with a leather whip. He made us all strip naked and whipped us till we bled. Major Tahir Malik would personally supervise the whippings, abuse us, laugh at us, and punch us…. We were produced before officers again in the morning. They would insist that we pay the contract money. Upon our refusal, it would begin again." — HRW Interview with Mohammad Iqbal, Okara, October 23, 2003 LONDON, July 20: The United Nations should immediately intervene to end the human rights abuses including widespread torture committed in Okara District by Pakistan Army, Rangers and the police, the internationally known organization Human Rights Watch, said in a detailed report on the situation released on July 20.
Calling on the UN to send at least two Special Rapporteurs to investigate torture and the housing situation, the HRW also urged the Government of Pakistan to prosecute all officials, members of the armed forces and police personnel implicated in serious abuses, extra-judicial executions; kidnappings, torture, extortion and other ill-treatment, including forced divorces in Okara.
The 55-page report on the infamous stand off between the Pakistan Army and the poor tenants of Okara Farms, comes as a stinging indictment of the army and focuses world attention on the increasing lust for land grabbing by the ruling Pakistan Army Generals. Many tenants were shot dead by the Army amid a worldwide uproar in recent months, which brought human rights organizations to Okara.
The military’s persistent efforts to usurp land through institutionalized means have also allowed the landed elite to retain extraordinary political influence, the report said.
The military has become particularly adept at maintaining this class linkage with the landed elite while dispensing with errant or rebellious individuals within it. Traditionally, the Pakistan Army has maintained its predominant position in the Pakistani state by reconfirming old alliances with the dominant classes as well as creating new ones, by disqualifying old politicians and keeping a firm leash on the new recruits.
The military, which seized power for the fourth time since independence in a 1999 coup, views its power as its ability to be selective in the granting of political privilege to dominant socioeconomic groups.
Arguably, the Pakistan Army especially needs to cultivate friendly political forces in times such as the present, when it is ruling directly. For its part, the landed elite needs support to compensate for its eroding power base in rural areas.
The HRW Report urged the World to raise the issue of the military’s control over land through force, and the impact it has on farmers’ livelihoods.
The U.N. Special Rapporteur on Torture should visit Pakistan as soon as possible to press for the immediate end to human rights abuses including widespread torture committed in Okara district by the Rangers and police,: the HRW said.
It added: The U.N. Special Rapporteur on Adequate Housing should visit Pakistan as soon as possible to press for the immediate end to human rights abuses committed by the Rangers and police in Okara and elsewhere. The Rapporteur should press the government to amend the Punjab Tenancy Act (1887) so that it is consistent with international standards prohibiting forced eviction and to ensure that tenant farmers, many of whose families have tilled the land for a century, do not face the threat of arbitrary eviction or the use of force and intimidation. The recommendations made to the Government of Pakistan in the HRW Report included: - Order the immediate withdrawal of the paramilitary force, the Pakistan Rangers, from Okara district and ensure that the Rangers and their personnel play no role relating to the conflict there or in other affected districts. Turn over responsibility for policing to the Punjab police. - Appoint a senior and respected outside police official with no connection to the land dispute to oversee the policing of Okara and other affected districts. - Immediately remove from any role relating to the conflict in Okara all Pakistan Rangers personnel and Punjab police personnel implicated in serious violations of human rights. - Reinstate all employees of Okara Military Farms and others unfairly dismissed from employment. Withdraw immediately all criminal cases registered against farmers from the affected districts absent a sound factual basis for the charges brought against them. - Investigate fully allegations of violations of Pakistani and international human rights law committed in the context of the Punjab land dispute. Suspend all officials against whom there is prima facie evidence of misconduct. Prosecute all officials, members of the armed forces, and police personnel implicated in serious abuses, including extra-judicial executions; kidnappings; torture; extortion and other ill treatment, including forced divorces.
- Ensure that all Pakistan Rangers personnel deployed in Okara and other civilian areas, at every level, have received basic training in the fundamental principles of human rights law. Ensure that all law-enforcement personnel deployed in all affected districts, at every level, have received basic training in such principles.
- Recognize the procedural rights of all persons detained or accused of crimes. Hold all detainees only in officially recognized places of detention. Inform all detainees immediately of the grounds of arrest and any charges against them. Provide all detainees with immediate and regular access to family members and lawyers. Detainees must promptly be brought before a judge to review the legality of their detention.
- Make publicly available regularly updated figures on the number of individuals charged and arrested in the affected districts, with information on the nature of their alleged crimes and the places of their detention.
- End the practice of besieging towns and villages and imposing unlawful restraints on freedom of movement and free expression.
- Ensure that human rights organizations and journalists have free access to all affected districts and allow them to carry out investigations and fact-finding missions free from intimidation or interference by military and paramilitary authorities.
- Respect press freedom and allow full independent coverage of both past and ongoing events in the affected districts. Remove informal prohibitions on direct news gathering and reporting by the Pakistani and foreign media.
- Invite the U.N. Special Rapporteur on Adequate Housing and the U.N. Special Rapporteur on Torture to visit the area of dispute, conduct investigations, and make appropriate recommendations.
Pointing out restrictions on Freedom of Speech in Okara, the HRW said: The military farm authorities, the Rangers, and the Okara Police have blocked access to journalists to prevent information filtering out of Okara, especially during confrontations, disturbances, and during the siege.
The Okara Military Farms are administered by and for the Pakistan Army and, by their refusal, the tenants were in effect seeking confrontation with the might of the Pakistan Army. The farmers’ reaction appears to have seriously shaken the Pakistani military establishment.
Apart from the political implications of the farmers’ decision which are discussed elsewhere in this report, the latter’s challenge to the military brought to the fore legal ambiguities that the military had conveniently ignored up to that point. The Pakistani military does not actually have legal title to land at the heart of the dispute the Okara Military Farms.
Although the military has had long-term leases to the land in the past and has exerted effective control over it, in some cases for decades, formal title to the land continues to rest with the government of Punjab province. Repeated attempts by the military to effect a permanent transfer of the land to the federal ministry of defense have been rebuffed by the Punjab provincial body that holds title to the land. Second, several arms of the Pakistan Army are involved, and culpable, in this dispute, at various levels. Nationally, military farms fall under the jurisdiction of Pakistan’s federal Ministry of Defense, and hence the army’s General Headquarters (GHQ) in Rawalpindi. The Remount Veterinary & Farms Corps and the Army Welfare Trust (AWT) manage the Okara Military Farms on behalf of the army. It is this joint management team, in consultation with GHQ in Rawalpindi, which has invited the Pakistan Rangers to secure law and order on the farms.
Had the Pakistan Army, as de-facto landlord, simply followed existing law, the confrontation could easily have been avoided. The Tenancy Act permits landlords to impose cash rents without insisting on individual contracts or jeopardizing the farmers’ status as occupancy tenants. According to Ahmed Rafay Alam, a lawyer at the Lahore High Court and Punjab Tenancy Law expert, the military could have switched to a cash rent system quietly under the Tenancy Act.
The new contractual cash rent system sought to be imposed seeks to relieve the Okara Military Farms from the tedium of dividing produce, but does not provide their tenants with the occupancy rights they would be deemed to have had such a cash rent system been implemented under the Tenancy Act. In other words, the Military authorities are trying to impose a streamlined system of rent collection while stripping tenants of their right to occupy the land they till. Talk about trying to have your cake and eating it too.
General Pervez Musharraf, who took power in a coup in 1999, unintentionally helped spur this movement by making repeated policy announcements that state land would be allotted to the landless. On August 20, 2000, inaugurating his government’s land distribution scheme as part of a poverty alleviation program, Musharraf announced that, in fact, all state land would be allotted to landless farmers and he had directed all four provinces to give ownership rights to all such people who had been living on state land for a long time.
Such statements energized the farmers’ movement, principally in Okara, but to a lesser extent also in other districts and consequently changed the very character of the AMP, by encouraging tenants to articulate a vision instead of just reacting to a threat.
Though the military publicly claims the land for itself, the land is the property of the provincial government of the Punjab. The military persists in its claim even though the Ministry of Defense, as recently as 2001, has written to the Punjab Board of Revenue to request that the land be permanently transferred to the military. The Board of Revenue refused the request.
While the contract dispute and General Musharraf’s announcements on allotments acted as catalysts for the resistance to take shape, they alone do not explain the scale, scope, or intensity of the resistance. The emergence and persistence of such a movement remains particularly unusual in the Pakistani context.
A number of factors are at work. Bitter experience with past displacement in the region in part explains the strong reaction of the tenants to the present threat of displacement. Decades of systematic abuse of power by local authorities on the farms are another source of resentment and, in turn, resistance. Finally, the farmers tilling these lands have, at varying levels, lobbied for ownership rights at different junctures in the past, sowing the seeds for a popular movement to evolve in the present.
The Pakistan Rangers, the paramilitary force responsible for much of the abuse and at least two of the killings, have a long and sordid history of human rights abuses against civilians.
In Pakistan, paramilitary internal security forces, such as the Pakistan Rangers, are organized at the provincial level by government authorities but are commanded by seconded Pakistan Army generals and fall nominally under the jurisdiction of the federal ministry of interior. In effect, these forces are an extension of the army for the performance of border and internal security functions.
The Pakistan Rangers are headquartered in Lahore, the capital of Punjab province, and boast approximately 50,000 personnel divided into numerous "wings" of approximately 800 Rangers each.
Officers of the Pakistan Rangers interviewed by Human Rights Watch in Okara are far less nuanced in their understanding of the issue. They are adamant that the farmers are ready and willing to cooperate with the authorities in signing new contracts and that it is only a handful of troublemakers, including outside parties, who have incited the otherwise peaceful tenants into conflict. Some also suggested that these outside influences had links to RAW, the Indian intelligence agency. Its nothing we cannot deal with. These people only understand the language of the stick explained a Rangers officer on promise of anonymity.
The reaction of the Pakistani military to the AMP, and the lengths it has gone to crush the farmers’ uprising, highlight just how important the land is to the military. However, given the massive scope of the Pakistan Army’s economic interests, it would be misleading to suggest that it is avoiding a compromise for purely economic reasons.
While agricultural land in these districts is generally valuable on account of its fertility, earnings from Okara Military Farms, in fact, can be described as relatively paltry. In 2000, the tehsildar (local revenue collector) for the Okara Military Farms area reported that a total sum of 12,237,000 rupees was realized from the receipt of 16,316 bags of wheat collected from the farmers who tilled the land. This figure amounts to less than U.S. $215,000.
The army’s motivation thus certainly goes beyond the finances of the particular farmlands in question. The army likely fears the potential knock-on effects of a compromise in Okara for its land operations nationwide and the damage that any compromise might do to its status as Pakistan’s most powerful and feared institution.
If one includes both the army’s landholdings and the land it administers, the Pakistan Army is one of the largest and quite possibly the largest landholder in the country. Extensive land-holdings, both urban and agricultural, remain under the visible control of the army. Urban land is publicly used by the military to dispense patronage to civilians and perks to its own officers. Similarly, agricultural land is a potent symbol of the privileged status enjoyed by the military.
The Army itself will decide the needs of the Army, and/or the government will decide this. Nobody has the right to say what the Army can do with 5,000 acres or 17,000 acres. The Army itself will determine the needs of the Army.
The army’s evident fear is that such a revolt, if allowed to fester or be accommodated, may lead to a reworking of the patron-client relationships carefully nurtured by the military establishment between itself and traditional landed elites, between itself and the tenant farmers and, between the traditional landed elites and peasant farmers.
The location of the dispute is also problematic for the Pakistan Army. The Punjab is the power-base of the military. It has traditionally drawn the overwhelming majority of its rank and file from the province and particularly from the districts that are now offering resistance.
Historically, the army has viewed the area as its backyard and the local people as subservient allies, given the latter’s role as laborers in a military-dominated economy. Hence the farmers’ movement likely is viewed by the military as particularly inimical to its interests.
Finally, in a military and landlord dominated country, army leaders may fear that, if the army succumbs to the will of tenant farmers, the consequences will be far-reaching and unpredictable.
This is a dispute that both sides believe they cannot afford to lose. For the Pakistani military establishment, control of land is essential for maintaining its position within the Pakistani political structure it believes that it cannot allow tenant farmers to challenge this position. For tenant farmers, access to land is often the difference between economic survival and abject poverty, between a full belly and hunger, between a viable future and complete marginalization, the HRW Report said.
Evictions in Karachi Update June 2005
UN Report on “The Challenge of Slums” Global Report on Settlements 2003 presents the results of the first global assessment of slums by the United Nations According to this report:
UN Report on “The Challenge of Slums”
Very few countries, cities or agencies have recognized this difficult situation But….
EVICTIONS IN PAKISTAN The case study deals with Karachi related issues. However, the conditions in Karachi are similar to other Pakistan cities. An attempt to present rural evictions has also made.
Major Issues:
REASONS FOR EVICTIONS
SCALE OF EVICTIONS IN KARACHI AND THEIR REASONS Table Some recent Evictions cases
The reported figures show that more than 19,505 houses (excluding houses and shops demolished in the Lyari riverbed due to the Lyari Expressway Project) have been bulldozed by various government agencies since 1992. As a result of these evictions 158,011 people have been displaced.
(Note: These are only the reported cases. There may be many others, which remain unreported)
Table
Huts Gutted in Karachi
Huts gutted in Karachi (some recent cases):
Since January 19997, a total number of 1,511 huts were gutted in different settlements. These incidents have rendered more than 10,289 people homeless. Ten minor children, two young girls, one woman and a 45-year-old man were also burnt alive in these incidents, besides a number of severe physical injuries.
(Note: These are only reported cases. There may be many others, which remain unreported)
MAJOR EXPECTED EVICTIONS/ RELOCATIONS/ CHANGE OF STATUS
Funding: Government of Pakistan
WHAT DO PEOPLE DO?
WHAT CAN BE DONE
UN
Human Development Report 2005
"International
cooperation at a crossroads: Aid, trade and security in an unequal world." http://hdr.undp.org/reports/global/2005/ This year’s Human Development Report takes stock of human development, including progress towards the MDGs. Looking beyond statistics, it highlights the human costs of missed targets and broken promises. Extreme inequality between countries and within countries is identified as one of the main barriers to human development—and as a powerful brake on accelerated progress towards the MDGs.
Full report available at http://hdr.undp.org/reports/global/2005/pdf/HDR05_complete.pdf
UN EXPERT CALLS FOR IMMEDIATE HALT TO FORCED EVICTIONS IN KARACHI, PAKISTAN
26 May 2006, United Nation Press Release
http://www.ohchr.org/english/issues/housing/annual.htm
(26 May 2006, United Nation Press Release) For use of the information media; not an official record
Razing settlements and villages of poor people KARACHI: Rally demands end to demolition
KARACHI, June 2: Protesters at a big rally taken out here on Friday urged the government to review its policies which, they said, were discriminatory against Pakhtoon and Sindhi people.
(Daily Dawn 3 June 2006)
Housing Rights Violations by Karachi City Government Over 2940 houses were demolished in last four months in Karachi city
On 22nd April 2006 the city district government Karachi (CDGK) demolished another 40 houses in Allah Wali Colony Block 6, PECHS Jamshid Town Karachi.
The community strongly protested and took out demonstration against demolition of their houses. Women and children pelted the CDGK employees with stones. Heavy contingent of police was present to control the situation by using aerial firing, tear gas and baton charge . Police and pera-military forces arrested 25 community activists. According to Haji Rafiquue, a community activist no compensation or alternatives land were given to the people and their houses were bulldozed in brutal way. The settlement was established in n1954. According to Mr. Khawer Din, a general councilor from the area a case was in pending in the Sindh High Court and next hearing was to be held on 27 April. 130 students of this settlement will not be able to appear their annual examinations, which will begin next month as their houses were razed.
The city government has started a major campaign for road extension and widening in the city. Under this campaign over 2940 houses (excluding those houses demolished for Lyari Expressway) have been demolished in various parts of the city since January 2006.
Here list of some settlement demolished in this period:
1. Over 1000 huts opposite side of Karachi University’s main gate were demolished on 14 February 2006 by the city government. According to city government officials these were illegal encroachers and occupying land over a water supply pipeline of Karachi Water and Sewerage Board (KWSB). No prior notice or any compensation was paid to these poor families. According to URC survey the settlement was over 15 years old and after loosing their houses they scattered in other parts of the city. 2. 150 houses were demolished by on the instruction of Town Nazim (Mayor) in Yousuf Goth New Karachi on 9th March 2006. As many as 300 other houses were also demolished in various other parts of New Karachi Town on eve of road extension programs. The government did not pay any compensation for these demolitions. The most of these houses were leased (had land titles) by the Sindh Katchi Abadi Authority. 3. The Town administration has demolished over 200 houses in Shaheed-eMillat Colony Korangi Sector 3 ½ on 10 March 2006. This settlement was also demolished for road extension. No compensation was paid to effected community. 4. Another 1250 houses were demolished in Jumma Goth Near NIPA Chorangi on 13th March 2006. The eviction of the settlement was brutal and without any notice. Many of families also lost their household goods. According to the government the settlement was illegal and located on one of the main water supply pipeline. A survey of area showed that there were many other high-rise buildings illegally constructed on the same water pipeline. But these high-rise buildings were not demolished by the government. The settlement was at least 30 years old The operation was started on the directive of the Town Nazim, (Mayor) Gulshan-e-Iqbal, Wasay Jalil. The. operation was supervised by TMO Matanat Ali Khan and TPO Asif Ejaz. During the operation people resisted but police present on the occasion used tear gas and batton charged. Jumma Goth was spread over an area of 120 acres with over 12,000 inhabitants.
The city government is planning to demolished a number houses in many other settlemnets of the city under its road widening and extension program.
PLEASE SEND YOUR PROTECTS AND CONCERNS LETTERS TO:
PLEASE SEND COPIES TO:
PLEASE SEND COPIES: CE@pak.gov.pk
2. Dr. Arbab Ghulam Rahim Chief Minister of Sindh Chief Minister’s House Dr. Ziauddin Road, Karachi PAKISTAN Fax: +92 21 920 2000
3. Mrs. Saira Karim Joint Secretary for Law, Justice and Human Rights Islamabad Tel: + 92 51 920 2819 Fax: + 92 51 920 3119
4. Mr. Miloon Kothari UN Special Rapporteur on adequate housing Attn: Ms. Cecilia Moller Room 4-066/010 UNOG-OHCHR, CH-1211, Geneva 10 SWITZERLAND Fax: +41 22 917 9010
5. Mr. Farouk Tebbal Chief Shelter Branch UNCHS – Habitat One United Nations Plaza 21st Floor, Rom. 2160 New York, NY 10017 USA Fax: +1 212 906 6379 E-mail: Farouk.Tebbal@unhabitat.org
___________________________ A-2/2, 2nd Floor, Westland Trade Centre, Commercial Area, Shaheed-e-Millat Road, Karachi Co-operative Housing Society Union, Block 7 & 8 Karachi Pakistan Tel: +92 21 - 4559317 Fax: 4387692
Introduction to human rights
Human rights are legal entitlements that all people have because of their inherent dignity as human beings. These are not like other rights that governments can ‘give’ to people, or ‘take away’ from them. Each person has these human rights simply because he/she is a human being. These human rights are protected by many international treaties that Pakistan has agreed to implement.
There are different types of human rights. However, all of them have the common objective of ensuring that people can live a life in dignity. There are civil rights, such as the right to fair trial, and political rights, such as the right to vote. There are also economic, social and cultural rights; for example, the right to adequate housing and the right to water. One of the most important documents, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948), recognises all these different types of rights.
Since these rights are universal it does not matter whether a person is rich or poor; old or young; male or female. People have human rights simply because they are people. Their rights must therefore be respected, protected and fulfilled without discrimination.
Governments must take steps to ensure that all their peoples’ rights are realised as soon as possible. Governments must not restrict human rights unless there is a very strong justification.
2 Does Pakistan have to respect human rights?
Yes. Pakistan has ratified international treaties that contain human rights. These treaties form part of international law, which is the legal arrangements between countries or within international organisations such as the United Nations.
Pakistan has legally agreed to implement the most important human rights treaties, including:
3 Do local governments have to respect human rights? Yes. the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan: “[S]hall recognize and respect human rights as stipulated in the United Nations Charter, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the covenants and conventions related to human rights, women’s and children’s rights.”
Since the local government (including City-District Governments, Towns and Union Councils) is part of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, it must therefore respect all the human rights in the international treaties and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
Any violations of human rights by local governments also mean that Pakistan has also violated its international obligations. Further, the federal government’s obligation to protect housing rights means that it will hold local governments accountable for violations of housing rights.
Housing rights
Housing rights are all those human rights that help people live in a decent and secure home. The most important housing right is the right to adequate housing. It is the right of everyone to live in their home in security, peace and dignity. Therefore, access to adequate housing should not just be determined by a person’s social or economic status.
The right to adequate housing is contained in the provisions of many international treaties ratified by Pakistan. The most important is in Article 11(1) of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR). Pakistan ratified this treaty in 1992.
In 1991, the United Nations Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights issued a General Comment to explain what this means. The Committee said there are seven elements to the right to adequate housing:
Local governments (including City-Distric Governments, Towns and Union Councils) have four important obligations with respect to housing rights.
The duty of non-discrimination means treating everyone equally in the law and in practice. Laws and policies of local government should not unfairly discriminate between residents on the grounds of race, colour, sex, age, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth, physical or mental disability, health status (including HIV/AIDS), sexual orientation and civil, political, social or other status.
The duty to respect means refraining from interfering with people’s existing access to housing. One clear way of respecting the right to housing is by not carrying out forced evictions.
The duty to protect means that the government must protect persons from violations by others, such as corporations and landlords. For example, allowing corporations to pollute water resources used for drinking is a violation of the right to adequate housing and the right to water. Local governments have a duty to protect communities from forced evictions.
The duty to fulfil means taking steps to ensure that everyone will progressively realise their right to housing. The first steps should include developing national and local action plans with the full participation of local people, including women and those living in informal settlements. Over reasonable time, there should be measurable progress in improving access to housing.
6 What if there are not enough resources available? Providing some of these rights can be expensive and resources will often be required from national government and other donors such as bilateral agencies and private corporations. However, local governments should examine their own budgets to see if an adequate amount is allocated to realising human rights, including housing rights.
Local governments, in co‑operation with the national government, have to create an enabling environment for communities to develop themselves. Furthermore, efforts should be made to remove obstacles to realisation of housing rights — for example, rules that prevent people living in informal settlements from accessing water and sanitation services, or rules that allow forced eviction that results in the destruction of housing stock. By working closely together with communities, the local government can often find that resources are available in the community for the completion of various projects.
Providing adequate security of tenure – in particular, by prohibiting forced eviction – may be one of the most effective means of protecting housing rights in Pakistan. This does not really cost anything, but instead means that people know either that they can go on living where they are living for an indefinite period, or how long they can go on living there. This means that people can plan their lives better, without a fear of being moved on against their will.
7 Are there good examples from other countries? The Kisumu City Council in Kenya, with the support of UN-Habitat, initiated a slum‑upgrading programme in four informal settlements and slums. They are also working to set up public water collection points so that residents in the settlements can get affordable and clean water.
In the municipality of Porto Alegre, Brazil, the public water company’s operations and investment are subject to a participatory budgeting process. Through a process of public meetings, every citizen can have a say in which new investments should be made first. This participatory model has contributed to the dramatic increase in access to water by poor communities in Porto Alegre.
Naga city in the Philippines has adopted widely publicised performance standards for each unit in its municipal administration.
One local council in the USA directly adopted the Universal Declaration of Human Rights as its guiding document.
Forced evictions
Forced eviction is the removal of someone from his/her home or land against his/her will and without the appropriate protections being given (see: General Comment No. 7, the Right to Adequate Housing, of the UN Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights). The United Nations Human Rights Commission has said that “…the practice of forced evictions constitutes a gross violation of human rights, in particular the right to adequate housing”. Local governments must ensure that its officials, as well as other actors in the municipality, do not carry out forced evictions. Even if a Pakistan law permits an eviction, this does not mean that it is consistent with the Constitution, international human rights treaties or Pakistan’s other legal obligations.
9 What are the appropriate protections? The United Nations Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights has said that evictions “can only be justified in the most exceptional circumstances, and in accordance with the relevant principles of international law.” An example of ‘exceptional circumstances’, in which forced evictions could be carried out without violating international law, might be tenants persistently refusing to pay rent and/or destroying rented property.
Even in such ‘exceptional circumstances’, certain procedural requirements must still be fulfilled:
Secondly, evictions should not result in rendering individuals homeless or vulnerable to the violation of other human rights. Governments must therefore ensure that adequate alternative housing is available to affected persons.
Finally, in those rare cases where eviction is considered justified, it must be carried out in strict compliance with additional relevant provisions of international human rights law and in accordance with general principles of reasonableness and proportionality. These include:
10 Can people living informally on land be evicted? In many of the world’s developing countries, urban centres include large informal settlements where the residents and/or their landlords do not have legal title to be on the land. Although people living in these informal settlements are often the poorest residents in such a locality, they contribute significantly to the economy, for example through providing casual labour and running small businesses. However, since the government has failed to ensure that sufficient affordable land and housing is available for low-income communities, these communities are often forced to live in informal settlements.
Human rights, including the right to housing, also protect residents of informal settlements from forced eviction. Where the local government wants to use public land occupied by the poor, or help private persons recover land occupied by the poor, the local government should consult with the affected residents to minimise any relocation and to ensure that no‑one is left homeless. The other protections mentioned above must also be put in place.
11 What does ‘adequate resettlement’ mean? Principles for adequate resettlement can be found in a number of documents. One of them is the UN Comprehensive Human Rights Guidelines on Development-Based Displacement, which is relevant because development projects often lead to evictions.
These guidelines state that resettlement must occur in a just and equitable manner and in full accordance with law of general application. All persons, groups and communities have the right to suitable resettlement, which includes the right to alternative land or housing that is safe, secure, accessible, affordable and habitable. In the event of resettlement, certain criteria should be adhered to:
12 Are there good examples from other countries? Courts in South Africa and India have also played an important role in setting standards on forced evictions when applying the human rights contained in their respective country’s constitution to prevent municipalities from evicting residents from informal settlements.
India’s Supreme Court stated that “the mere fact that encroachers have approached this court would be no ground to dismiss their cases. Where the poor have resided in an area for a long time, the state ought to frame schemes and allocate land and resources for rehabilitating the urban poor.” (Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation v. Nawab Khan Gulab Khan)
South Africa’s Constitutional Court stated that “a court should be reluctant to grant an eviction against relatively settled occupiers unless it is satisfied that a reasonable alternative is available, even if only as an interim measure pending ultimate access to housing in the formal housing programme.” (Port Elizabeth Municipality v. Various Occupiers).
Basic services
Local governments play an important role in delivering services to residents of their areas. These services often include water, sanitation, energy, garbage disposal, drainage and emergency services. As we have already seen, the government has a duty to provide these services to realise the residents’ right to adequate housing.
These services also help people realise other rights such as the right to water, life and health. For example, India’s Supreme Court, in the Ratlam Case on the basis of the right to life, ordered a local municipality to provide sufficient water, sanitation and drainage facilities to its residents. The Philippines’ Supreme Court, in the case of Energy Regulatory Board v. Manila Electric Company, found that the ‘right to electricity’ was an “economic right to a basic necessity of life” and ordered the electric company to refund to all its customers the excess amounts it had collected from them since February 1994.
14 Can local governments disconnect services if users do not pay? Not in all circumstances. The UN Committee on Economic Social and Cultural Rights makes it clear in its General Comment No. 15, the Right to Water, that the user’s inability to pay should not be a reason for disconnecting essential services. The user’s capacity to pay must be taken into account and under no circumstances shall an individual be deprived of the minimum essential amount of water.
The Committee also says that before disconnecting any service, the relevant authorities should follow the proper procedures, including: (a) genuine consultation with those affected; (b) timely and full disclosure of information on the proposed measures; (c) reasonable notice of proposed actions; (d) legal recourse and remedies for those affected; and (e) legal assistance for obtaining legal remedies.
In South Africa, for example, these protections have been included in the Water Services Act and nobody can be deprived of the free minimum of 25 litres of water per day.
Yes. People should not be discriminated against on the basis of their housing or property status. The UN Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights says in its General Comment No. 15, the Right to Water: “Deprived urban areas, including informal human settlements, and homeless persons, should have access to properly maintained water facilities. No household should be denied the right to water on the grounds of their housing or land status.”
However, it is not always easy to provide informal settlements and Katchi Abadis with some services. Innovative solutions should be found, even when the final status of a settlement has not been determined. For example, the Kisumu City Council in Kenya is currently working to set up public water collection points so that residents in a slum can get cheap and clean water.
Where can I get more information? This is a short, but not exhaustive, list of some organisations and their websites that may be useful if you want more information on Pakistan and human rights, including housing rights. On their websites, many of these organisations will have links to other relevant organisations.
Centre on Housing Rights and Evictions: http://www.cohre.org Judicial System Monitoring Programme: http://www.jsmp.minihub.org Amnesty International: http://www.amnesty.org United Nations: http://www.un.org UN‑Habitat (United Nations Human Settlements Programme): http://www.unhabitat.org UN Housing Rights Programme: http://www.unhabitat.org/unhrp Human
Rights Watch:
Human Right Commission of Pakistan www.hrcp-web.org
By Fatima Bhutto Tuesday, January 24, 2006
The
issue here is not the Expressway, but the rights of the people. Not simply their
unalienable right to shelter, but also their right to choose where they make
their homes and their right to defend their communities and resist forced
resettlement. These forced evictions affect all of us Why
should it be, argues the government, when we can have a highway that takes us
faster from point A to point B and allows a neat profit in the process (don’t
ask them about the Northern Bypass, a road that does exactly the same thing,
without dispossessing entire communities). Further away from the graveyard there
is a mosque that has been home to worshippers as far back as 1840. It is now in
danger of being razed to the ground. The
city of Karachi is home to more than 4.5 million people living in slums or
katchi abadis. Not all the slums are in the area that is to be transformed into
the Expressway. In fact, there are approximately 1,200 katchi abadis.
Karachi City government plans to demolish another 6000 houses in 20 different settlements.
According to the news reports the city governmennt is planning to demolish another 6000 housing units in 20 different Katchi Abadis (informal Settlements) situated in Gulberg, North Nazimabad, Saddar, Jamshed, Gulshan-e-Iqbal, Liaquatabad and SITE towns. All these settlements are now facing immediate eviction threats. The plan is to be implemented in phases and according to estimates these Katchi Abadis are spread over an area of 450 acre of land. According to City Nazim Syed Mustafa Kamal each and every katchi abadis that sprang up after 1985 is being considered as an encroachment (and therefore illegal) and they would be removed any time. He added that the city government was soliciting suggestions and solutions to tackle the matter from different countries, which have experienced the same problem. The city Nazim said the whole thing was being made part of the City Master Plan and a strategy would be drawn up to resolve the issue once and for all. He said, "we do care for poor people who live in slums but we can never compromise on the future of Karachi. We have to develop this city in a strategic manner so that it is seen as the seventh largest city of the world, an engine of growth for Pakistan and an attraction for people from around the world. During the current year (Jan – May 2006) the government bulldozed over 3,490 houses in the various parts of the city. A total of 23,124 people were made homeless as result of these recent evictions. People’s investment of over Rs. 1.047 billion on construction of 3,490 houses has been lost. This does not include the cost of land, infrastructure and services that people obtained over a period of time. FPRIVATE "TYPE=PICT;ALT=" Photo: Sikander Goth recent demolition URC photo The list of demolished settlement is as follows · The municipal administration of Baldia Town has demolished some 200 houses in Qaim khani Colony’s Sector-12 in Baldia on 1st February 2006. The town administration has launched an anti-encroachment operation on the directives of Town Nazim, Kamran Akhter. The Town Nazim has said that all illegal settlements on government land in any area of the town will be bulldozed. · Over 1000 huts opposite side of Karachi University’s main gate were demolished on 14th February 2006 by the city government. According to city government officials these were illegal encroachers and occupying land over a water supply pipeline of Karachi Water and Sewerage Board (KWSB). No prior notice or any compensation was paid to these poor families. According to URC survey the settlement was over 15 years old and after loosing their houses they scattered in other parts of the city. District Officer (DO) Enforcement, City District Government Karachi (CDGK), Abdul Malik, and other staff also took part in the demolition operation, while 10 police mobile vans led by the Station Head Officers of Aziz Bhatti, Mubina Town, Bahadurabad and Sachal police stations besides three fire tenders were also present. The settlement stretched on an area of 30 acres, near the University Road, in Gulshan-e-Iqbal town. Three bulldozers turned the entire settlement into rubbles in five hours time. Most of families were working as a domestic servant in the surrounding apartment buildings. · 150 houses were demolished on the instruction of Town Nazim (Mayor) in Yousuf Goth New Karachi on 9th March 2006. As many as 300 other houses were also demolished in various other parts of New Karachi Town on eve of road extension programs. The government did not pay any compensation for these demolitions. The most of these houses were leased (had land titles) by the Sindh Katchi Abadi Authority. · The Town administration has demolished over 200 houses in Shaheed-eMillat Colony Korangi Sector 3 ½ on 10 March 2006. This settlement was also demolished for road extension. No compensation was paid to effected community. · Another 1250 houses were demolished in Jumma Goth Near NIPA Chorangi on 13th March 2006. The eviction of the settlement was brutal and without any notice. Many of families also lost their household goods. According to the government the settlement was illegal and located on one of the main water supply pipeline. A survey of area showed that there were many other high-rise buildings illegally constructed on the same water pipeline. But these high-rise buildings were not demolished by the government. The settlement was at least 30 years old The operation was started on the directive of the Town Nazim, (Mayor) Gulshan-e-Iqbal, Wasay Jalil. The. operation was supervised by TMO Matanat Ali Khan and Town Police Officer (TPO) Asif Ejaz. During the operation people resisted but police present on the occasion used tear gas and baton charged. Jumma Goth was spread over an area of 120 acres with over 12,000 inhabitants.
· Another 100 Houses near Graveyard Masira Colony Landhi on 25th April 2006. ·
On 5th May 2006 the City Government demolished 250 houses in Sikander
Goth an will demolish another 750 houses. A community activist shot dead
and another was seriously injured URC has been monitoring evictions in the city since 1992. The reported figures show that more than 23,575 houses (excluding houses and shops demolished in the Lyari riverbed due to the Lyari Expressway Project) have been bulldozed by various government agencies since 1992. As a result of these evictions 185,801 people have been displaced. Apart from these evictions: The recent surveys showed that another 11,397 housing units have demolished by the city government. Besides those 3100 commercial units (including shops, factories etc) were also bulldozed to make way for this controversial project. No compensation or alternatives land were given to the commercial units.
Activists show concern over development-related evictions
KARACHI: Civil society activists are concerned at the continuing high rate of evictions in Karachi as a result of government-backed investment projects to develop infrastructure in the port city.
or the purpose, the Karachi City Government is planning to demolish and evict inhabitants of another 6,000 housing units in 20 different informal settlements across the city. Irin (Saturday, June 17, 2006 Daily Times)
Expressway
to Nowhere for Displaced People
(END/2006) KARACHI, Jun 19
By Zubeida Mustafa
IT IS ironical that it required a massive show of strength in the form of a large demonstration in Karachi on June 2 to get the city government to stop the demolition of katchi abadis it had been carrying on in a very determined way.
(Daily Dawn Karachi, June 21, 2006)
(Note: These are only reported cases. There may be many others, which remain unreported)
|
