Today, the ICJ will argue a case before the Supreme Court of Appeal, as an amicus curiae, that the rights to housing and work for persons working in the informal sector to reclaim waste for recycling must be protected in line with international law and standards.
The practice of treating precious housing stock as a mere commodity for speculative investment, rather than as a critical social good needed to fulfill a human rights guarantee, has run rampant in many places in the world.
Today, the ICJ will argue in a case before the Johannesburg High Court that the rights to housing and work for persons who work to informally reclaim waste must be protected in line with international law and standards.
Today the International Commission of Jurists will be appearing as an amicus curiae in the matter of Ryckloff-Beleggings (Pty) Ltd v Ntombekhaya Bonkolo and Others. In this matter, the Socio-Economic Rights Institute of South Africa represents over 100 informal waste reclaimers who are opposing an application for eviction from their homes by, Ryckloff-Beleggings (Pty) Ltd, the owner of the property.
The ICJ, represented by Lawyers for Human Rights, is asking the Court to fully consider the impact of any eviction order it grants on the rights to housing and work of the reclaimers and the right to health of both the reclaimers and the broader community, particularly in the context of the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic.
Timothy Fish Hodgson, Legal Adviser on Social, Economic and Cultural Rights at the ICJ said:
“It is inhumane to render people homeless as a result of eviction from their homes, but when doing so also strips them of their ability to make a living, the impact on their dignity is even greater. South Africa has a duty to ensure the protection of the reclaimers’ rights to housing and work.”
Many of the informal reclaimers in this matter have lived on the property for long periods of time and they argue that the eviction will result in them being rendered homeless. Many make a living by collecting, sorting, recycling, and selling valuable materials disposed of as waste at and near their homes.
The land upon which they live is not just their home, but also allows them to make a living. In the South African context job opportunities are scarce with an official unemployment rate as high as 32.5 percent.
The ICJ brief calls on the Court to take account of international human rights law relating to the right to work, and South Africa’s international legal obligations and its own domestic law in terms of the right to housing.
In the event of their eviction being permitted by the Court, the reclaimers seek the provision of alternative accommodation which will not deprive them of their ability to make a living, a request which the ICJ contends is consistent with the requirements of international human rights law.
Thandeka Chauke, ICJ’s legal representative in this matter and an Attorney at Lawyers for Human Rights said:
“Especially in light of the economic devastation brought on by the COVID-19 pandemic, it is essential that Courts act as guardians of the human rights of the marginalized in our society. Informal reclaimers’ role in our society should be recognized and they should not be stripped of their homes and livelihoods without sufficient effort being made by government to come to their aid.”
For the ICJ’s heads of arguments, click on ICJ_Amicus_Curiae_Heads_of_Argument_Ryckloff.
For more information about the case, click here.
CONTACT:
Timothy Fish Hodgson, Legal Adviser on Social, Economic and Cultural Rights, e: timothy.hodgson@icj.org
Tanveer Rashid Jeewa, Communications and Legal Officer, e: tanveer.jeewa@icj.org
Today, the ICJ, the Regional office of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) for Central Asia and the Supreme School of Judges of the Republic of Uzbekistan (SSJ) are beginning a national training on “International law on economic, social and cultural (ESC) rights.”
This two-day online-training is the second of a series of trainings on ESC rights, including, the right to health, education, housing, child protection and rights in the workplace.
The online-training aims to build the capacity of judges, lawyers, prosecutors, legal academics and other representatives of civil society to apply international law and standards on ESC rights. Trainers will share best practices on implementation by States of their international obligations, including through judicial practice, and in ensuring access to justice for ESC rights. The online-training will also allow for exchanges between members of the judiciary, other legal practitioners, and members of civil society.
The training will be based on four modules: (1) introduction to international law on ESC rights; (2) international obligations concerning access to justice and effective remedies for ESC rights in national courts and comparative examples of good practices; (3) children`s ESC rights and (4) women`s ESC rights. The office of the UN Special Rapporteur on independence of judges and lawyers and representatives of the UN Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women will participate in the training.
“Nobody could imagine the challenges the world will face only in few months after my visit to Uzbekistan. We are witnessing and living this unprecedently challenge for individuals, societies and states to response to crisis at global and national level to protect right to life and health, and to protect individuals from impact of lockdowns and restrictions. Economic, social and cultural rights are the heart of these challenges,” said Diego Garcia-Sayan, the UN Special Rapporteur on independence of judges and lawyers in his video-address to the participants of the training.
Francois Begeot, Head of Cooperation of the Delegation of the European Union to the Republic of Uzbekistan pointed out, “COVID-19 pandemic showed the urgency and importance of economic, social and cultural rights that have to be ensured by the states, even in the emergency situations. Taking international obligations, Uzbekistan has to respect, protect and fulfil human rights including during the state of emergency and ensure access to justice and legal remedies.”
Read full press release here.
Watch Diego García-Sayán speech for the event:
Contact:
Ms. Dilfuza Kurolova, Legal Consultant, ICJ Europe and Central Asia Programme, e: dilfuza.kurolova@icj.org
Ms. Guljakhon Amanova, National Program Officer, Uzbekistan, Regional Office of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR), e:gamanova@ohchr.org
Mr. Utkir Khalikov, Head of the international department The Supreme School of Judges under the Supreme Judicial council of the Republic of Uzbekistan for Central Asia, e: inter.dep.ssj@mail.ru
In a wide-ranging interview recorded on June 4 2020, ICJ Commissioner and former Chief Justice of the High Court of Delhi, Ajit Prakash Shah, called on the Indian judiciary to exercise its responsibility to protect peoples’ human rights and “reprise its role as protector of Indian people” in the context of the Covid-19 epidemic.
In April and May 2020, the Indian Supreme Court dismissed several petitions and applications concerning the rights of internal migrant workers.
These included petitions demanding that migrant workers be moved to shelter homes and provided with basic needs and that payment of minimum wages be made to all migrant workers for the lockdown period.
The Court was also requested to direct the District Magistrates to identify those who are walking and ensure that they are provided with shelter and food and reach their destination, following the death of 16 internal migrant workers killed while sleeping on railway tracks while on their way back to their hometowns.
Finally, on 26 May 2020 the Court took suo moto cognizance of their predicament and, on 28 May 2020 ordered the Government to: register internal migrant workers; provide internal migrant workers free transportation home; and provide internal migrant workers with shelter, food, and water until they reach their homes.
This action was followed by another order on 9 June by which the Court ordered that: internal migrant workers are identified and sent to their hometowns within 15 days; and that all cases registered against those who had allegedly violated COVID-19 lockdown orders be considered for withdrawal.
In the interview, Justice Shah accented, in particular, the role of the Indian judiciary “as protector of Indian people” in respect of marginalized and disadvantaged people, including people living in poverty.
In addressing the question about internal migrant workers who were stranded during the recent COVID-19 lockdown, Justice Shah observed that for two months (March 24 2020 – May 28 2020) between the initiation of the lockdown and the rulings of the Supreme Court the Court appeared to have “remained skeptical” and in “denial” about petitions filed seeking redress for internal migrant workers.
Speaking in this context, Justice Shah reminded the Indian judiciary that Indian courts have historically been at “the forefront of giving effect to India’s international legal obligations,” including its economic, social, and cultural rights obligations encapsulated in International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights.
They had done so in landmark cases such as PUCL v. UOI (in which it held that the right to life with dignity includes a right to food and a right to be free from hunger and starvation) and Chameli Singh v. UOI (in which it held that right to shelter includes adequate living space includes light, air, water, civil amenities, and sanitation).
While commending the Courts interventions in May 2020, Justice Shah pointed out that their lateness to react was damaging.
“Courts should have intervened earlier. They could have monitored the process of the return of the migrants to their home states and ensured basic wages were fixed and delivered.”
Justice Shah expressed hope that the 28 May 2020 order represented a turning point:
“Hopefully, going forward, the Court will act in the same spirit … to grant some reliefs to suffering migrant communities. In the future, the Court should take the lead and monitor these processes, serving as a guide to both the center and the state authorities and the bureaucracy for addressing these issues.”
Commenting on the role of lawyers during the COVID-19 crisis, Justice Shah expressed concern that law officers were castigating lawyers for approaching courts with petitions.
Watch the video
Additional Reading
Download (with additional information)
EU: Lawyers and civil society call for mandatory humanitarian clause in anti-smuggling directive
EU: Access to a lawyer in juvenile justice proceedings remains a key concern in several EU Member States
Pakistan: Military “justice” system reflects a glaring surrender of human rights