Protection Cluster
Housing, Land and Property Working Group
Policy options and recommended approach
to address forced evictions in post-earthquake Haiti
1. Background-problem description
The Haiti 12 January 2010 earthquake provoked a mass displacement of the disaster-affected population towards
apparently available “free” plots, in such circumstances a considerable number of displaced population settled down
spontaneously on private owned plots. One of the major trend recently emerged is that the land owners, being
concerned that the prolonged emergency situation could last for an indeterminate period, depriving them from the
full enjoyment of their property rights, have started forced evictions of the displaced persons from their privately
owned plots.
1.1. Purpose and audience
1.2 This document analyses different policy options in support of the Government of Haiti’s efforts to address the
issue of forced expulsions in the aftermath of the devastating earthquake on 12th January 2010. The document will
be presented to the Government of Haiti by the Humanitarian Coordinator for review on DATE.
These options represent the humanitarian community’s effort to advocate for:

International best practices, human rights standards with respect to forced evictions.

A response that reflects the Haitian context based on the best available evidence from those operating
on the ground.

UNHABITAT coordinated a working group on Housing, Land and Property (HLP) issues. The consultative
process involved contributions from other WG members (CARE,IOM, Habitat for humanity), the document is
shared with the Working group on Housing, Land and Property (HLP) issues

This document will be presented and discussed at different levels of the humanitarian coordination
system (Protection, Early Recovery, Inter-Cluster Coordination Group, the HCT and the Humanitarian
Coordinator);
2. Why do we care about forced eviction?
2.1 What is a forced eviction?
Forced eviction is the permanent or temporary removal against
their will of individuals, families and/or communities from the
homes and/or the land which they occupy, without provision of and
access to appropriate forms of legal or others protection
Forced evictions and the threat of eviction can exacerbate, 1:
 Homelessness An eviction cannot result in individuals and
families being rendered homeless or vulnerable to the
violation of other human rights.
 Inadequate shelter: shelter is a basis for physical protection,
health, livelihoods and economic recovery. Without access
to land the right to adequate housing is breached, people
are left homeless and unable to find shelter, restart
livelihoods, repair, rebuild.
 Conflict: Possibility for creating “a vicious cycle of
intimidation, anxiety and abuse”
1
J. Philip Thompson and Paul Altidor, MIT, p 7.
Document1
Legal Frameworks
International human rights law . The
International Covenant on Civil and Political
Rights prohibits arbitrary or unlawful
interference with his … home (Article 17.1)
Natural disaster affected persons are a
specific group of the internally displaced
persons and therefore beneficiaries of the
standards contained in the UN Guiding
Principles on Internal Displacement which
foresee that:
1) Every human being shall be protected
against arbitrary displacement
2) Alternatives must be explored to avoid
and minimize displacement.
3) Proper accommodation is provided to
the displaced persons so that the
displacement leaves them with satisfactory
health, safety, nutrition and hygiene
conditions, also family members are not to
be separated.
 Speculation: “speculation, and eviction in one area creates assumptions of evictions in other areas.”
 Land grabbing: made worse by lack of confidence in protection of property rights
2.2 Risks of not acting
If left unaddressed, disputes surrounding HLP can undermine reconstruction efforts, fuel instability and generate
hostilities and a systematic use of force (evictions)to get the problem fixed, if no appropriate measures are being
taken. It can also create a statu quo that generate new “shanty-slum-tents” permanent towns and neighborhoods
that poses even much more complex questions and problems to solve.
Some displaced people will also try to return to their areas of origin where they held some type of property (around
20%), but if this land is occupied or has been given away to investors land and property disputes will also arise.
In urban areas arbitrary occupation of non-owned plots (14 000 persons around Corail for instance) and
commercialisation of land currently occupied by IDPs, will also result in a growing number of disputes.
Given the lack of an appropriate legal framework and the weaknesses of the administrative systems, it is reasonable
to expect that land disputes throughout the country will remain largely unaddressed over an extended period of
time unless there is a considerable effort to address underlying problems. This situation will risk causing increasing
dissatisfaction and tension which could lead to new or renewed conflict in areas where access to land is key to
people’s livelihoods and survival.
In the worst case scenario any one of a number of actual or brewing land disputes could rapidly degenerate into
violent clashes, especially in areas where land rights are derived from an individual membership in a wider group of
people with the tradition to use the force, through gunmen, in order to have their property rights respected, in land
that suddenly acquired value after the crisis.
Document1
2.2 Chronology of the evictions in Haiti
Before the 12th January 2010
According to a 2009 UN Habitat study, there have been very few forced evictions in the last 10 years2. However,
there is some evidence that groups of people displaced since the earthquake were already involved in local political
and economic struggles over access to land and may be facing acute insecurity and eviction threats now.
 Since the 12th January
 Christian school leadership selected Easter Sunday as the date to force all of these people off the school land.
 Approx. 7,335 persons from the National Sports Stadium in April.
 Approx. 1,500 persons forcibly removed from Villa Manrese in March.Other watchdogs and journalists are
reporting figures as high as 80,000 to 100,000 expulsions. None of these estimates include the "invisible" IDPs in
the provinces that have already been evicted already, or are experiencing "deplacements pendulaires": the
secondary and tertiary expulsions that can occur after an initial forced expulsion. These sometimes violent
expulsions have been initiated by private landowners, school managers, religious organisations and government
entities3.
2.5 What is the humanitarian community doing to help at the moment?
Promoting voluntary return
 Advocating and providing resources for people to return voluntarily to their pre-earthquake neighborhoods:
including structural assessments of buildings, transitional shelters, information campaigns on MTPTC’s green,
yellow and red houses and small scale resources for repairs including materials and technical support (MTPTC
with UNOPS and WB, UNH, HfH and other humanitarian partners).
 Advocating proposing the enumeration exercise (UNH) to restore and upgrade the tenure rights of disasteraffected population and protecting them against forced evictions.
 Monitoring: tracking of evictions in earthquake affected areas and in the provinces is underway and starting
programmes in neighborhoods identified as return locations for people in camps and spontaneous settlements
(IOM)
Preventing forced evictions
 Advocating for a moratorium: officially calling for declaring the moratorium proposed by Humanitarian
Coordinator on behalf of the humanitarian community It is formally proposed or not?? If so when?
 Improving compliance with human rights law, its standards4 and guiding international principles on forced
evictions.
authorities should be requested to ensure that owners of affected property are adequately compensated for such use.
UN-HABITAT, “Strategic citywide spatial planning: A situational analysis of metropolitan Port-au-Prince, Haiti” (United
Nations Human Settlements Programme, 2009), http://www.gltn.net/en/home/land-use-planning/strategic-citywide-spatialplanning/details.html.
3
Lilianne Fan, “Scoping Study On Housing, Land And Property Rights In Post-Earthquake Haiti: Securing Tenure, Preventing
Evictions, Faciltiating Return, And Strengthening Access To Justice For The Vulnerable” (OXFAM GB Haiti Earthquake
Response, May 2010).
4
The necessity to strike the balance between the guaranties for the private ownership and to conciliate this principle with the
public interest of society American Charter of Human Rights (1969), Art. 21
1. Everyone has the right to the use and enjoyment of his property. The law may subordinate such use and enjoyment to the
interest of society.
2. No one shall be deprived of his property except upon payment of just compensation, for reasons of public utility or social
interest, and in the cases and according to the forms established by law.
2
3. Usury and any other form of exploitation of man by man shall be prohibited by law.
In addition, so called Pinhero Principles. are applicable (United Nations Principles on Housing and Property Restitution for
Refugees and Displaced persons”), its Principle 7
1. Everyone has the right to the peaceful enjoyment of his or her possessions.
2. States shall only subordinate the use and enjoyment of possessions in the public interest and subject to the conditions provided
for by law and by the general Principles of international law. Whenever possible, the “interest of society” should be read
restrictively, so as to mean only a temporary interference with the right to peaceful enjoyment of possessions.
The duty to compensate owners in post-natural disaster emergency is also foreseen by IASC Operational Guidelines on Human
Rights and Natural Disasters:
Unused private property and possessions may be temporarily, but no longer than absolutely necessary, allocated to those
displaced by the natural disaster. Competent
Document1

Training on international best practice for those that implement Haitian law: training Ministry of Justice staff
and juge de paix, PNH (UNHCR)
3. What are the policy options for responding to expulsions while building confidence in protection of
property rights?
Document1
3. Summary of policy options
Short term
stabilisation
(0-12 months):
 Moratorium
on forced
evictions
Expropriation.
Eminent domain
(O-36 months)
Medium term
stabilisation(o36) months
Land Leases
Requisition of
Document1
Implementation in Haiti
Strengths
Weaknesses
Decree issued by the Government of Haiti declaring
the moratorium for a limited period of time. The
decree may establish a mechanism to identify and
compensate landowners.
Proposed by HC, UNHCR etc with reference to article
16 of the Law on the State of Emergency, the
Government may requisition for relief assistance
additional means and buildings belonging to private
owners, where the logistical means of the public
authorities are not sufficient.
Decree issued by the Government of Haiti declaring
the land(s) of public interest and establishing the
expropriation procedure
Once expert valuation is done, the amount is made
available (committed) and Government takes
possession of the land.
Expropriation commission processes ownership
claims and identify legitimate owners.
Earlier this year, the following steps were taken with
respect to land identified for resettlement by the
Haiti Commission for Shelter and Reconstructio n
Presidential Decree signed (19 March 2010)
declaring selected properties as beneficial to the
public at large.15 days period for landowners and
legal renters to deposit papers justifying their legal
occupancy at the office of the Direction Générale
des Impôts. Boundaries of the land normally
demarcated by ONACA
Fast: this is a rapid and clear response during the
emergency phase
Enforcement: The moratorium would be binding to
State authorities, without which any legal expulsion is
impossible.
Enforcement: so far this policy has proved to be
difficult to enforce
Mandatory: There is no need to spend time and
resources negotiating with landowners
Mandatory: The mandatory nature of the
expropriation can also become a disadvantage.
Landowners will be obliged to comply, which may
cause tensions
Government to negotiate rental agreement with
owners of land occupied by IDPs;
Government issues decree establishing mechanisms
for determining rental values and setting out
mechanism to ascertaining land ownership
Relatively fast: this can be a rapid and clear response
during the emergency phase, particularly if land
ownership is clearer.
Negotiated solution: landowners will not be forced to
accept it
Cost: leasing land for an extended period of time will
demand that the Government commits the necessary
resources. ICRH may contribute to funding the
emergency lease programme.
Ownership blockage: negotiating rent cannot take place
before identifying the landowner. If this identification
becomes difficult, the rental solution may be slowed
down or blocked
Government issues a decree requisitioning a number
of properties for a period of up to 3 years.
Fast: this can be a rapid and clear response during the
emergency phase
Cost: compensating landowners will demand that
the Government commits the necessary resources.
Simple and cheap: statements with reference to
existing Haitian legal code are easy to formulate and
disseminate
It has a limited effect to extra-legal expulsions: a
moratorium would be binding to all State
authorities, including peace judges, prosecutors
and police. Evictions carried out outside the legal
procedures would not be affected.
private property
Medium term
stabilisation
(0-36 months)
Promote options
for return
(6-36 months)
The decree must contain: the identification of the
properties;
A procedure for identifying and compensating
landowners;
Rules regulating the terms and conditions of the
temporary possession of the State.
Support return for people with different types of
tenure:
Rental subsidies or incentive packages to promote
return
Repair packages: financial and technical support
Transitional shelters in neighbourhoods not camps
Mandatory: There is no need to spend time and
resources negotiating with landowners
Prioritises the choices of displaced people
ICRH may contribute to funding the emergency
lease programme.
Mandatory: The mandatory nature of the
requisition can also become a disadvantage.
Landowners will be obliged to comply, which may
cause tensions
Cash and vouchers:
Slow:
Under resourced so far
Information campaigns
Promote return
PLUS
 progressive
closure
Progressive closure (proposed by MINUSTAH,
Human Rights unit):
Minimum guarantee: No IDPs will be removed from
camps without availability of an alternative shelter
option meeting minimum standards.
Calendar for progressive closure: with sites
prioritized by risk, size, potential for rapid return
Closure procedure: a procedure that respects the
rights of IDPs, including to information, choice and
support during the move.
Strategic use of resources: strategies and resources
to provide alternative options (e.g. preparing new
sites, surveying houses) to IDPs should be organized
according to the chronological list of camp closures.
Compensation and co-use: landowners who are
lower down on the chronological list should be
offered compensation packages, such as free repairs
to their property, and co-use should be explored.
The Commission on Camp Closures will agree
compensation levels with landowners.
Promote return
PLUS
 progressive
closure
 compensation
arrangements
for
Relies on: i) government-led entity for
5
Promoting the Safes return is the most preferable
option which allows the displaced persons to regain
their social and economic pre-earthquake
neighbourhood. This approach (to support the safe
return) is defined as a priority also by the Gov. of Haiti
last March
Does not offer compensation to landowners and
may result in evictions for closures that have not
been prioritised
The owners are reassured that they will be
compensated for the interference with their property
rights, therefore they should refrain from carrying out
forced evictions,
The compensations The duty to compensate owners in
post-natural disaster emergency is also foreseen by
IASC Operational Guidelines on Human Rights and
Natural Disasters
Determining ownership: identifying legitimate
owners is difficult in practice, multiple claims and
overlapping records of ownership and biases
towards those politically and financially best placed
able to make claims quickly. Conflicts of interest on
land compensation by members of the GoH have
already been reported5.
In the case of Corail, “The AP has confirmed that the land under the government-run camp is owned by Nabatec Development - a consortium whose president, Gerard-Emile "Aby" Brun, was in charge of the relocation effort. The
company stands to gain part of a $7 million fund the government will spend compensating landowners.” http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/07/13/AR2010071300005.html
Document1
landowners
Document1
implementation; ii) sufficient resources; and iii) the
formulation of a scale for calculating the damage for
example using criteria such as:
Price: the original price of the immovable property
declared by the owner and the public notary at the
moment of the real-estate transactions of the given
plot. these criteria should be only indicative since in
Haiti, it is a widespread use to diminish the official
price in order to pay less property tax.
The purpose- agricultural, commercial use, plot for
development etc. If the plot was used for a purpose
different from what it was originally zoned for
(“informal use”) and it was tolerated by the
authorities, its “real” use should be considered
rather than the official use.
-Improvement and transformations of the original
plot made by the owner from the moment of buying
to the emergency.
-Market value of the immovable property concerned
from the time just before the disaster.
The level of the temporary damage of the plot
caused by providing the temporary shelter.
-The financial losses caused by foregone livelihood
and/or income opportunities (agricultural yield;
livestock rearing; fishing; on-site manufacturing and
maintenance shops, shops, etc.) should be taken into
consideration
Implementation process and agency: Who carries
out the calculation and evaluation? How is data
gathered? How are disputes resolved?
Prices: land price indicators are notoriously difficult
to verify. In Haiti, it is a widespread to misreport
purchase prices to reduce property tax liabilities.
Recommended policy options for responding to forced evictions
while building confidence in protection of property rights
OPTION 1
1. Promote return, plus progressive closure of the camps,
moratorium on evictions followed by compensation for the owners.
The combination of these options represent the most comprehensive and coherent approach. It is in line of
the Safes return strategy, adopted by the government of Haiti last March where the safe return is
envisaged as the most preferable option. A moratorium is a temporary protective measure (never
permanent solution). against arbitrary evictions, it’s a way of protecting the most vulnerable victims of the
earthquake from further displacement, while Government authorities and its partners seek medium and
long term housing alternatives-sustainable return.
The Government can enact emergency legislation prohibiting authorities do carry out expulsions and
evictions from privately owned sites. Such prohibition may be specific to immovable properties occupied
by persons displaced and made homeless after the earthquake.
Under the moratorium, peace judges and any other judicial or administrative organs would not be allowed
to undertake expulsions or evictions of internally displaced persons from private land.
The moratorium should be followed by a mechanism to compensate landowners, having the guarantees to
receive compensation the owners should refrain from carrying out extra-judicial (arbitrary) eviction for
protecting their private plots.The duty to compensate owners in post-natural disaster emergency is also
foreseen by IASC Operational Guidelines on Human Rights and Natural Disasters. 6
In this case, the Government should establish a procedure, criteria for compensation as well as for
identifying existing ownership claimants and determining (eligibility criteria) who the legitimate owner is.
Following criteria may be considered formulation of a scale for calculating the damage for example using
criteria such as:
-Price: the original price of the immovable property declared by the owner and the public notary at
the moment of the real-estate transactions of the given plot. these criteria should be only indicative since
in Haiti, it is a widespread use to diminish the official price in order to pay less property tax.
-The purpose- agricultural, commercial use, plot for development etc. If the plot was used for a
purpose different from what it was originally zoned for (“informal use”) and it was tolerated by the
authorities, its “real” use should be considered rather than the official use.
Improvement and transformations of the original plot made by the owner from the moment of
buying to the emergency.
Market value of the immovable property concerned from the time just before the disaster.
The level of the temporary damage of the plot caused by providing the temporary shelter.
The financial losses caused by foregone livelihood and/or income opportunities (agricultural yield;
livestock rearing; fishing; on-site manufacturing and maintenance shops, shops, etc.) should be taken into
consideration
OPTION 2
2. Expropriation , declaration of Eminent domain
6
Unused private property and possessions may be temporarily, but no longer than absolutely necessary, allocated to those
displaced by the natural disaster. Competent authorities should be requested to ensure that owners of affected property are
adequately compensated for such use.
Document1
The Government can exercise its eminent domain powers in order to expropriate privately owned
immovable property for purposes of public interest. This measure is foreseen by the Haitian Civil Code (5
September 1979 Law), Expropriation needs to be directed to specific land parcels or buildings.
In the case of expropriation, compensation to landowners is mandatory.
The law requires the Government to determine the value of the compensation and to make the amount
available prior to finalizing the expropriation, if the first stage of mediation between the owners and the
state fails. Once these steps are completed, the Government can take legal possession of the expropriated
land.
The next step is to establish a mechanism to identify existing ownership claimants for each of the
expropriated properties and a procedure for determining who the legitimate owners are. Such mechanism
can be set out in the expropriation decree.
Expropriation is not a temporary act, and therefore may not be a suitable legal instrument to protect
homeless earthquake victims from expulsion of privately owned land.
The recommendation is that the Expropriation may be an adequate remedy in specific cases only, where
the land occupied by IDPs has been identified as suitable for temporary or permanent housing
development a condition that such land meets the urban development criteria.
Document1