‘Punitive Demolitions Grave Violation Of Human Rights’ UN Special Rapporteur tells Supreme Court

128 Properties Owned Mostly by Muslims Demolished in 15 days: Earlier Report

Newsreel Asia Insight #323
September 30, 2024

The photo is for representational purposes only

The UN Special Rapporteur on adequate housing, Balakrishnan Rajagopal, has formally told the Supreme Court that the use of bulldozers for demolishing homes without proper authorisation constitutes a severe infringement of international human rights. This comes months after the international human rights group Amnesty International referred to the destruction of 128 properties owned mostly by Muslims in just 15 days.

In an intervention application to the court, Rajagopal stated, “Arbitrary demolitions carried out for purportedly punitive reasons are aggravated forms of human rights violations, especially when they target or result in discriminatory impacts against minorities, and when demolitions result in homelessness, they may constitute a violation of the prohibition against cruel, inhuman, degrading treatment or punishment,” as reported by LiveLaw.

In February, Amnesty International said in a report that it documented the destruction of 128 properties, including homes, businesses, and religious sites, primarily owned by Muslims across Bharatiya Janata Party-led states and Delhi, where the police reports to the central government though the state is governed by the Aam Aadmi Party, within 15 days between April and June 2022.

The report, titled “If You Speak Up Your House Will Be Demolished: Bulldozer Injustice in India,” said the demolitions left at least 617 people homeless or without livelihoods. It reported that extensive demolitions occurred across five states: 36 in Gujarat, 56 in Madhya Pradesh, 25 in Delhi, eight in Assam and three in Uttar Pradesh.

The report noted that of the 75 people directly impacted, only six had received any prior notice. Further, there were 39 documented incidents where police used excessive force during demolitions.

The rapporteur told the court that the lack of due process in these demolitions not only contravenes basic human rights but also denies affected individuals the fundamental right to adequate shelter. This right is safeguarded under multiple international frameworks to which India is a signatory, including the UN Charter on Human Rights.

He said demolitions should not be used as punitive measures against residents or their associates, regardless of any legal violations. If such demolitions occur, they should be legally treated as “serious crimes.”

Rajagopal pointed out, “In General Comment No.48, the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (CESCR) has affirmed that every person has a right to security of tenure, and to be free of the threat of forced eviction, among other elements of the right to adequate housing, a fundamental human right under the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR)...right to adequate housing is far more than an entitlement to four walls and a roof. It includes a ‘bundle of rights,’ as noted in Ajay Maken v. Union of India, including the rights to livelihood, food, water, sanitation, health, education, other public services such as transport, as well as political rights.”

On Sept. 17, the apex court issued an interim order stating that no demolitions should occur nationwide without its authorisation, unless they involve encroachments on public roads, footpaths, railway lines or water bodies.

On Oct. 1, the Supreme Court is expected to consider the international legal perspectives provided by Rajagopal alongside national laws concerning property demolitions and human rights.