During the illegal eviction of Sambok Chap residents, more than 1000 armed military cops were moved in to evict the residents out by force (AFP)Phnom Penh Post
July 14-27, 2006
Jean du Plessis, acting executive director of the Geneva-based Center on Housing Rights and Evictions (COHRE) spoke to the Post about his agency's assessment of recent land disputes and evictions in Cambodia.
What does your office make of the situation in Cambodia at the moment and how does it compare to other nations?
Security of tenure is under threat in many parts of Cambodia, and this threat in particular affects Cambodia's ordinary citizens. One of the best definitions of the concept of security of tenure is "freedom from fear of forced eviction." Unfortunately, far too many people do not experience this freedom, but rather live in constant fear of eviction.
Forced evictions have various and often complex and interconnected causes. Regardless of the actual cause, those carrying out forced evictions generally attempt to justify evictions in the name of "development" and, by implication, as intended for the general public good. Governments and other implementing agencies use compelling "developmental" language, often backed up by complicated technical jargon, in an attempt to defend actions which are, in most cases, totally indefensible.
It must, therefore, be made unambiguously clear at the outset of any discussion of forced evictions, that the practice of eviction without consultation or adequate alternatives and compensation is illegal in terms of international law. It is also unjust, compromising fundamental human rights principles, with devastating consequences for those affected. Moreover, in terms of international experience and best practice, it is fundamentally counterproductive to the goal of human development.
Why do you think there are so many fiercely contested and internationally condemned evictions in Cambodia at the moment? Why has there been an increase in evictions in Cambodia in recent years?
Land disputes and evictions have indeed reached crisis proportions in Cambodia. Many land disputes have roots in the conditions created by land privatization in the late 1980s. This problem is exacerbated by the political nature of the allocation and privatization programs initiated by the Government of Cambodia over the last 15 years.
While these processes were ostensibly intended to provide users of land with greater security by providing them legal title, they have thus far proved counterproductive. Indeed, implementation of these policies has diverted resources — including housing, land and property — away from ordinary citizens and farmers, to the benefit of a powerful elite.
Analysis of the way in which land distribution and privatization programs have been implemented by the government reveals that access to land has decreased rather than increased in recent years, particularly for the poor. In spite of some positive legislation and mechanisms that have been put in place, land opportunities and security of tenure are primarily accessed through political connections and patronage.
As the government owns a majority of the land, it has had a free reign in deciding how the land will be utilized. For the most part the government has utilized land for commercial and economic gain, and not to promote the land and housing rights of its ordinary citizens. It has done this by transferring ownership and title to domestic and overseas investors as a means of generating income for the state coffers.
Although the Land Law of 2001 created a legal framework that went a long way, on paper, towards securing property rights to land and housing; local and national government authorities often bypass laws and standards in the process of forced evictions, land expropriations and concessions of land and natural resources to powerful business interests.
Are evictions and land disputes likely to get better or worse over the next five to ten years?
This question is in the hands of the government. It is worth pointing out that the question of revoking illegal land grabs and economic concessions constitutes an acid-test of the government's commitment to the rule of law.
Studies indicate that there is very little viable land currently available for redistribution as social land concessions to the poor and vulnerable [without] the reclamation of illegally confiscated land. However, many high-level officials from the ruling party and other political groupings are implicated in land-grabbing. If illegally claimed land is consistently taken back and distributed to the landless without regard to the rank or political affiliation of the person alleged to have confiscated it, this will be a victory for both social land concessions and the broader rule of law in Cambodia.
Do you agree that the most serious land disputes and evictions all seem to involve private companies that have bought land from the state or received concessions?
The government has a crucially important responsibility for ensuring that the land under its control (i.e. land which has been decollectivized since the end of the Communist era in Cambodia) is redistributed in a fair and equitable manner which forms the basis of long-term sustainable development. However, this has all too often not occurred, and most land concessions have been given to both local and international companies who have strong links with the political elite. Land allocation is clearly a tempting and lucrative source of income.
Because the government has failed to adequately regulate economic land concessions to date, the private companies that benefit from them have had a relatively free hand to take any measures seen as necessary to maximize the profit they will extract.
Is there political will in Cambodia to introduce a consistent and transparent policy of development and land management that benefits the poor population?
It is unclear whether such political will exists. Some positive steps have been made in putting in place a legal framework and, more recently, a new National Authority on Land Dispute Resolution. However, the patronage system which exists at most, if not all, levels of government in Cambodia is a major obstacle. It has created a situation where a range of essential public services (ranging from issuance of land title certificates to medical treatment and education) depend on the payment of bribes that are unaffordable to most Cambodians. This is further worsened by patronage politics that continue to undermine the rule of law in Cambodia.
The government should be urged, pressured and assisted by all parties to tackle this problem head-on in order to reverse current trends, and to vigorously implement policies and programs that will promote and protect the right to land tenure security and adequate housing of all its citizens.
What does your office make of the situation in Cambodia at the moment and how does it compare to other nations?
Security of tenure is under threat in many parts of Cambodia, and this threat in particular affects Cambodia's ordinary citizens. One of the best definitions of the concept of security of tenure is "freedom from fear of forced eviction." Unfortunately, far too many people do not experience this freedom, but rather live in constant fear of eviction.
Forced evictions have various and often complex and interconnected causes. Regardless of the actual cause, those carrying out forced evictions generally attempt to justify evictions in the name of "development" and, by implication, as intended for the general public good. Governments and other implementing agencies use compelling "developmental" language, often backed up by complicated technical jargon, in an attempt to defend actions which are, in most cases, totally indefensible.
It must, therefore, be made unambiguously clear at the outset of any discussion of forced evictions, that the practice of eviction without consultation or adequate alternatives and compensation is illegal in terms of international law. It is also unjust, compromising fundamental human rights principles, with devastating consequences for those affected. Moreover, in terms of international experience and best practice, it is fundamentally counterproductive to the goal of human development.
Why do you think there are so many fiercely contested and internationally condemned evictions in Cambodia at the moment? Why has there been an increase in evictions in Cambodia in recent years?
Land disputes and evictions have indeed reached crisis proportions in Cambodia. Many land disputes have roots in the conditions created by land privatization in the late 1980s. This problem is exacerbated by the political nature of the allocation and privatization programs initiated by the Government of Cambodia over the last 15 years.
While these processes were ostensibly intended to provide users of land with greater security by providing them legal title, they have thus far proved counterproductive. Indeed, implementation of these policies has diverted resources — including housing, land and property — away from ordinary citizens and farmers, to the benefit of a powerful elite.
Analysis of the way in which land distribution and privatization programs have been implemented by the government reveals that access to land has decreased rather than increased in recent years, particularly for the poor. In spite of some positive legislation and mechanisms that have been put in place, land opportunities and security of tenure are primarily accessed through political connections and patronage.
As the government owns a majority of the land, it has had a free reign in deciding how the land will be utilized. For the most part the government has utilized land for commercial and economic gain, and not to promote the land and housing rights of its ordinary citizens. It has done this by transferring ownership and title to domestic and overseas investors as a means of generating income for the state coffers.
Although the Land Law of 2001 created a legal framework that went a long way, on paper, towards securing property rights to land and housing; local and national government authorities often bypass laws and standards in the process of forced evictions, land expropriations and concessions of land and natural resources to powerful business interests.
Are evictions and land disputes likely to get better or worse over the next five to ten years?
This question is in the hands of the government. It is worth pointing out that the question of revoking illegal land grabs and economic concessions constitutes an acid-test of the government's commitment to the rule of law.
Studies indicate that there is very little viable land currently available for redistribution as social land concessions to the poor and vulnerable [without] the reclamation of illegally confiscated land. However, many high-level officials from the ruling party and other political groupings are implicated in land-grabbing. If illegally claimed land is consistently taken back and distributed to the landless without regard to the rank or political affiliation of the person alleged to have confiscated it, this will be a victory for both social land concessions and the broader rule of law in Cambodia.
Do you agree that the most serious land disputes and evictions all seem to involve private companies that have bought land from the state or received concessions?
The government has a crucially important responsibility for ensuring that the land under its control (i.e. land which has been decollectivized since the end of the Communist era in Cambodia) is redistributed in a fair and equitable manner which forms the basis of long-term sustainable development. However, this has all too often not occurred, and most land concessions have been given to both local and international companies who have strong links with the political elite. Land allocation is clearly a tempting and lucrative source of income.
Because the government has failed to adequately regulate economic land concessions to date, the private companies that benefit from them have had a relatively free hand to take any measures seen as necessary to maximize the profit they will extract.
Is there political will in Cambodia to introduce a consistent and transparent policy of development and land management that benefits the poor population?
It is unclear whether such political will exists. Some positive steps have been made in putting in place a legal framework and, more recently, a new National Authority on Land Dispute Resolution. However, the patronage system which exists at most, if not all, levels of government in Cambodia is a major obstacle. It has created a situation where a range of essential public services (ranging from issuance of land title certificates to medical treatment and education) depend on the payment of bribes that are unaffordable to most Cambodians. This is further worsened by patronage politics that continue to undermine the rule of law in Cambodia.
The government should be urged, pressured and assisted by all parties to tackle this problem head-on in order to reverse current trends, and to vigorously implement policies and programs that will promote and protect the right to land tenure security and adequate housing of all its citizens.
2 comments:
THese police are all animals. they are being used to serve interest of all gangsters. These kind of police forces should wear police uniforms, They shame their nation and tehir families for working for all animals.
The Vietcong steal Cambodian land to promote their real estate market and AH HUN SEN is doing the same like his master that is to steal Cambodian land to promote his own real estate market and give it to the rich for big buck.
The master and slave must go together if they want to survive in a dangerous world!
Post a Comment