Author: Monique van Cauwenberghe LLM. MA.
On 22 December 2022, a communication to Pakistan was jointly issued by five UN Special Rapporteurs mandated to the right to adequate housing, the right to health, rights of internally displaced persons, extreme poverty, and discrimination against women and girls. This communication concerned the ongoing forced evictions and home demolitions along Karachi’s waterways (nullahs, which are traditionally used as natural storm water drains).
These forced evictions and home demolitions occurred in the context of Pakistan’s climate change adaptation strategy. Due to the risk of flooding, a Supreme Court order, issued on 12 August 2020, instructed the National Disaster Management Authority to remove all encroachments in and around Karachi's nullahs. This was in particular due to the negative impacts caused by the heavy monsoon rains and seasonal floods of 2020 and 2022. Despite the court order, these evictions and home demolitions are reportedly being carried out with little regard for the human rights of those affected. By issuing this communication, the special rapporteurs are seeking clarification on the matters highlighted, which is currently pending a response from the Government of Pakistan.
This communication draws attention to the impacts that climate change has upon forced evictions and home demolitions, the significant human rights violations occurring in this context, in addition to the impact of discrimination against women. This blog post discusses the innovative way in which discrimination against women, including gender-based violence (GBV) was addressed within the broader context of climate displacement. It also draws attention to the missed opportunity to strengthen these legal arguments within climate litigation.
The communication raises concerns regarding violations of international human rights law, and draws attention to the disregard of human rights in how the forced evictions and home demolitions were conducted. This includes a lack of consultation with those affected, inadequate compensation, and the absence of a rehabilitation plan. This has left many people forcibly displaced, homeless and without adequate housing. Other concerns include but are not limited to cuts to electricity, water and gas lines, a lack of access to healthcare, a decline in access to education due to interruptions, and a lack of gendered responses or consideration.
The Special Rapporteurs highlight several applicable human rights instruments and provisions, basing their arguments on the following:
Interestingly, the applicants paid significant attention to discrimination against women, and the intersecting inequalities that have adverse effects on women in situations of displacement. This included the nexus of displacement and forms of GBV, such as physical and sexual violence. The special rapporteurs shed light on concerns regarding Pakistan’s measures in this regard. Their report highlights that:
“
The communication afforded significant attention to addressing this concern. This included highlighting the discriminatory legal provisions related to property ownership, lack of timely reproductive health care, loss of income, increased risk of harassment, stigmatization, and sexual violence. These nuanced considerations bring a novel approach to climate litigation concerning displacement. This is due to the lack of prior attention for this nexus within climate litigation, particular in displacement circumstances. This demonstrates the importance and necessity of well-considered arguments that provide a foundation for future cases.
The communication seeks a clarification from the Government of Pakistan regarding the various concerns raised. The applicants request that the Government of Pakistan “...provide detailed information on the measures adopted to address the disparate impacts produced by the monsoon rains and the home demolitions on women and girls…”.
At the time of writing, no response has yet been provided.
Engagement with the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW) in this case would have been apt, as its purpose is entirely dedicated towards the elimination of discrimination against women, in all its forms. While various other human rights conventions are no doubt applicable, and have indeed been considered by the special rapporteurs, on this matter the CEDAW is arguably the most well positioned. This is also of particular interest in light of Pakistan also being a party to the CEDAW, having ratified it in 1996.
Considering its binding nature, it raises the question of why CEDAW provisions (beyond the non-binding guidance of CEDAW General Recommendation No. 37) were not utilised. For instance, the right to work (article 11), right to health (article 12), or the right to equal protection under the law (article 15). This is particularly disappointing considering the weight that was afforded within this communication to discrimination against women. Nevertheless, it is the hope that this case sheds light on this significantly overlooked concern in climate displacement, paving a way for future cases.
This communication presents a novel contribution to climate change litigation. Yet, it is particularly a missed opportunity to strengthen arguments against discrimination against women through the use of the CEDAW. Its use in this instance would have allowed for much richer guidance concerning discrimination against women. Ultimately, a timely response to this communication by the Government of Pakistan would be well-received, reinforcing their commitment to the CEDAW.
Above all, in line with requests by the special rapporteurs, all possible interim measures to end alleged violations and prevention of recurrence of any violations must take immediate effect.