Beyond Law 10: Economic and Social Challenges of Housing and Land Management in Post-Conflict Syria (original) (raw)
Related papers
Urban Housing and the Question of Property Rights in Syria
The traditional land tenure systems in Syria are complex and overlapping, stemming from hundreds of years of evolution in the legal as well the socio-economic conditions of the different communities in the country and the region. Some of these systems were codified progressively in the 20th century while others remained outside the control of the State. The rapid rural to urban migration starting in the second half of the 20th century generated a major demand for housing and real estate in the main cities. Most of the formal systems failed to cope with the increased demand for housing and the magnitude of the rural to urban migration, which created massive zones of informality, particularly in peri-urban sections of major metropolitan areas and in secondary cities. Supply-side state subsidies and the promise of freehold home ownership for all was a dream on which the State could not deliver. Contradictions unresolved in the transformation from traditional land tenures to modern land registries accumulated and added to the inability of the State to manage urban growth properly. These contradictions were an important factor contributing to the outbreak of the conflict in 2011. The early manifestations of the conflict took place primarily at the urban-rural interface. HLP issues played a major part in mobilizing disgruntled communities. The State initially considered dealing with this issue separately from other causes of grievances (e.g. human rights abuses). The first two years of the conflict witnessed a laissez-faire approach to informal settlements. The State looked the other way while these areas added no less than 10% to the housing stock in less than a year. However, demonstrations against the State did not stop and the idea of appeasing communities through relaxed housing regulations as a means of quelling the uprising seemed to backfire. The rebellion took a sharp turn towards heavy militarization by mid-2012. Most of the clashes took place in peri-urban areas and in the small and medium- size cities where urban growth was rapid and where HLP rights were most vulnerable. Most of the damage to the housing stock – estimated at over 30% of the total value of the pre-war housing stock – is found in these areas. Many voices within the government started to advocate a permanent solution to informal settlement areas, taking advantage of the fact that most of their inhabitants had been forced out either as refugees in neighbouring countries or as internally displaced persons in Syria. The destroyed peri-urban areas were seen as potential sites for lucrative re-development and created an opportunity to compensate loyalist cronies and others by allowing them to invest in “reconstruction solutions” based on private-public partnerships in locations where the original populations had the weakest property rights protection. Furthermore, in different locations and under different guises all parties to the conflict participated in demographic transfers (some for ethno-sectarian reasons). To this extent, HLP issues increasingly feature as a core issue in the peace-building process. The peace process has thus far been fixated on issues related to political transition and power sharing. Very little effort has gone into mapping the magnitude of the HLP problem and the way it may affect the peace process. However, one can discern several levels of concern that should be addressed even before a political deal is reached. These concerns will play into the hands of spoilers if not addressed. Most of the UN-mandated mechanisms for addressing HLP issues post-conflict tend to address grievances that accumulated during the conflict. In Syria, addressing pre- conflict grievances is essential. There is no reliable judiciary system that enjoys widespread public trust. The establishment of an independent judicial framework will be part and parcel of the political negotiations. These negotiations have not produced any viable visions as yet for the separation of powers, nor for that matter on how the new Syrian territory will be organized in the future and how land will be managed. The bias in favour of formal HLP documentation by actors working from Damascus and actors working cross-border may undermine the pre-crisis security of tenure enjoyed by holders of non-cadastral property rights evidence. Understanding the continuum of tenure and developing mechanisms for recognizing and protecting different types of tenure is essential for securing HLP rights, particularly for the most vulnerable communities. While the official national narrative has been fixated on freehold ownership as the preferred tenure type, supply-side economics has not been able to resolve Syria’s housing crisis in the past, and will not be able to compensate for the massive level of damage to the housing sector. Criminality, fraud, the displacement of informal communities to advance real estate projects as well as ethnic- and sectarian-based forced displacement are all factors to be addressed, but claims and counter-claims require further clarification. Interventions into the HLP issues are only now starting to gain traction among international donors and actors. Some of the issues to be considered are: The restitution of HLP rights cannot be relegated to the “repatriation and resettlement of refugees” annex of a future political agreement (as has happened in the Dayton Agreement). HLP rights should be addressed as part of a comprehensive architecture for adjudicating disputes and/or to provide fair alternatives. This should include the reform of the judiciary at large. Para-legal institutions must somehow be incorporated into the deal to avoid chaos created by wartime HLP transactions. A dispute resolution system that is based on a “continuum of tenure” approach will be essential to ensure stability in the immediate post-agreement context. HLP issues will generally be seen as a part of the greater reconciliation efforts between the different communities in Syria. Resources must be provided to develop the local reconciliation infrastructure. The task cannot be the sole preserve of a national top- down process. HLP issues in Syria will be enormous in urban areas where real estate markets will be used to support the reconstruction process. Donors should avoid the temptation of supply-side solutions to housing reconstruction and focus more on demand-side solutions: micro-loans, especially for women, legal hedges against gentrification, and economically motivated evacuations (but no rent controls), housing coupons, and so forth. In short, HLP issues in semi-legal spontaneous areas must be accompanied by strong but well-calibrated financial instruments to forge win-win deals on the ground, resolve disputes, and minimize negative impacts (inflation and secondary displacements). The issue of tenure will also have to be addressed with a critical review of the status of women. Women are now the main heads of households in many areas. While the percentage of women heading households has increased severalfold in Syria, the legal framework still favours the male next-of-kin when the male head of the household dies or disappears. The HLP issue will require negotiating some basic changes to the law in order to provide women with more equitable solutions in the case of inheritance. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The State of Syrian Cities 2016–2017 draws together contributions from various experts, researchers and field reporters. The following authors have contributed to different sections of the report: Samir Aita, Mohamad Diab, Giulia Guadagnoli, Omar Abdulaziz Hallaj, Nazi Heme, Nour Jazaerly, Rana Khalaf, Sana Kikhia, Ayman Menem, Rand Sabbagh and Roua Al Taweel. In addition to these authors, other scholars and practitioners provided valuable support to the reporting process. These include Rania Assassa, Kais Al-Dairi, Tobias Ehret, Razan Ghazzawi, Mohamad Haj Omar Albathish, Farah Hwijeh, Damien Jusselme, Ryo Kato, Kholoud Mansour, Waseem Massas and Burkhard von Rabenau. Disclaimer The State of Syrian Cities 2016–2017 is a preliminary document not intended for publication, but rather to be used as input for consultation between stakeholders. It is a working document that can be used to trigger dialogue for an inclusive reporting process and for knowledge sharing. No liability can be held against the organizations promoting this reporting process if this report is used for an alternative purpose from which it is intended. The information and views set out in this report are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the official opinion of the European Union. Neither the European Union institutions and bodies nor any person acting on their behalf may be held responsible for the use which may be made of the information contained herein.
RECLAIMING HOME The struggle for socially just housing, land and property rights in Syria,Iraq and Libya, 2019
How the Deprivation of Land Ownership Makes Minority Groups more Vulnerable: An Examination of the Case of Yazidis in Iraq, The analysis presented in this paper is based on 22 semi-structured interviews, a comprehensive review of relevant secondary literature and information drawn from official documents such as government policies, legal texts, and national and international reports. The purposive sample of interviewees was selected in consultation with Yazidi activists.9 Aside from one participant, research involved only Yazidis who are aware of the status of HLP in Sinjar district. Interviewees included ordinary people, activists, public officials, lawyers and community leaders living either in Sinjar district or Duhok governorate. The reality of HLP in Sinjar is investigated from the Yazidis’ perspective. Yazidi participation provided relevant insights into the status of HLP there as well as their views on HLP violations and the post-2003 restitution efforts. It was difficult fo...
Law No. 10: Property Rights Violations in Syria Against Sustainable Solutions for Returnees
2019
This paper was presented at the 5th Lemkin Reunion, held in March 2019 and organized by the Shattuck Center at the School of Public Policy, Central European University in Budapest. Each year the Shattuck Center hosts the Lemkin Reunion, a gathering named in honor of Raphael Lemkin, the Polish lawyer who lost his family in the Holocaust and first coined the word genocide. He campaigned tirelessly during his life to ensure that the crime of genocide was enshrined in international law. The Lemkin Reunion gathers policymakers involved in responding to atrocity crimes and assess the lessons they learned. Recent reports of Syrian refugees returning to their home country after several years of civil war raise important issues, one of which being the status of their properties in the country. A recently enacted law called Law No. 10 of 2018 – ostensibly part of benign reconstruction legislation – has proven to be problematic for the millions of Syrians who are refugees, internally displaced or living abroad. This is happening on a scale that affects conflict settlement and the emerging post-war social order, as it shapes the framework for reconstruction and reintegration into the economy and social life. Although several articles have addressed the potential problems raised by this law, there are no analyses that explicitly tackle Law no. 10 from a rule-of-law perspective. In this paper, I argue that Law No. 10 will permanently exclude displaced residents especially from having a voice in reconstruction in their home areas. In the first instance, the paper expounds on the different historical and socio-political aspects of the issue, which is necessary for a better understanding of the current state of affairs. The paper then analyses the specific parts of Law No. 10 that provide grounds for rule of law violations in its practice. In the third section, based on the aforementioned analysis, I propose a series of measures – consistent with international standards and best practices – that must be taken in order to effectively guarantee property rights for returnees and contribute to an equitable reconstruction process, both in the immediate term (e.g. including returnee property rights in peace talks) and in the longer term (e.g. establishing an independent adjudication body). To view this paper as published on the Aleppo Project website, click here: https://www.thealeppoproject.com/papers/law-no-10-property-rights-violations-in-syria-against-sustainable-solutions-for-returnees/
2019
This report intends to establish a first approach for an urban recovery framework for post-conflict housing in Syria. This recovery framework has been established taking into account the country past experience in housing construction, as well the facts on the ground during the conflict, including the massive damages and destructions and the unprecedent flow of displacement and refugees. It tries to imbed the housing reconstruction in its physical, economic, financial, social, legal, administrative, governance and political-economy environment. Special focus is made on the human rights and financial considerations. The final objectives of this framework approach is to create a public debate, mainly amongst Syrians, and to foster research on the major issues involved.
The Syrian civil war has seen the weaponization of its land and property rights system by the primary combatant groups in the country. The government is the most robust in its use of the tenure system to locate, target, destroy, confiscate, cleanse, and gain revenue by way of the institutions and attributes comprising the system. Based on fieldwork with Syrian refugees in Lebanon, Jordan, and Turkey, this article describes seven ways the Syrian government is currently using the land and property rights system in its military-on-civilian engagements. While the objective of such use is presumably to permanently prevail over opposition civilian constituencies, the article describes how this actually creates evidence usable for effective restitution of lands and properties subsequent to the war. Introduction The ongoing civil war in Syria has emerged as a laboratory of new weapons used by the various sides in the conflict. While a number of these are purely kinetic-involving both crude and innovative forms of firepower, executions, troop movements and strategies-others take advantage of society based structures and institutions which facilitate targeting specific constituencies within the civilian population and then become attached to kinetic objectives. Statutory land and property rights systems are particularly vulnerable to being used in this way, with significant effect and lasting repercussions. While the Syrian government is not the first to use aspects of land and property rights systems in the pursuit of military objectives, it is the most current, egregious and sophisticated. This paper describes how the statutory land and property rights system has become an important weapon in the Syrian conflict with a number of uses, but with the ultimate counterinsur-gency strategic objective of spatially and permanently prevailing over the insurgency and its civilian constituencies. Permanently ridding certain landscapes of opposition supporters and replacing these with pro-regime inhabitants is just as important to the overall objective of 'prevailing' as is military victory over insurgent combatants for the Syrian government.
Living with Quality: Strategies for Transferring Social Housing Development to After-war Syria
Conference: 4th International Conference of Contemporary Affairs in Architecture and Urbanism – Full book proceedings of ICCAUA2020, 20-21 May 2021, 2021
Obtaining a home in Syria has been an equivalent to a strategic goal around which the life of the Syrian citizen revolves. Housing was one of the problematic crises before the war, which accelerated due to the war. Moreover, this turned into a humanitarian disaster, and the situation has become more urgent and requires immediate treatment. The solution of this demolition is not limited to an easy rebuilding and needs a more sustainable and qualified policy in order to prevent to turn back to the existing crisis before the war. This paper focuses on finding an appropriate strategy to respond to the housing crisis in Syria in the light of successful implementations of social housing. In order to achieve that, after a literature review of the general context of social housing, the Singapore social housing experience has been analyzed. Considering the housing problems and implementations in Syria (before and after the war) in a comparative evaluation with the Singapore experience, some strategies have been suggested, along with discussing the transfer of this experience to the Syrian context. Although applying a social housing system in a country that has had a failed experiment is not an easy task, the study proposes a list of recommendations for developing a social housing strategy based on a clear legal framework which also provides a base for social housing. In addition to defining all the criteria related to social housing, such as the target groups, the type of housing, the available financing methods, and focusing on urban planning and architecture for the importance of their role in creating a peaceful coexistence in the conflicting societies.
Syria under Pinheiro: Reformulating Syrian Domestic Law for Decentralized Reconstruction
Brooklyn Journal of International Law, 2018
Recommended Citation: George Somi, Syria under Pinheiro: Reformulating Syrian Domestic Law for Decentralized Reconstruction, 43 Brook. J. Int'l L. 717 (2018). Available at: https://brooklynworks.brooklaw.edu/bjil/vol43/iss2/16 According to the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, since 2011, the Syrian conflict has generated roughly 5.4 million refugees, while approximately 6.5 million people are internally displaced within the country, making it the largest internally displaced population in the world. Rebuilding Syria’s infrastructure, homes, and businesses will be an immense task, with cost estimates ranging between 250–250–250–350 billion USD. The Syrian government and the international community have already started to contemplate postwar reconstruction and even wartime reconstruction, despite the ongoing fighting. This Note operates under the assumption that the Syrian government of President Bashar al-Assad will, at a minimum, remain in charge of at least what has been termed “Useful Syria.” Furthermore, it recognizes that reconstruction is a process that begins during war and that the notion that Syria will be able to implement a grand, centralized reconstruction project after the war’s cessation is an unrealistic paradigm. It is imperative, then, that policymakers, negotiators, and lawmakers representing Syria’s warring parties debate and negotiate existing Syrian domestic law, which appears likely to persist in some form, in order to anticipate and accommodate the rights of displaced Syrians and Syrian refugees. A proper investigation of the obstacles to Syrian refugees’ achievement of appropriate post-conflict relief and housing restitution necessitates an understanding of the flaws in Housing, Land, and Property rights in prewar Syria. Rapid urbanization and the proliferation of informal housing spurred by neoliberal government policies led to massive discontent in the country. This Note analyzes the Principles on Housing and Property Restitution for Refugees and Displaced Persons (“Pinheiro Principles”) and argues that while they provide valuable contributions to an increased understanding of the needs of post-conflict societies, room may be allotted to tailor a more context-specific approach to remedying the rights of displaced Syrian persons and refugees. This Note proceeds to analyze and prescribe amendments and additions to existing Syrian domestic law so that it better conforms to the end goals of the Pinheiro Principles. Syria’s Local Administrative Law, Legislative Decree Law 107, if amended to democratize the institution of the Syrian governorship, could be an effective starting point that presents decentralization as a pivotal tool to empower sustainable reconstruction efforts for refugees and displaced persons. Its incorporation, alongside an amended version of Syria’s Public-Private Partnership Law, Legislative Decree Law 5, could safeguard against abuses directed against refugees’ and displaced persons’ rights under the Pinheiro Principles, strengthen ordinary Syrians’ voices in the deliberations concerning their country’s bottom-up reconstruction, and enhance and strengthen demoralized and underdeveloped local Syrian institutions.
Housing, Land and Property in Conflict and Displacement Settings
Deusto Journal of Human Rights, 2017
Housing and land are the main things that displaced persons lose when they are forced to leave their places of origin. Once peace and security has been restored in the country, IDPs often find it difficult to reclaim their homes and lands that have been either destroyed or occupied by others. This is a common feature in almost all post-conflict situations. And it is a major obstacle to the establishment of other durable solutions. The tensions in property disputes pose a serious threat to post-conflict stabilisation. This article discusses the importance of issues relating to housing, land and property throughout the displacement cycle. Violations of the rights to housing, land and property are at the same time, both cause and consequence of displacement. The loss of shelter and soil brings new vulnerabilities for displaced populations that may jeopardize their health and physical safety and limit their opportunities to earn a living. The restitution of housing and property is also a key element to achieving durable solutions. The existence of effective mechanisms for conflict resolution plays an important role in consolidating peace. This paper will examine specific challenges to address land disputes in the context of informal occupation of land and will provide an overview of how humanitarian actors address this issue.
Land, Property and the Challenge of Return for Iraq's Displaced
The crisis of displacement in Iraq has created an array of challenges related to land and property that must be addressed if return is to be sustainable. This report analyzes the nature of these land and property issues and the measures thus far taken by the Iraqi government to address them. It concludes with recommendations on how these policies can be improved and broadened to have a more durable impact. The report draws on the extensive efforts of both the United States Institute of Peace and the International Organization for Migration (IOM) to assist the Iraqi government in the design of displacement-related land and property policies, including a July 2008 conference in Amman sponsored by the Institute and the World Bank and a November 2008 conference in Baghdad sponsored by the Institute, IOM, and the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR)