Альтернативный доклад “О нарушении прав граждан на достаточное жилье в г. ОШ” в Комитете ООН по социальным, экономическим, культурным правам, июнь 2015г.
NGO Submission to the United Nations Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights on Kyrgyzstan
by “International Center Interbilim – Osh”
55th session of the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights
01-19 June 2015
Right to adequate housing (Article 11)
Dear members of the Committee! We would like to draw your attention to the violation of the rights of citizens of the Kyrgyz Republic to adequate housing enshrined in Article 11 of the ICESCR, to the infringement of fundamental principles regarding evictions and displacement for reasons of development (Recommendation of the Special Rapporteur on adequate housing as a component of the right to an adequate standard of living (A / HRC / 4/18)).
Summary of the situation:
In 2010, ethnic conflicts occurred between persons of the titular ethnicity – Kyrgyz and ethnic minorities – Uzbeks in the city of Osh (Kyrgyzstan). Houses of 570 families, mainly belonging to ethnic minorities, were burnt down. During 2010-2012, thanks to international aid, all of the households were restored.
Despite this, in 2012-13, the local authorities launched a campaign for demolition and seizure (purchase) of 22 households belonging to ethnic minorities (132 people). The reason for the seizure was the decision of local council deputies, and the General Layout Scheme of the City of Osh, which provides for the expansion of the street for the public needs. The seizure and purchase were made at the wrong time of post-conflict ethnic hatred. This measure was not recommended by international guidelines, especially with regard to groups of people affected by violence during the conflict. Of the 22 households affected by the demolition, two were previously reconstructed by the State Directorate for Reconstruction and Development, and two households lost a family member.
That is “victims” of the tragedy later became “victims of eviction” which put them in a more marginal position. Thus, the “two-story” violence affected 16 family members and gave them an even greater conviction of discrimination on ethnic grounds.
The price paid for the property was less than the amount of damage, land provided for new housing was far from being equal to areas where victims had lived previously. This fact is a forced eviction for development purposes. The authorities put pressure on people, with the aim of forcing them to sign a disadvantageous contract, meanwhile the June tragedy still stood up strongly in minds. Articles 2.2. and 3 on non-discrimination of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights imposes an additional obligation on governments to take appropriate measures in case of evictions to avoid any forms of discrimination. In this case, discrimination affected ethnic minorities, widows and single women (27 people), children under the age of 18 (38 people), and seniors (17 people). From 22 households affected by demolition: 2 2 houses were destroyed because of arson during June events, and restored by the State Directorate of reconstruction and development in 2011, and in 2012 notified of demolition. Three (3) houses during the June events have lost a family member, and advanced to this tragedy have been notified of the demolition of housing. That is the “victims of tragedy” become the “victims of eviction” making them at even more marginalized. So, “two-storey violence” were 16 family members, which gave them more confidence in their national discrimination.
The case with the seizure of households in Monuev street in Osh (household 22) has shown that some houses (9) did not have a proper registration by the owners of housings; this was the cause of reducing the amount of compensation and the reason for putting pressure on the residents to make them abandon litigation.
Analysis of the practice of seizure of house ownership in Osh City:
In the study of the practice of expropriation/seizure of housing on Monuev Street, which was carried out in 2012, a number of violations of national and international standards of protection of the rights of citizens to adequate housing were found. The purpose of this description of the practices, which occurred in the past years, is prevention of similar violations in subsequent actions of the authorities, associated with the seizure/buyout of individual housing for public needs.
1. The Management of municipal property of the Mayor’s Office of Osh City prepares an Agreement on transfer of land plots from private ownership into the municipal property, in which the conditions for buyout of seized property are not stipulated. Only the estimated value and purpose of the seizure are provided. Then, with each owner a contract is signed, which did not indicate the redemption value. This is a gross violation. Upon the appeal of victims, lawyers of the “IC Interbilim” PA could not challenge the Agreement, as it was unilaterally signed by the owners. This is a proof of coercion of victims by authorities to sign the Agreement, through the use of official position and the June 2010 events. If no agreement is reached, a judicial procedure for dispute resolution is applied. In practice, in the process of reconstruction of Monuev Street in 2012, there are no cases of appeal to a court on controversial issues of seizure and compensation; the above situation deprived the owners of such opportunity. Besides, local legislation is silent on the responsibility of the parties in the event of default under the Agreement. City Administration of State Registration should carry out the registration of concluded agreements on the transfer of land plots and other objects to municipal ownership, which fall into the zone of demolition between the Management of municipal property and the owner of the seized object, which was not done. 
2. Compensation is provided to all owners, and land plots for the construction of new housing were allocated. However, the proposed redemption value by the Mayor’s Office of Osh City was low; residents were not able to buy a new home equivalent to the seized housing. Many have spent their own money to build a house. When determining the redemption price, damages caused to the owner in connection with the termination of the right to a land plot until the acquisition of new housing were not included, as well as losses associated with early termination of obligations to third parties, including the loss of economic benefits if the housing is used for commercial purposes.
3. Without issuing the signed Agreement to owners of seized land plots, an authorized body began demolition of housing, and therefore many objects were demolished for which no Agreement was provided. There is no timeline for issuing instructions to the population of seizure/buyout of land plots, and there is no timeline between the announcement of the buyout and the actual buyout which is specified in the Agreement. Timing and sequence of actions of seizure are not regulated by any laws of the Kyrgyz Republic.
4. When seizing the land plot of individual housing, if only a portion of the land plot is subject to seizure, the local authority with the owner shall resolve the issue of the total or partial seizure of the area of the land plot, because the issue is about buyout of the whole unit. In practice of seizure of land on plots on Monuev Street, residents were denied the right to decide on the partial or totality of the seized land; they were simply told the result. An exemption of land occurred in 5 homeowners, 17 homes pulled down, and seized part of the land. In the case of partial taking, the part that remained in private ownership subsequently has lost its value and feasibility of use in the future. When seizing a part of the area of land plot, the State Registration shall divide ownership to individual units, and then seize a part separately. That does not allow definition of the boundary of the seized land plot, and inclusions of the same in the Agreement. The Mayor’s Office was supposed to make a separate decision on each land plot for each individual. Bodies of the municipal administration of Osh city, according to the contract between the city and the owner were in assisting in the free registration of the remainder of the plot (not removed). But, in practice this does not happen. Residents had to bear the loss twice. First: spent money for the division of the land into two units, second time: for making documents of contract of sale of seized land. That is originally drawn up by agreement between the city and the population was only part of the compensation payments, and on the basis of which it would be impossible to operate in State Register under the purchase and sale. In general, each of the 17 owners spent $ 200 for processing of documents.
5. Today, while the owner himself will not go to the State Register for register his land plot (not removed) representatives of the authorities will not do anything. After the road has built, problems with registration left for the owner. On the other hand, even after legal separation of the land into two parts, the bought part of the land of the city is not properly registered and is not on the balance of the City Hall. Actually all the land seized by the City hall are still by the owners, in addition to those who legally registered buy and sale documents with the City hall (10 households:sold and making business). 12 plots of land already seized by the City Hall and is not legally registered in the State register as purchase and sales are still is belongs to owners which can create problems in tax payments.
6. There are no rules for the provision of temporary housing: no provisions of norms for women, children, the disabled and the elderly separately, and none of this is addressed in the Agreements. The area, where new land plots were provided to all affected residents do not meet the requirements of accessibility for vulnerable groups, as well as access to employment, health care, schools, child care institutions and other social services, the access to which victims had at their former place of residence. In the land provided by the City Hall for the construction for all 22 owners lives only one family. It speaks of not equivalence and attractiveness of bought land.
7. Written Agreements do not indicate promises of the Mayor’s Office of Osh City, that affected people will receive architectural permits for the construction of new housing in addition to a state certificate on land plot without any charge, as well as assistance in reshaping the land plot to commercial uses. For getting permission documents for new housing architector helped to prepare the documents by own means. But architecture did not help to get permission documents for business objects. Therefor 7 owners were forced to spend $700. Architecture in the rest of the land prohibited to build capital construction and gave permission the construction of light weight constructions. However, this is in the violation of local and international standards for the rights of owner. The owner has right to build whatever he wants, the government bodies must not restrict the owner’s right of choice between capital and lightweight construction.
8.There is also a contradiction of paragraph 1 of article 44 and article 47 of the land Code, which stipulated that “buildings and structures cannot be separated from the right to the land plot, which is mounted behind the building and construction, and the same time found that “If the right to land (i.e when the seizure of the land for public and Government use) the fate of the remaining bulifings on land is determined by its owner”. That is, if the Government buys land, then must redeem all that it be, but another rule might allow the Government to by land, but say to owner “can take all you buildings and not to pay any compensation for building”. In case of removal of 22- householdes (132 people) there was no practice does not compensate for the structure, but it became the subject of pressure on owner and manipulated during negotiating the redemption value, and conclusion of contracts.
9. According to international standards, dispossession should not be carried out in inclement weather, at night, during festivals or religious holidays, prior to elections, during school exams, or directly before them. However, in the case of dispossession on Monuev Street, seizure was carried out in August, close to the opening of school time and the cold autumn season.
Paragraph 1 of Article 11 of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, states that: “The States Parties to the present Covenant recognize the right of everyone to an adequate standard of living for himself and his family, including adequate food, clothing and housing, and to the continuous improvement of living conditions. The States Parties will take appropriate steps to ensure the realization of this right, recognizing to this effect the essential importance of international co-operation based on free consent.” By ratifying the Covenant, the State – the Kyrgyz Republic – undertook the obligation to ensure the implementation of housing rights and the legal right to possession. We believe that the Government of the Kyrgyz Republic has not fully complied with these obligations. The Kyrgyz Republic has adopted no specific legislative act. The absence of withdrawal/redemption of private housing for Government/municipal needs, and unclear procedures for exemption limits the nationals to fully assert their right to housing.
Residents of Monuev Street repeatedly appealed to the Government of the Kyrgyz Republic, to the Parliament and to the Office of the Ombudsman. However, no positive response was received from the higher authorities; all appeals and all complaints were forwarded for execution to local authorities.
Legal analysis of the compliance of national legislation with international standards revealed the following:
When considering the question of who has the right to decide on the seizure of a land plot, who has the right to apply to court for buyout of immovable property in connection with the seizure of a land plot, as well as who is competent to proceed with the seizure of the land plot, legislation of the Kyrgyz Republic states the following: compulsory seizure may be exercised for public or municipal needs by a so-called “competent authority.” According to Article 1 of the Land Code, “authorized state body is the authority referred to in Articles 13-17, 20, 21 of the Land Code of the Kyrgyz Republic.” These include: executive and administrative body of local self-government of county, township, city (Mayor’s Office, City Council), district and regional state administration, local councils, specially authorized bodies, the Government of the Kyrgyz Republic and the Parliament of the Kyrgyz Republic. However, the Land Code of the Kyrgyz Republic does not specifically define the body that has the right to decide on the seizure of a land plot. Paragraph 11 of Article 20 of the Land Code of the Kyrgyz Republic determines that the order of seizure (buyout) of land plots for state and public needs is established by the Government of the Kyrgyz Republic. The developed Rules for land use and development, taken under local law-making, do not regulate the mechanism of seizure of land plots as well.
To this date, the Government of the Kyrgyz Republic has not adopted a normative legal act which would define the procedure (mechanism) of seizure of land plots for state and public needs, and that’s why the law has not yet determined which authority shall be entitled to make a decision on seizure of a land plot, and what authority should proceed with the seizure of a land plot, i.e., to execute the decision of the authorized body on seizure of a land plot. The absence of normative legal acts, regulating all procedural and substantive issues of seizure of land plots and construction for state and public needs, leaves controversial issues regarding the legitimate exercise of seizure.
1. Articles 65-68 of the Land Code and the provisions of the Civil, Housing Codes of the Kyrgyz Republic, which govern the seizure of land plots and demolition of construction for state and public needs, do not regulate issues of notification of citizens and legal entities whose land is planned to be seized for state and public needs. Thus, the existing legislation does not define the rules for written notification of each owner/user of immovable property, for the timing of the notification, for public hearing of the impending seizure of land plots and/or demolition of premises, for the right of interested persons to submit for consideration of alternative options, as required by the above standards.
2. There is also a conflict with a provision of paragraph 1 of Article 44 and 47 of the Land Code of the Kyrgyz Republic, which states that “the building and construction is inseparable from the right to the land plot designated for these buildings and constructions” and at the same time states that “at the termination of a right to a land plot (i.e., seizure of a land plot for public and state needs) the fate of buildings and constructions, remaining on the land plot, is determined by its owner.” It means that, if the State buys the land plot, it must buy everything that is on the land plot, but another rule may allow the State to buy only the land plot, but can tell the owner “you can take with you the construction” and not to pay compensation for the construction. On the 22 occasions of seizures (132 people), there was no practice of compensation for the constructions, but it became the subject of pressure on the owner and manipulation when negotiating the buyout value and concluding Agreements.
3. Article 58 of the Law “On Local Self-Government” and paragraph 2 of Article 36 of the Law “On Urban Construction and Architecture” provide that in matters of local significance, state bodies and local self-government authorities are required to hold public hearings and other forms of expression by members of the local community, in order to take into account the views of the population in the area. The state bodies and local self-government authorities are required to inform the population about the date and time of the public hearing, not less than 2 months before the date of the hearing, through the media with placement of draft master plans, plans of detailed planning of districts, neighborhoods on the official website of these bodies and in a public place of their office buildings. However, as the law enforcement practice in Osh City shows, these rules are not implemented by local self-governments fully. Besides, the format of public hearings and the procedure for making and considering proposals of citizens is not defined, making the whole process non-transparent, and limiting the access of interested citizens to decision-making on urban issues.
4. Legislation of the Kyrgyz Republic does not contain provisions that regulate what measures public authorities need to take before, during and after the eviction, in accordance with the standards listed above.
Thus, it can be argued that although the legislation of the Kyrgyz Republic contains the basic principles of seizure of property, there is a legal gap in terms of procedural guarantees of respect for human rights, property rights, and other economic, social and cultural rights, during compulsory seizure of immovable property and forced displacement as a result of this.
It should also be noted that state authorities, in practice, as a rule, are not governed by international law but are rather governed by the laws, regulations and provisions adopted at the national level, sometimes interpreting conflicting and insufficient rules in their sole discretion. The Constitutional rule, which establishes that international treaties to which the Kyrgyz Republic is a party are an integral part of the legislation of the Kyrgyz Republic and take precedence and direct effect on the territory of the Kyrgyz Republic, remains declarative only.
It seems that at the present time, in connection with the development and expansion of settlements, internal migration (outflow of rural residents to the city) and the activation of urban construction in the cities of the Kyrgyz Republic, there is a need to adopt a law regulating transparent and fair procedures for ensuring the protection of property rights, participation of citizens in decision-making on urban actions affecting their interests, as well as the protection of other economic, social and cultural rights in case of seizure of their property.
Despite the appeal of local NGOs to local authorities and the Ombudsman’s Office to suspend such practices, in 2014-2015 demolition and seizure of houses on another street is planned: Osh Street, where people of ethnic minorities live – 33 households (267 people). These houses function as retail outlets, which threatens deprivation of livelihood. National laws do not regulate cases where housing, land and non-residential premises are the only source of the livelihood of citizens being evacuated. This is the second case of the compulsory seizure that may be viewed as a systematic demolition of “undesirable citizens” and “political opponents.”
By acceding to the International Convention on the Elimination of all forms of racial discrimination from March 7, 1966 year, the Kyrgyz Republic has undertaken to prohibited and to eliminate racial discrimination in all its forms and to guarantee the right of everyone to equality befor the law, without distinction as to race, color of skin, national and ethnic origin, notably in the enjoyment of the following rights:
The right to own property alone as well as in association with others;
The right to housing;
The right to public health, medical care, social security and social services;
The right of access to any place or services intended for use by the general public, such as transport, hotels, restaurants, cafes, theatres and parks;
The right to equal treatment before the tribunals and all other organs administering justice.
The measures taken by the Mayor’s Office of Osh City and NGOs in order to prevent violations of international and national standards
1. Local NGOs of the Osh branch of “IC Interbilim” PA helped to represent interests of members of the population to the higher authorities. On behalf of the local community, a number of letters were sent to the Government of the Kyrgyz Republic, to the Ombudsman’s Office and the Jogorku Kenesh of the Kyrgyz Republic. The Mayor’s Office established a commission on the review of the amount of compensation, which included local NGOs and community members of Monuev Street. As a result of repeated negotiations, an agreement was reached to increase the amount of compensation for land plots by two-fold. But for construction of new housing, no increase was made available due to the lack of a title certificate and property documents certifying rights to new housing.
2. The basis for the seizure is the decision of the local council with reference to the Master Plan of the development of Osh City, which citizens have not yet seen. On July 2014, the President of the Kyrgyz Republic signed a document about requiring Master Plans to be posted in a public place, but without reflection of topographic bases and their origin. A mock-up of the central part of the Master Plan of Osh City is hung in the architecture building of Osh City, but it is not possible to see the presence of Osh and Monuev streets.
3. A round table was held with the population, whose homes were to be demolished, for the joint discussion of procedures of seizure/buyout of individual housing. Some requests of the public and NGOs were implemented by the local authority.
4. When reconstructing the Monuev Street, in the summer of 2012, the authorities of Osh City offered several payment options to choose from for the seizure of land plots and demolition of objects: payment of compensation in monetary terms for the building/construction (housing) and the provision of land in the On-Adyr region for the construction of individual houses. In this case, if in one house building several families lived; each family was offered a plot of land of 5 acres, which are not included in the calculation of compensation. There is a second option for a home, which is municipal property, in other parts of Osh City. Third is a provision of assistance when needed in the committee of urban construction of Osh City when reshaping the remaining part of the land plots on the Monuev Street from residential to commercial ones.
5. A Headquarter was established on the site of seizure of private housing, for feedback from the public on their issues. Lawyers of “IC Interbilim” PA were also present in the area of the seizure for legal consultation and support of the population in the exercise of a seizure/buyout.
6. Transparency to access of information is provided; all consent documents regarding seizure/buyout and the responsibility of municipal institutions were placed in the form of handouts at the Headquarters. On the recommendation of the “IC Interbilim” PA, a municipal institution of the Mayor’s Office provided to all residents written information about the calculation of the compensation for land.
7. The authorities and their representatives did not require or forcefully evicted persons to demolish their own housing or other constructions. Persons, upon the request to the Mayor’s Office in Osh City, were given the opportunity to take down their own house in order to facilitate the rescue of their property and building materials.
8. A working group for the development of the Regulation “On the order of demolition and seizure of property for municipal needs” was established, that would help regulate the issues of demolition and seizure in Osh City and to prevent the practice of offenses in the future. A total of 2 round tables were held to discuss the draft Regulations. The project was sent to the Ministry of Justice for consideration. However, the Ministry of Justice had given a negative opinion referring to the norm of the Land Code, according to which the right to develop the order of the demolition and seizure of property is vested in the Government of the Kyrgyz Republic.  Thus, the local authority made an attempt to control the gaps of the Law of the Kyrgyz Republic. The Osh branch of “IC Interbilim” PA made a written appeal to the Government of the Kyrgyz Republic on the implementation of obligations on the development of a separate Regulation, which regulates the order, forms and procedures of the demolition and seizure of individual housing. However, this appeal was refused, with reference to the fact that in local legislation this norm has been specified and there is no need for additional documents.
The State should adopt separate normative legal acts for the regulation of the issue of lack of title certificate and certifying documents. The UN Special Rapporteur recommends that all countries “take measures of legal security of tenure to all persons, households and communities that do not currently have such guarantees, including all those who do not have formal titles to housing and land”… (paragraph 25 of the Basic Principles and Guidelines (А/HRC/4/18), in order to ensure the most effective legal remedies against the practice of forced eviction of all persons under the jurisdiction of that State.
To conduct monitoring of the situation of families subject to involuntary resettlement, on the issue of their right to live in decent conditions. To organize a meeting of the Government of the Kyrgyz Republic with people subject to forced resettlement for the purpose of feedback on the conditions of their residence in the newly resettled residence. To create conditions for living of persons according to the requirements of adequate housing. To discus at that meeting problems related to lands as a retirement/redeemed for municipal needs, and part of the land left for the owner for future reference.
is consistent with the guidelines and internationally recognized principles of human rights. To develop and implement mechanisms for the implementation of “General guidelines of humanitarian law for compensation of loss of property and revenues to the population.”
To eliminate the practice of seizure and redemption of individual housing in the Kyrgyz Republic before the adoption of a special document by the Government of the Kyrgyz Republic regulating standards and procedures for seizure and buyout of land plots and housing property. To examine the situation in Osh City on the upcoming seizure of households on Osh Street (32 families) and to take measures to prevent violations of national and international standards of seizure of property.
To bring into line the Land Code and other normative legal acts governing the seizure of individual housing. To create a working group to develop a bylaw on procedures of seizure and buyout of individual housing for state and public needs, with the involvement of the public in the working group. To adopt a bylaw at the level of the Government of the Kyrgyz Republic and provide mechanisms for its implementation.
In the improvement of local legislation to consider the following standards:
– to establish requirements for the content and support of the application for seizure of land plots for state or public needs, as well as the composition and the content of the documents attached thereto;
– to establish a procedure for reviewing the application of the seizure of land plots for state or public needs, as well as the timeframe for a decision on seizure of land plots, the grounds for refusal of an application for seizure of land plots for state and public use needs;
– create conditions the population’s access to justice in case of refusal of residents to sell their property, provide free legal consultation and legal support in court;
– to determine the order of identification of the owners of immovable property to be seized, if it does not contain information in the Unified State Register of rights to immovable property, or copies of legal documents are not provided. This procedure should be reduced to the identification of persons through the publication of reports in the media about the upcoming seizure and setting the period during which such persons shall be entitled to apply if they have the right to the property being seized, that must be taken into account when seizing land plots for state and public needs;
– take into consideration the rule in legislation of the Kyrgyz Republic, as well as in the formulation of the withdrawal and the part of housing, seizures are not whole, and part of the land;
– to determine the order of notification of owners, landowners, land users and tenants of land plots on the upcoming seizure of land plots for state and public needs through publication in the media and by sending notifications to the address of possessors of a right, available in the data base of state immovable property, and in case of seizures of residential premises – and to addresses of these housing;
– persons carrying out the seizure, to notify in advance the individuals whose rights to the land plots are subject to termination, about the terms and conditions of termination of rights to land plots, and the period of notice of the impending seizure for state and public needs. This obligation must be fulfilled by submitting the draft Agreement on buyout of seized immovable property – the agreement, in relation to the buyout of property which combines the features of a sale-purchase agreement and an agreement on remedies as a result of the seizure of the land plot and constructions located on it, as well as losses associated with relocation and resettlement of members of the family at the new location. To amend the legislation involve the resposibilty of the parties in the event of failure to comply with an obligation according the contract.
– to prepare a Model Agreement between the government, local authorities and owners in cases of demolition and seizure of property. The Agreement should specify in what time frame payments should be made on the purchase of a land plot and constructions located on it, as well as the time within which actual seizure of the land plot is realized; in what time frame a seized land plot should be released.
– to secure the right of the owner of a seized residential house to require the equivalent land and in lieu of housing of the seized property, which is the only shelter of the owner of the seized property;
– to secure in the legislation that in assessing the damage and losses, the commercial losses shall be taken into account, as well as the loss of the equipment, inventory, livestock, land, trees/crops, and lost/decreased wages/income.
– to remove the contradictions in article 44 and 47 of the Land Code and the explanation of the buildings located on the seizured land;
– in development and adoption the regulation of the Government of the Kyrgyz Republicon thr procedure of seizure and destruction of private housing indicated responcibility among government agencies, as well as between municipalities and organizational units of individual institutions, who may be involved in the procedure of seizureand demolition (Architecture, State Register, municipality and etc.)
The issues of seizure of land for state and public needs should be addressed in a separate normative legal act that would specifically regulate all matters related to the seizure of land plots and buildings/construction on them, in order that the established procedure which guarantees the protection of property rights from arbitrary seizure and is consistent with the principles of protection under international standards on the right to adequate housing.
To organize public hearings in Osh City to discuss the Master Plan and further urban construction.
To develop and implement mechanisms to protect certain groups of the population in case of inconsistency between the local and international laws. Unsubscribe adoption of the law on foreign agents, restrict freedom of assemblies and the right to protect interests of vulnerable people. In adopting this Law will be confined the NGO’s activity that provide free consultation for people that badly affected the protection of citizens’ rights to edequate housing, which os now being implemented in Kyrgyzstan poorly.
Pending the appeal of local NGOs to local authorities and the Ombudsman’s Office, to suspend in the 2015-2017 planned demolition and seizure of other households on Osh street, where persons of ethnic minorities live – 33 households (267 people). These houses function as retail outlets, which threatens deprivation of livelihood to these persons.
This is the second case of compulsory seizure that can be seen as a systematic removal of “undesirable citizens” and “political opponents.” We ask the Committee for assistance in the development and implementation of mechanisms in the Kyrgyz Republic of implementation of international norms and standards for the implementation of citizens’ rights to adequate housing, namely, in matters of individual seizures of property, prevention of violations of discrimination against certain persons and other vulnerable groups of people.
 Article 69. Land code of the Kyrgyz Republic dated June 2, 1999, N 45
 The Kyrgyz Republic acceded to the International Covenant on economic, social and cultural rights of December 16, 1966 year in 1994 year (order) of the Jogorku Keneshdated January 12, 1994 N 1406-XII.
 The Kyrgyz Republic acceded to the International Convention on the Elimination of all forms of racial discrimination from March 7, 1966, the law of the KR dated July 26, 1996 N 48.
 Law of the Kyrgyz Republic “On amendments to the Law of the Kyrgyz Republic “On Urban Construction and Architecture of the Kyrgyz Republic”. №115, dated July 7, 2014.
Article 11, paragraph 20. Land code of the Kyrgyz Republic dated June 2, 1999, N 45