Editorial: Respecting the rights of 'Sodom and Gomorrah'

Once more, the country is faced with another debate and policy decision aimed at evicting residents of Sodom and Gomorrah, a slum within the larger Agbogboloshie area.

This newspaper recalls that some six years ago the issue of eviction came up after a High Court ruled that the residents should be thrown out. But good sense prevailed after civil society organizations argued strongly that it would be inhumane to make thousands of people homeless, without first providing alternative accommodation for them.

From that time, this newspaper had expected that government would have made provision and moved them to the new site.

The latest violence at the densely populated slum has rightly triggered another round of plans to evict them. As in the past, two human rights groups Amnesty International-Ghana (AI) and the Centre for Housing Rights and Evictions (COHRE) have petitioned President John Evans Atta Mills to intervene and halt the eviction until alternative settlements are provided.

This newspaper shares in the concerns of the two human rights bodies, especially when a huge number of more than 40,000 people are involved. Of course there are those people out there who feel that government is not enjoined to resettle the residents of Sodom and Gomorrah. Such people need a rethink because when over 40,000 people are displaced and they have no place to lay their heads, even those of us living in walled houses cannot escape the consequences.

We do not have qualms with the position taken by the government that the 40,000 odd people, most of whom are suspected criminals pose some kind of risk to national security, given the recent clashes which left four people dead. That notwithstanding, we wish to draw the attention of the government to its avowed commitment to slum upgrading as spelt out in page 85 of its 2008 Manifesto titled, A better Ghana. Investing in People, Jobs and the Economy. It states that: Slum existence is the result of rural-urban migration, limited supply of land and regulatory frameworks that fail to address the needs of the urban poor. The NDC, as a party with strong support in slums and in sprawling shanty towns, including the "Zongos," will adopt an "upgrading-in- place" approach consisting of improving the existing infrastructure and facilities up to satisfactory standards including addressing issues relating to tenure. This will minimise destruction of the social and economic lives of the communities and retain community networks and the social capital on which they endure..." Has the government too soon changed its promise to upgrade slums?

Besides, we respectfully remind the government of Ghana that according to Article 11 of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR), as it is interpreted in General Comment No 7 of 1997, for forced evictions or relocations to be considered as lawful, they may only occur in very exceptional circumstances and all feasible alternatives must be explored. If and only if such exceptional circumstances exist and there are no feasible alternatives, can evictions be deemed justified."

Regardless of whether the evictions are justified, affected persons must have access to appropriate procedural protection and due process must follow. The Government of Ghana is a party to the ICESCR and as such, it is bound to respect, protect and fulfil its provisions at all levels of government.

UN Basic Principles and Guidelines on Development-Based Evictions and Displacement require that States must ensure that evictions only occur in exceptional circumstances, and must give priority to exploring strategies that minimize displacement. At the heart of Sodom and Gomorrah crisis is the failure of Ghana's housing policy, which has left millions of Ghanaians, especially urban dwellers sleeping on the streets.

If the eviction were to proceed without due regard to internationally accepted guidelines or the commitment in the 2008 Manifesto, a vicious cycle of forced evictions would ensue with poor people being the repeated losers. Evicting residents of Old Fadama without adequate alternative accommodation would force them to set up informally elsewhere and all of us will be at the receiving end.