El Ayoubi and El Azouan Azouz v. Spain, Views adopted by the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, No. 54/2018

Nature of the Case

In this case, the United Nations Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (the Committee) found Spain (the State) had violated Article 11 (1) of the Covenant and Article 3 (1) of the Optional Protocol by evicting Fátima El Ayoubi and Mohamed El Azouan Azouz from their home, despite having no adequate alternative housing. This adoption was accompanied by initial interim measures to stay the eviction order, recommendations specific to the authors and their children, and general recommendations to the State for guarantees of non-repetition and obligations according to the Covenant and the Optional Protocol affirming that their right to adequate housing had been violated because the Spanish court had failed to conduct a proportionality assessment of the eviction.

Enforcement of the Decision and Outcomes

The Committee acknowledged that Spain had adopted new legislation since the original filing of the complaint, and that “this legislation could prevent violations of the right to housing” seen in El Ayoubi and El Azouan Azouz.

Significance of the Case

The decision provides an application of the Committee’s case law on the proportionality test, and an affirmation of State obligations to ensure adequate alternative housing in eviction cases, as well as work to redress structural causes relating to inequality and financialization underlying housing crises.

The decision in El Ayoubi represents that domestic decision-making processes influence an international body’s substantive review; the procedural mistakes made by the local governing authority in Spain were under review by the Committee, and as such, they recommended a change to the normative domestic framework. The Committee restates that any State party will be committing a violation of the right to adequate housing if it stipulates that a person who is occupying a property illegally must be evicted immediately irrespective of the circumstances in which the eviction order would be carried out.

The requirement of the proportionality assessment in the context of forced evictions is being standardized by the Committee as one of the safeguards for Article II of the Covenant. The proportionality assessment is developed with reference to the relevant precedents under “protection against forced eviction.” In this decision, the Committee reaffirms the norm that only in exceptional cases can evictions be justified, and only as long as they are carried out in observance of the principles of reasonableness and proportionality.

While it is specific to Spain’s legislative rules and guidelines, this case can serve as precedent for other individuals facing eviction due to illegal occupation, should the same standards be met. Importantly, the Committee reinforced the obligations that states have according to the Covenant and the Optional Protocol. Spain’s new legislation, as mentioned above, could also serve as a type of model law for states looking to ensure the guarantees of non-repetition. The decision has been cited in the Committee for the Elimination of Racial Discrimination as a reminder that the “interpretation and application by courts…of rules for access to social housing…must avoid perpetuating the systemic discrimination and stigmatization of those who live in poverty and who illegally occupy property out of necessity and in good faith.”

For their contributions, special thanks to ESCR-Net member: the Program on Human Rights and the Global Economy (PHRGE) at Northeastern University.