Tajikistan: Home Ownership on Shaky Ground
Residents forced to move out of homes scheduled for demolition say they are left without compensation.
Tajikistan: Home Ownership on Shaky Ground
Residents forced to move out of homes scheduled for demolition say they are left without compensation.
Human rights activists in Tajikistan say people evicted from their homes to make way for urban renewal are often short-changed, getting little or no compensation for the property they lose.
As municipal authorities around Tajikistan pursue redevelopment projects, houses are being torn down and the owners forced to move out.
In theory, such residents are entitled to monetary compensation or alternative housing from the state, but they frequently do not get it because their documentation is not in order. In the years since Tajikistan became independent in 1991, many people have migrated between regions and from the countryside to the towns.
Especially during the 1992-97 civil war, when a lot of homes were destroyed, people would squat on unoccupied land and build homes there. They could then attempt to gain legal rights of ownership after the fact, often through “property amnesties” offered by the government to record assets and bring people back into the tax system.
However, as the residents of Buni Hisorak, a suburban area of the capital Dushanbe, found, the documentation they had acquired was not regarded as sufficient proof of ownership to make them eligible for compensation when the city authorities decided to clear the area to make way for an amusement park.
At least 130 people in the Buni Hisorak area watched as their homes were demolished by bulldozers in mid-January. The city authorities said the 15 households involved were living in their properties unlawfully, and the bulldozers moved in after an appeals hearing upheld an earlier court ruling that they were not entitled to any compensation.
“They’ve ruined my entire wealth before my very eyes, in the space of a few hours,” said resident Manzura Rahimova. “I spent 20,000 [US] dollars to build this house, and I took out a bank loan that I haven’t repaid yet. And now none of it is left.”
Rahimova says she obtained a document of legal ownership after applying under a 2007 property amnesty in which people were allowed to own up to previously undeclared assets.
Her neighbour Tojibi Rahimova, who has lived in Buni Hisorak for more than 40 years, insists her home was rightfully hers, yet she has been denied compensation.
“I inherited the home from my husband’s parents,” shse said, watching with tears in her eyes as the bulldozers moved in. “There were 11 people living in my house till now. The authorities have given some families two or three apartments each, but they’ve thrown us out into the street.
Residents recall that when President Imomali Rahmon visited Buni Hisorak nearly a year ago, he instructed local officials to ensure everyone received new housing before their houses were torn down.
Nozilshoh Mahmudov, deputy local government chief in the city’s Sino district, says the families concerned simply seized the land and built homes on it, adding “For that reason, the city authorities are under no obligation to provide them with housing in exchange for what was demolished.
Mahmudov said the owners had been given fair warning and the demolitions only went ahead after the appeal was turned down.
Another 33 families did have the right documentation and were therefore given apartments in new multi-storey blocks elsewhere in Dushanbe.
Sergei Romanov, a lawyer with the Tajikistan Bureau for Human Rights and Rule of Law says his organisation is providing the evicted Buni Hisorak residents with free legal aid.
He points to a number of flaws in the way the evictions were carried out. For example, no one from the court was present during the demolitions, even though this is required by law when court orders are being enforced.
In addition, said Romanov, “The appeal from the owners of demolished homes was already under review by the Supreme Court, so they should have waited for a decision from this highest legal body…. I am certain that the high court will overturn the district court ruling that their demands are unlawful.”
However, Firuz Saidov, a social affairs expert, is sceptical that residents really obtained full legal ownership rights because this would have needed to be certified by town surveyors, at a time when Buni Hisorak did not exist on any formal plan of the city.
“They probably do have documents issued by various officials confirming that the buildings are legal,” he said. “It’s often the case that officials issue… documents but don’t enter the buildings onto the general [land] register. So owners who think they’ve made their properties legal have in fact not done so in the eyes of the law, and cannot claim compensation if they are demolished.
Similar cases are occurring elsewhere in Tajikistan. In the southern town of Kulob, for example, people are still living in homes two months after they were torn down by the local authorities.
Out of the 30 families living in part of the town known as Zhivprom, 27 saw their homes bulldozered on November 14. The local authorities ordered the demolitions because the residents did not possess legal title to their homes.
Since then most have continued to live in the ruins, rigging up makeshift roofs to shelter them from the winter weather.
“I’ve been living in these conditions for nearly two months,” said Oyniniso Qosimova, pointing at the collapsed walls of the two room house where she lives with her three children.
“While they were demolishing one of the rooms, two of my children were in the other room….Thank God nothing happened to them,” she added.
Qosimova admits the house was built illegally, but said “we did it out of need, not for pleasure. We’d been renting a flat in Kulob and when we had to move out, we had no other option but to build ourselves this shed so as to have a roof over our heads.”
Like other residents who have lost their homes in Zhivprom, Qosimova has applied to the municipal authorities for new housing
However, Kulob is overcrowded and the local authorities are struggling to cope with the demand for new land plots. Only around 170 of the 4,000 applications for land in and around the town submitted in the last few years have been successful.
In Khorog, the main town of the sparsely populated Badakhshan region of southeast Tajikistan, several dozen households have been forced to move to make way for an urban regeneration project that includes a sports stadium and a youth centre.
Some accepted the compensation on offer, but the head of the local branch of the Bureau for Human Rights and Rule of Law, Manuchehr Kholiknazarov. says seven families have appealed to his group for help.
Zuhro Shamirova says her family has been homeless for two years despite promises she would receive housing, and she is now suing the town administration for damages.
Money was set aside to build her a new home, but Shamirova says the municipal construction department did a bad job. The mayor’s office in Khorog ordered the building department to start again and pay compensation if the work overran a six-month deadline, but this has not happened and the case has gone to court. The builders deny they are at fault.
Deputy mayor Abdullo Khudoberdiev says the municipal authority has done its best to help evicted residents. “But instead of thanking us, they started making complaints,” he said.
Fourteen more buildings in the town are due to come down to make way for a road widening scheme.
“We will do our best to implement this plan with minimal losses to the owners,” said Khudoberdiev.
Experts with the Bureau for Human Rights and Rule of law say disputes over evictions and compensation arise because the law is unclear. For example, there are no fixed mechanisms for deciding whether homes can legally be seized and demolished, or for evaluating whether they are fit for human habitation. Nor is it clear which state agencies have powers to make these decisions, or what exactly the wording “state and social needs” means as a justification for seizing private property.
As municipal authorities around Tajikistan pursue redevelopment projects, houses are being torn down and the owners forced to move out.
In theory, such residents are entitled to monetary compensation or alternative housing from the state, but they frequently do not get it because their documentation is not in order. In the years since Tajikistan became independent in 1991, many people have migrated between regions and from the countryside to the towns.
Especially during the 1992-97 civil war, when a lot of homes were destroyed, people would squat on unoccupied land and build homes there. They could then attempt to gain legal rights of ownership after the fact, often through “property amnesties” offered by the government to record assets and bring people back into the tax system.
However, as the residents of Buni Hisorak, a suburban area of the capital Dushanbe, found, the documentation they had acquired was not regarded as sufficient proof of ownership to make them eligible for compensation when the city authorities decided to clear the area to make way for an amusement park.
At least 130 people in the Buni Hisorak area watched as their homes were demolished by bulldozers in mid-January. The city authorities said the 15 households involved were living in their properties unlawfully, and the bulldozers moved in after an appeals hearing upheld an earlier court ruling that they were not entitled to any compensation.
“They’ve ruined my entire wealth before my very eyes, in the space of a few hours,” said resident Manzura Rahimova. “I spent 20,000 [US] dollars to build this house, and I took out a bank loan that I haven’t repaid yet. And now none of it is left.”
Rahimova says she obtained a document of legal ownership after applying under a 2007 property amnesty in which people were allowed to own up to previously undeclared assets.
Her neighbour Tojibi Rahimova, who has lived in Buni Hisorak for more than 40 years, insists her home was rightfully hers, yet she has been denied compensation.
“I inherited the home from my husband’s parents,” shse said, watching with tears in her eyes as the bulldozers moved in. “There were 11 people living in my house till now. The authorities have given some families two or three apartments each, but they’ve thrown us out into the street.
Residents recall that when President Imomali Rahmon visited Buni Hisorak nearly a year ago, he instructed local officials to ensure everyone received new housing before their houses were torn down.
Nozilshoh Mahmudov, deputy local government chief in the city’s Sino district, says the families concerned simply seized the land and built homes on it, adding “For that reason, the city authorities are under no obligation to provide them with housing in exchange for what was demolished.
Mahmudov said the owners had been given fair warning and the demolitions only went ahead after the appeal was turned down.
Another 33 families did have the right documentation and were therefore given apartments in new multi-storey blocks elsewhere in Dushanbe.
Sergei Romanov, a lawyer with the Tajikistan Bureau for Human Rights and Rule of Law says his organisation is providing the evicted Buni Hisorak residents with free legal aid.
He points to a number of flaws in the way the evictions were carried out. For example, no one from the court was present during the demolitions, even though this is required by law when court orders are being enforced.
In addition, said Romanov, “The appeal from the owners of demolished homes was already under review by the Supreme Court, so they should have waited for a decision from this highest legal body…. I am certain that the high court will overturn the district court ruling that their demands are unlawful.”
However, Firuz Saidov, a social affairs expert, is sceptical that residents really obtained full legal ownership rights because this would have needed to be certified by town surveyors, at a time when Buni Hisorak did not exist on any formal plan of the city.
“They probably do have documents issued by various officials confirming that the buildings are legal,” he said. “It’s often the case that officials issue… documents but don’t enter the buildings onto the general [land] register. So owners who think they’ve made their properties legal have in fact not done so in the eyes of the law, and cannot claim compensation if they are demolished.
Similar cases are occurring elsewhere in Tajikistan. In the southern town of Kulob, for example, people are still living in homes two months after they were torn down by the local authorities.
Out of the 30 families living in part of the town known as Zhivprom, 27 saw their homes bulldozered on November 14. The local authorities ordered the demolitions because the residents did not possess legal title to their homes.
Since then most have continued to live in the ruins, rigging up makeshift roofs to shelter them from the winter weather.
“I’ve been living in these conditions for nearly two months,” said Oyniniso Qosimova, pointing at the collapsed walls of the two room house where she lives with her three children.
“While they were demolishing one of the rooms, two of my children were in the other room….Thank God nothing happened to them,” she added.
Qosimova admits the house was built illegally, but said “we did it out of need, not for pleasure. We’d been renting a flat in Kulob and when we had to move out, we had no other option but to build ourselves this shed so as to have a roof over our heads.”
Like other residents who have lost their homes in Zhivprom, Qosimova has applied to the municipal authorities for new housing
However, Kulob is overcrowded and the local authorities are struggling to cope with the demand for new land plots. Only around 170 of the 4,000 applications for land in and around the town submitted in the last few years have been successful.
In Khorog, the main town of the sparsely populated Badakhshan region of southeast Tajikistan, several dozen households have been forced to move to make way for an urban regeneration project that includes a sports stadium and a youth centre.
Some accepted the compensation on offer, but the head of the local branch of the Bureau for Human Rights and Rule of Law, Manuchehr Kholiknazarov. says seven families have appealed to his group for help.
Zuhro Shamirova says her family has been homeless for two years despite promises she would receive housing, and she is now suing the town administration for damages.
Money was set aside to build her a new home, but Shamirova says the municipal construction department did a bad job. The mayor’s office in Khorog ordered the building department to start again and pay compensation if the work overran a six-month deadline, but this has not happened and the case has gone to court. The builders deny they are at fault.
Deputy mayor Abdullo Khudoberdiev says the municipal authority has done its best to help evicted residents. “But instead of thanking us, they started making complaints,” he said.
Fourteen more buildings in the town are due to come down to make way for a road widening scheme.
“We will do our best to implement this plan with minimal losses to the owners,” said Khudoberdiev.
Experts with the Bureau for Human Rights and Rule of law say disputes over evictions and compensation arise because the law is unclear. For example, there are no fixed mechanisms for deciding whether homes can legally be seized and demolished, or for evaluating whether they are fit for human habitation. Nor is it clear which state agencies have powers to make these decisions, or what exactly the wording “state and social needs” means as a justification for seizing private property.
