ECtHR says eviction of Roma from municipal land would violate Article 8

In Yordanova and Others v. Bulgaria, the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR)found that there would be a violation of Article 8 (right to respect for private and family life), if a removal order against Roma who had settled on municipal land was enforced. The court found that the removal order had been based on a law and reviewed under a decision making procedure that did not require the authorities to balance the different interests of the parties involved.

Under Article 8 of the ECHR, a removal order could only proceed if it was ‘proportionate to the legitimate aim pursued’. The relevant Bulgarian law did not require any examination of proportionality whatsoever and therefore the municipal authorities did not give any reasons for the order apart from the unlawfulness of the applicants’ occupation. The Bulgarian court refused to even hear arguments related to the proportionality of the measure.

Two notable factors influenced the court’s decision. Firstly, on the issue of community life, the court noted the damage that would be done if the Roma were evicted, as the settlement had been established there decades ago and the strong community and lifestyle that had developed there would be harmed by an eviction order. The court further held that the fact that the applicants are a socially disadvantaged group must be a relevant factor under the proportionality assessment that the national authorities are under a duty to undertake. After considering a number of other factors such as the length of time the Roma had stayed on the settlement and the potential that the applicants would become homeless if evicted, the court held that “the respondent Government failed to establish that the removal order...was necessary in a democratic society for the achievement of the legitimate aims pursued”.

Click here to read the Yordanova judgment.

Click here for an ECHR factsheet on Roma and Travellers.

Click here to read a blog post on the Yordanova judgment by Garden Court Chambers.

Click here to read a blog post on the Yordanova judgment by Strasbourg Observers.

Meanwhile back in Ireland, in Offaly 100 Irish Travellers are seeking orders from the High Court restricting Offaly County Council from removing them from an unofficial halting site. Three individuals brought the action on behalf of the group. Offaly County Council planned to take action under Section 160 of the Planning and Development Act of 2000 after receiving complaints from the public. The relevant site of land is located a half a mile from the nearest residence and away from the main road. According to the three applicants, facilities at the site are non-existent, including a lack of running water and toilet facilities. Mr. Justice Michael Peart was due to give his judgment by 4 May.

Click here to read an article by the Irish Times on the case.

Share

Resources

Sustaining Partners