United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, Tbilisi, Georgia
I had the pleasure of working with the Protection Unit of the Branch Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) in Tbilisi, Georgia this summer as their focal point on housing issues in the context of the privatization, closure and eviction of internally displaced persons from collective centers. The portfolio involved legal and policy analysis in an area of considerable uncertainty during the government's development of an Action Plan to implement the State Strategy on Internally Displaced Persons and its on-going ad hoc practice in the reconciliation of private property rights and humanitarian need.
Between 220,000-240,000 persons fled their homes due to internal conflicts in Abkhazia and South Ossetia in 1992-93, with a second wave of displacement in 1998. Many of these internally displaced persons (IDPs) sought refuge in collective centers (CC) - unfinished residential buildings, former hospitals, factories and other buildings approved by the government for temporary residence in order to cope with the housing crisis. There is a great deal of uncertainty about the legal foundations of their settlement as many of the decrees have been repealed, though the IDPs have stayed for want of other options. As property values have risen, a general policy of privatization has also emerged in Georgia, presenting both a significant protection risk for IDPs through arbitrary evictions and an increased risk of homelessness, while also creating a unique opportunity to improve their living conditions and further durable housing solutions if the investments are well-regulated for their, and the broader, social benefit.
Past practice in 2003-2007 in Georgia reveals significant protection gaps in the legislative and regulatory framework for IDPs, particularly for those who have self-settled or migrated from one CC (or the private sector) to another CC as their place of de facto residence. The problem is compounded by inconsistent implementation of existing protections in national law, and an urgent need to elaborate clearer standards for IDP-investor negotiations to safeguard both parties and the broader public interest. Part of my work was to analyze these protection challenges and brainstorm on how they could realistically be met in the Georgian legal, political and resource-constrained context. This involved elaborating a 'wish list' for UNHCR advocacy of longer-term legislative clarifications of IDP housing rights and the elaboration of a formal regulatory framework on aspects like adequate compensation, notice periods, and the manner of evictions. I also developed a strategy proposal for the UNHCR to address the issue of eviction in more immediate steps, developing recommendations on NGO and ministerial capacity-building, models for mediation mechanisms, proposals for policy and program adjustments and parallel initiatives that would mobilize the complementary strengths of the NGO sector through the development of softer customary norms for settlement agreements, pending formal legal change. The lessons here were about the art of the possible, an engaging process demanding of creativity and imagination, and understanding the compromises to be made without sacrificing the core achievements which would make a difference to IDPs in the field.
I also designed and presented a training seminar to 17 local NGOs on housing rights, norms, and standards in international and European law. It was a wonderful day of interaction with Georgian lawyers and housing activists, reflecting on the interrelations between human rights, their application in the national context, and the possibilities and limits of the law as an instrument in effective advocacy. The training drew on a reference tool I drafted in my first weeks on housing-related rights in international law, delving into conventions and custom, case law, and interpretive documents on the nature of state obligations toward economic and social rights. Georgia is a monist system, whose constitution recognizes the direct application of Georgia's commitments to international instruments in the national legal system, so the possibilities, at least, are fairly significant.
In reflecting on my time as a IHRP intern, I am struck by how exceptional the experience was.
The mentorship and level of responsibility I was entrusted with at the UNHCR was mesmerizing, with bright supervisors who were unfailingly generous with their time and insight. It provided me a unique platform on which to develop my skills and knowledge in a new area of human rights analysis, and I tremendously enjoyed the work. The experience confirmed my intuition of human rights analysis as creative and compelling, and gave me an invaluable window into how it is practiced professionally.
The Caucasus was also a new region for me - one in which I didn't speak the first or second language. The experience taught me how to work effectively with interpreters and to appreciate the immense reliance international staff place on their national colleagues. I felt the illiteracy I experienced on the streets, and in the markets where I navigated more through gesture and smiles than in words and discussion, provided a microcosm of the isolation and dislocation experienced much more significantly by the IDPs.
Public legal education in Georgia will be key to strengthening human rights outcomes in the privatization process. I hope my work will have helped in small ways to provide a voice to the most vulnerable, and demonstrated to decision-makers that it is both possible and desirable to manage the privatization process to the benefit of society as a whole. For my part, it was an enriching experience that has provided a new interest in filling a research gap on security of tenure, and enhanced my ability to manoeuvre in foreign legal systems and use the law for the public good.
