E/C.12/69/D/48/2018 11.2 The obligation to provide alternative housing to evicted persons who need it implies that, under article 2 (1) of the Covenant, States parties must take all necessary steps, to the maximum of their available resources, to uphold this right. States parties may choose a variety of policies to achieve this purpose. 17 However, all measures adopted should be deliberate, concrete and targeted as clearly as possible towards fulfilling this right18 as swiftly and efficiently as possible. Policies on alternative housing in cases of eviction should be commensurate with the need of those concerned and the urgency of the situation and should respect the dignity of the person. Moreover, States parties should take consistent and coordinated measures to resolve institutional shortcomings and structural causes of the lack of housing.19 11.3 Alternative housing must be adequate. While adequacy is determined in part by social, economic, cultural, climatic, ecological and other factors, the Committee believes that it is nevertheless possible to identify certain aspects of the right that must be taken into account for this purpose in any particular context. They include the following: legal security of tenure; availability of services, materials, facilities and infrastructure; affordability; habitability; accessibility; location which allows access to social facilities (education, employment options, health-care services); and cultural adequacy, such that expressions of cultural identity and diversity may be respected.20 It must also take account of the right of members of a family not to be separated.21 11.4 In certain circumstances, States parties may be able to demonstrate that, despite having made every effort, to the maximum of available resources, it has been impossible to offer a permanent, alternative home to an evicted person who needs alternative accommodation. In such circumstances, temporary accommodation that does not meet all the requirements of an adequate alternative home may be used. However, States must endeavour to ensure that the temporary accommodation protects the human dignity of the persons evicted, meets all safety and security requirements and does not become a permanent solution, but is a step towards obtaining adequate housing.22 Analysis of the proportionality of the author’s eviction 12.1 The Committee will consider whether the author’s eviction from the property she was occupying constituted a violation of her right to adequate housing. 12.2 The Committee notes that the author was able to appeal the decisions taken at first instance and that she was assisted by counsel. 12.3 The Committee also notes that, for the State party, allowing the author to remain in the property would be tantamount to validating criminally unlawful conduct on the grounds of the right to housing and would constitute a violation of the owner’s right to property under national law. The Committee notes that the right to private property is not a Covenant right, but recognizes that the State party has a legitimate interest in ensuring the protection of all rights established in its legal system, so long as this does not conflict with the rights set forth in the Covenant. 23 Given that the author was convicted of a minor offence of unlawful appropriation, the Committee considers that there were legitimate reasons for her eviction and that it could therefore be justified. The Committee notes that Madrid Court of Investigation No. 30 examined all the author’s claims relating to her right to housing and examined the proportionality of the eviction. The Court agreed to a postponement of the eviction on 29 May 2018. In its decisions of 20 August 2018, 28 September 2018 and 28 May 2019, the Court refused to postpone the eviction again, noting, inter alia, that the author 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 10 General comment No. 4, para. 8 (c). See also para. 13. General comment No. 3 (1990), para. 2. See also the letter of 16 May 2012 from the Chair of the Committee to the States parties to the Covenant. See, for example, the report of the Special Rapporteur on adequate housing as a component of the right to an adequate standard of living and on the right to non-discrimination in this context (A/HRC/31/54, paras. 28–38). General comment No. 4, para. 8. López Albán v. Spain, para. 9.3. Ibid., para. 9.4. Ibid., para. 11.5. GE.21-04761