E/C.12/61/D/5/2015 the social report of Madrid City Council, in 2006 a social worker noted that Mr. Ben Djazia did not wish to participate in a job-seeking scheme as he did not consider it useful. In 2009, the centre reminded him that it was mandatory to come in for an income support review every six months, noting that in the past two years he had come to the centre only once. 8 In 2012, as in previous years, the centre noted Mr. Ben Djazia’s lack of motivation to find employment. 4.5 The State party notes that Mr. Ben Djazia, rather than actively searching for housing, simply expected that it would be provided by Social Services, even when the eviction was imminent. When the lease expired in August 2012, a social worker informed him about public and private entities that could grant public housing. However, Mr. Ben Djazia demanded that the centre provide him with housing. In addition, in July 2012, the centre referred Mr. Ben Djazia to the Caritas solidarity rental scheme, under which he received two financial support payments of €300 each in October 2012. In 2013, Social Services granted Mr. Ben Djazia financial assistance of €600 to cover basic needs, and urged him to continue searching for alternative housing. In February 2013, a social worker at the centre noted that Mr. Ben Djazia had not searched for alternative accommodation, despite the fact that he knew that he had to leave the rented room. Given Mr. Ben Djazia’s reluctance to searching for accommodation, in August 2013, the centre contacted him to offer him financial support to pay one month’s rent on a room and the deposit on an apartment of no more than €400. He was also informed that in the event that the eviction took place on 11 September and he had no accommodation, protection measures would be taken in respect of the children. In September 2013, Mr. Ben Djazia again began to receive a minimum income allowance of €532.51 per month. 4.6 Of all the public housing applications submitted by Mr. Ben Djazia, only three had included his family, at the suggestion of the centre. 9 The State party notes that every year the Madrid Housing Institute receives an average of 8,000 requests for public housing and allocates an average of 260 housing units in the city of Madrid. 4.7 The authors failed to inform the Committee that SAMUR had told them that if they had not found accommodation by the end of the maximum stay in the SAMUR SocialMadrid short-stay unit, accommodation could be provided for Ms. Bellili and the children in a women’s shelter and for Mr. Ben Djazia in a homeless shelter. The Madrid City Council social services centre in Tetuán offered the author a similar option (see 2.13). Authors’ comments on the State party’s observations on admissibility 5.1 On 27 June 2015, the authors submitted their comments on the State party’s observations and claimed that the obligations under article 11 of the Covenant extended to situations related to rental housing, including evictions, which can constitute forced eviction if carried out in accordance with legislation that is not compatible with the Covenant, or where the persons affected do not have access to the appropriate legal remedies.10 5.2 The State party’s observations aim to call into question Mr. Ben Djazia’s civic conduct to justify the lack of housing alternatives and reverse the burden of proof, attaching an aura of suspicion to the person who claims to be a victim of a violation of the Covenant. However, Mr. Ben Djazia sought employment and diligently trained for the labour market 8 9 10 GE.17-12396 According to the social report, Mr. Ben Djazia received a minimum income allowance of €532 from 2013. The State party provides a copy of a report from the General Directorate of Housing and Rehabilitation of the Community of Madrid dated 21 April 2015, which indicates that Mr. Ben Djazia submitted 16 applications for public housing: 11 under the special necessity quota and 5 to be entered into a draw. The report concludes that Mr. Ben Djazia’s application for public housing under the special necessity quota was “admitted” and that on the date of application he was number 432 on the list. The authors refer to the Committee’s general comment No. 7, paras. 11, 16 and 19. 5