Comparative implementation strategies for the progressive realisation of the right to adequate housing in South Africa, Canada and India

Abstract

The central hypothesis of this thesis is that the universal fundamental right to adequate housing must be equally enforced by all states irrespective of its non-entrenchment as a constitutional, legislative and/or policy entitlement. Despite being a minority, poor Canadians still face the same sordid living conditions that the majority are experiencing in South Africa and India. If a developed country such as Canada, despite its available resources and housing policies, and, similar to South Africa and India as third world countries, fails to improve the poor’s standard of living, the right to adequate housing will remain a distant dream for many. Any housing implementation strategy must be able to reduce housing backlogs, eradicate homelessness and slums and in general improve the poor’s standard of living. The thesis considers the diverse implementation strategies of the right to adequate housing as adopted by South Africa, Canada and India and reveals how each country has experienced systemic challenges. Against the background of international and regional human rights obligations, key issues are investigated to determine how to properly implement, enforce and monitor the right, include the role of a constitutionally entrenched right, the adoption of a housing legislative and/or policy measures, the role of the judiciary, (in)action on the part of government and the part played by national human rights commissions. While each of these three countries approaches the issue in their own unique way, and each country makes its own contribution, what is required is a coordinated and multi-faceted housing implementation system. Although the point of departure was to determine what South Africa could learn from Canada and India, the conclusion is that both Canada and India can draw inspiration from South Africa. Nevertheless, the main conclusions are that South Africa must urgently conduct a comprehensive review of its regressive 20 year housing implementation strategy and India’s 61 years five year plans. The Canadian judiciary should be looking at ways to enforce the right within the Canadian Charter as well as its domestic legislation to include ‘social condition’ as a discrimination ground. While both Canada and India must review their housing policies their judiciaries should be evaluating the history of homelessness and the reasonableness of their adopted housing policies.