6.1.4 Right to privacy The destruction of homes by the authorities, without adequate notice and with inadequate or no provision of alternative housing, constitutes an arbitrary interference with privacy, family and the home.64 6.1.5 Right to an effective remedy The people of Porta Farm have been denied the right to an effective remedy. The right to an effective remedy is recognised in the ICCPR and the African Charter. 65 The CESCR has also upheld the right to a remedy for violations of rights protected under the ICESCR, 66 and has called for legal remedies and procedures to be provided to those affected by eviction orders. 67 This is echoed in Principle 7(3) of the UN Guiding Principles, which outlines the guarantees that need to be complied with if displacement occurs in situations other than during the emergency states of armed conflicts or disasters. They include “a specific decision by a State authority empowered by law to order such measures” and “the right to an effective remedy, including the review of such decisions by appropriate judicial authorities.” The Zimbabwean courts initially protected the people of Porta Farm, prohibiting evictions that did not include a proper relocation of those affected. However, in September 2004 the authorities ignored court orders and attempted – ultimately unsuccessfully – to forcibly evict the residents in clear defiance of a court order. In 2005 the authorities succeeded in forcibly evicting the entire Porta Farm community, on this occasion acting in clear defiance of three separate court orders. Police officers, made aware of the court orders, failed to act impartially or professionally and told lawyers they were acting on “orders from above”. Despite the fact that the police and government action at Porta Farm in June 2005 violated three court orders, the High Court of Zimbabwe dismissed a contempt of court action without giving a reason. This has left the people of Porta Farm with no recourse to the courts for protection of their rights. The fact that the court orders prohibiting the forced evictions of residents of Porta Farm were disregarded by the authorities and this disregard was subsequently upheld by the court itself has left the community of Porta Farm with no access to an effective remedy at law. 6.2 Violations of human rights of internally displaced persons as a result of the forced evictions 6.2.1 The right to an adequate standard of living The right to an adequate standard of living including adequate food, clothing and housing is guaranteed in Article 11(1) of the ICESCR. Principle 18 of the UN Guiding Principles also emphasises that IDPs have the right to an adequate standard of living. The UN Guiding Principles provide that, at the minimum, regardless of the circumstances, and without discrimination, competent authorities shall provide IDPs with and ensure safe access to: (a) essential food and potable water; (b) basic shelter and housing; (c) appropriate clothing; and (d) essential medical services and sanitation. Operation Murambatsvina has left hundreds of thousands of persons without adequate housing. In addition, many have lost property and livelihoods without compensation. The government has forcibly displaced people to unsatisfactory and uninhabitable sites, such as Hopley Farm, where no or inadequate materials for ensuring even basic shelter were distributed. The site had no 64 Article 17 of the ICCPR. Article 18, African Charter. See, also, CESCR General Comment No. 4 Art. 2(3), ICCPR; Arts. 2 and 26, African Charter. UN Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, General Comment 3: Nature of States Parties Obligations, UN Doc. E/C.12/1991/23, para 5; and General Comment 9: The domestic application of the Covenant, UN Doc. E/C.12/1998/24, para 2. 67 General Comment No. 7, paras 12 and 16. 65 66