Introduction and Main Focus 

On  27 February 2025, Balakrishnan Rajagopal, Special Rapporteur on adequate housing; Heba Hagrass, Special Rapporteur on the rights of persons with disabilities; Margaret Satterthwaite, Special Rapporteur on the independence of judges and lawyers; Claudia Mahler, Independent Expert on the enjoyment of all human rights by older persons and Olivier De Schutter, Special Rapporteur on extreme poverty and human rights issued a Communication (AL ITA 2/2025) to the Italian government concerning its violation of the right to adequate housing for people in vulnerable situations and the right to redress through the practice of forced evictions. The experts stated that the Italian government disregards the interim measures, fails to provide

genuine consultations with affected persons, and lacks adequate housing alternatives to protect them from homelessness and/or forced separation from their families. 

The Rapporteurs also expressed serious concern that these forced evictions were carried out during or in the aftermath of the COVID-19 pandemic, a period when many individuals and households faced severe economic difficulties. 

Furthermore, the communication also criticises Italy’s worrying trend of the financialization of housing, which consists of an unregulated housing market built on economic imbalance and the exclusion of significant sections of society. 

The main target of the Communication is a document issued in March 2022 by the Italian Attorney General (Avvocatura dello Stato) on the request of the Rome tribunal in the Ruggieri case (Rome Tribunal, section III, judgement, 18 July 2022), and representing the position of the Council of Ministers. The document stated, among other things, that ‘the determinations of the High Commissioner [for Human Rights]  and the Committee on economic, social and cultural rights (CESCR) must be considered as recommendations to the states parties and are not binding for the latter, according to Articles 7 and 9 of the Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (OP-ICESCR) as they are not jurisdictional bodies by nature.”

This document was used in the Ruggieri case and in several other cases pending before the CESCR to dismiss the request to take provisional measures aimed at avoiding possible irreparable damage and consisting of the suspension of the eviction.

The Communication summarises some of the Individual cases that have been handled by Italian judges according to the instruction adopted in the Ruggieri case.

Individual Cases of denied suspension of the eviction despite the interim measures requested by the Committee

Ms. Rossana Letizi, an Italian citizen, is 90 years old. Her discounted rental fee was increased due to a chain of transfers of the property from one real estate company to another, and was allegedly in breach of the initial rental agreement between the building company and the Municipality of Rome. The CESCR requested Italy to take interim measures, such as suspension of the eviction order or providing Ms. Letizi with an adequate alternative housing solution. The request was denied, as the  CESCR’s views “do not have the juridical value to the point of influencing internal juridical procedures.” Although the eviction was not carried out, the case remains active, causing Ms. Letizi psychological and emotional distress.

Another case involved Mr. Carlo Cusatelli, a 71-year-old Italian, who was unable to pay the rental fee due to the increased price. On 11 September 2018, the Court of Rome issued an eviction order against Mr. Cusatelli and his family, consisting of his unemployed wife and his 25-year-old son suffering from psychiatric problems. This eviction was suspended by the Italian government due to the COVID-19 pandemic. In 2022, the eviction was scheduled for 16 May 2022. The CESCR granted interim measures to him and his family. However, the eviction was carried out, and he was relocated to a tiny garage with his wife and mentally ill son.

Mr. Ashraf El Rakwaby, an Egyptian chef, who lost his job due to COVID-19, was evicted and relocated to a one-room of an overcrowded emergency shelter with his wife and three sons, where conditions were inadequate and restrictive. Even though the CESCR granted him interim measures, the judge of execution rejected the application of the interim measures, reiterating the non-binding nature of CESCR’s views. To date,  Mr. Ashraf El Rakwaby is unable to work due to a stroke.

Ms. Begum Rabeya Bakul, Bangladeshi, a caregiver to her disabled brother and psychologically traumatized son, lost her income and could not pay rent. On 12 June 2023, the CESCR granted her interim measures. On 16 June 2023, the judge of execution rejected the request for interim measures. Therefore, she was evicted and relocated to an emergency shelter, while her brother and son were at another facility, without necessary support. After a few months, she was physically assaulted near her accommodation. 

Ms. Salima El Alawi Hafidi, a Moroccan, and her husband were evicted after losing their jobs.  On 16 October 2022, the judge of execution rejected the interim measures. Only Ms. Hafidi and her daughter received alternative housing; her husband became homeless. This eventually led them to seek temporary refuge in another town. Since the family was unable to register as residents, their children were denied access to school and healthcare.

Mr. Hamid Saydawi, Moroccan, is 62 years old. He was evicted from a building that had been purchased by a railway company.  The city council did not offer any public housing solution.  On 26 October 2021, the judge of execution suspended the eviction, in compliance with the request for interim measures granted by the CESCR. On 14 June 2022, the judge of execution revoked the suspension, citing the Government’s interpretation of the non-binding nature of the CESCR’s recommendations. He and his wife were left in unstable living conditions.

Lastly, Emiliano Piccioni, an Italian, was scammed into purchasing a home. After losing his job, the family was unable to pay the mortgage. On 1 October 2019, Mr. Piccioni was notified of an eviction order. On 28 July 2021, the CESCR granted him interim measures, but despite this, he was evicted with his family. Mr Piccioni had to relocate to France, resulting in separation from his family.

UN Special Rapporteurs’ Legal and Human Rights Concerns

The Rapporteurs stated that the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR) and its Optional Protocol  (OP-ICESCR) are binding for the State parties, including Italy, that ratified them (Article 26 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties), and must be complied with in good faith. Therefore, the dismissal of the interim measures granted by the CESCR, under Article 5 of the OP-ICESCR, claiming that the CESCR’s decisions have a non-binding nature for the State, undermines the effectiveness of the mechanism for protecting ICESCR rights when there is a risk of irreparable damage. 

The Rapporteurs stated that Italy, as a party to the OP-ICESCR, by failing to implement the suggested interim measures, violates its obligation to comply in good faith with the procedure for individual communications established in the OP-ICESCR. Moreover, it also deprives the CESCR of its ability to provide an effective remedy to the persons alleging to be victims of a violation of the ICESCR. 

The Rapporteurs underlined the fact that forced evictions affected vulnerable groups, including low-income and marginalised families with older people, children, and persons with disabilities. 

The practice of forced evictions constitutes a gross violation of human rights, in particular the right to adequate housing under Article 11 of the ICESCR, interpreted in the light of  General Comment No. 7 of the CESCR, due to Italy’s failure to provide them with adequate housing and to deny them access to basic goods and services. Forced evictions of older individuals also violate the United Nations Principles for Older Persons.

Moreover, the Rapporteurs underscored the violation of the rights to adequate and accessible housing and to be part of a community covered by Article 19 of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. The separation of persons with disabilities from their family members, as illustrated, for example, in the Bakul case, increased their isolation and social exclusion.

With regard to forced evictions against children, the Rapporteurs stated that Italy failed to comply with Article 16 of the Convention on the Rights of the Child, which establishes the right of every child to be protected from interference with their privacy, family, and home, and Article 27, providing the right of every child to a standard of living adequate for his or her physical, mental, spiritual, moral and social development.

The Rapporteurs urged Italy to adopt measures aimed at preventing housing from becoming a mere commodity, to ensure that all domestic institutions recognise its social value, and apply laws and policies in this domain with full respect for the human right to adequate housing. 

Recommendations and Concluding Remarks

The Communication asked Italy to:

• Provide information on the allegations mentioned;
• Clarify the status of international human rights treaties in its domestic legal system;
• Explain the justification for the decision of the Presidency of the Council of Ministers, instructing courts on the application of interim measure requests by CESCR, in light of the principles of the separation of powers and the independence of the judiciary;
• Submit eviction data from 2020 onward.

The Communication asked Italy to provide information on any measures taken to:

• guarantee security of tenure, to protect against forced evictions and, should evictions be allowed, ensure they do not lead to the tenants facing homelessness but are instead provided with alternative and adequate housing;
•  prevent people from falling into homelessness, as a result of the inability to pay rent; 
• eradicate the economic barriers preventing people experiencing financial hardships from accessing justice.

The Rapporteurs further called for all necessary interim measures to be taken to stop the alleged violations and prevent their recurrence, and, if the investigation confirms or indicates that the allegations are correct, to ensure that any person(s) responsible for the alleged violations are held accountable.