CCPR/C/128/D/2568/2015 conclusion on a particular matter of fact in the light of the evidence available, the decision cannot be held to be manifestly arbitrary or amount to a denial of justice. The authors’ claims with regard to the validity of proclamation No. 164 are therefore inadmissible under article 2 of the Optional Protocol. 4.5 The State party adds, on the basis of the records of the National Housing Authority,33 that only 51 of the 101 authors of the communication were verified to have been residents of Barangay Corazon de Jesus in San Juan City, where the allegedly violent forced evictions took place. Moreover, the names of certain authors of the communication were listed twice, pointing to the inaccuracy of the claims made and to an intent to mislead the Committee. 4.6 The National Housing Authority records also indicate that the author D.G. was not qualified for relocation because he had previously been awarded a housing unit in Dasmariñas Bagong Bayan, Cavite City, as part of a government relocation program. D.G., however, sold that property and thereafter settled illegally at Barangay Corazon de Jesus, in violation of the Urban Development and Housing Act. Moreover, the allegations of a lack of consultations, use of violence, threats of arbitrary arrest, harassment and violence, as well as hazardous and unacceptable resettlement sites, have not been sufficiently substantiated. Such claims have no basis in fact. 4.7 With regard to the State party’s relocation and resettlement policies, as provided under section 28 of the Urban Development and Housing Act, the law discourages eviction or demolition, except when persons or entities occupy dangerous areas, when government infrastructure projects with available funding are about to be implemented or when there is a court order for eviction and demolition. Furthermore, section 28 stipulates procedural requirements in carrying out eviction or demolition orders involving underprivileged and homeless citizens, including notice upon the affected persons or entities at least 30 days prior to the date of eviction or demolition, adequate consultations of those concerned, the presence of local government officials or their representatives during eviction or demolition, proper identification of all persons taking part in the demolition and adequate relocation, whether temporary or permanent. Sections 21 and 22 of the Urban Development and Housing Act mandate the local government unit concerned or the National Housing Authority to provide resettlement areas with basic services and facilities, such as potable water, electricity or sewage, while requesting government agencies to prioritize the provision of livelihood programmes and grant livelihood loans to beneficiaries of resettlement programs. Given that the State party complied with all the substantive and procedural requirements of the law, it categorically denies all the allegations in the communication as baseless and unwarranted. 4.8 The State party also refutes the authors’ allegations that the Government employed violent and brutal measures to evict the informal settlers in Barangay Corazon de Jesus. On the contrary, 321 families volunteered to relocate to the resettlement area provided for them at Southville 8-B and 8-C, Rodriguez, Rizal. 4.9 In addition, the State party denies the allegations that the authors were not duly informed, given that the records show that the local government duly complied with the requirements of notice and adequate consultations under the Urban Development and Housing Act. Individual notices of eviction were sent to the residents concerned on 27 May, 4 June and 9 December 2010. However, a number of residents refused to receive the individual notices served on them. Accordingly, public notices were also posted in conspicuous areas such as in the Barangay Hall, in waiting sheds, along major roads and streets and in day-care centres. Government agencies conducted adequate consultations with the affected residents prior to, during and after the relocation. The Social Welfare and Development Office of San Juan City conducted three consultative meetings attended by local government officials and residents on 8 October and 28 and 29 December 2010. The local government conducted another dialogue with residents on 9 September 2010. On 21 January 2011, the housing board in San Juan City also conducted a meeting with the residents to provide them with information on the relocation site in Rodriguez, Rizal, the amenities and services already available at the site and the payment schedule, after the one33 8 The National Housing Authority is the primary government agency charged with providing housing for the underprivileged and homeless.