CCPR/C/127/D/2444/2014 the authors, the issue raised in the present complaint has therefore not been addressed, and the authors assert that they do have standing to bring a complaint. 5.2 The authors argue that they should not be penalized for having accepted the offer of alternative accommodation made by the State party after the request for interim measures had been issued. The authors were forced to accept the offer due to the non-existence of any legal remedy that would have allowed them to challenge their eviction and because they were told that their houses could not be legalized.10 5.3 Regarding the exhaustion of domestic remedies, the authors point to statements made by the State party about the lack of effective remedy for forced evictions of Roma and Egyptian communities living in informal settlements, which are not eligible for legalization. 11 The authors argue that because of the State party’s previous assertions regarding the situation of Roma and Egyptian communities and regarding housing as a human right,12 the State party is estopped from claiming that the domestic legal framework is effective now. 5.4 The authors note that effective recourse such as compensatory awards is payable only if the Government has acted unlawfully and if the property is legalized. Squatters such as the authors have no legal right to compensation for expropriation and are entitled to alternative accommodation only. The Government has not made it clear at any point whether the expropriation funds are available to the authors, and the authors were informed of alternative housing only after interim measures had been granted for the present communication.13 Furthermore, even if alternative accommodation is an option in the State party, there is no guarantee in practice that those affected will be provided with alternative accommodation before their houses are demolished. The authors note that the relevant procedures are cumbersome and lengthy. 5.5 Lastly, the authors note the State party’s silence on the issue of lack of access to effective legal aid with a view to challenging their forced eviction. The ongoing discrimination against Roma communities in the State party affects their ability to obtain legal representation. Because Roma victims of eviction are more likely to have low legal literacy skills,14 effective legal aid is necessary. State party’s observations on the merits 6.1 On 22 September 2014, the State party provided its observations on the merits. The State party notes that the road project under which the eviction notices were given to the authors also affected non-Roma citizens. The Elbasan municipal urban construction 10 11 12 13 14 The authors note that A.L. is an exception. The authors cite the final conclusions of Albania–European Union policy dialogue seminar on inclusion of Roma and Egyptian communities, held on 20 and 21 February 2014. The authors also call attention to another report, in which, the authors argue, the State party explicitly acknowledges deficiencies in the applicable domestic framework on evictions. The authors refer to the State party’s response to the questionnaire on the responsibilities of subnational governments with respect to the right to adequate housing, issued by the Special Rapporteur on the adequate housing as a component of the right to an adequate standard of living, and on the right to non-discrimination in this context (November 2014), in which it stated the following: “Due to the fact that housing is not considered as a human right, there are [no] standards established to fulfill this right.” The authors also point to opinions of the European Court of Human Rights on the same issue – see, for example, Eglantina Bakiu and Others against Albania and 16 other applications, Application No. 43928/13, Statement of Facts, 29 January 2015 – and a recent order issued by the Minister of Urban Development and Tourism on 23 December 2013. In 2018, the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination expressed concern over forced evictions of Roma and Egyptian people in the context of major infrastructure projects, calling upon the State party to provide remedies and adequate housing (CERD/C/ALB/CO/9-12, paras. 27–28). The authors point to other cases, such as the situation of Roma in Selitë, Albania, where no alternative housing or subsidy was provided to evicted Roma in an identical situation to that of the authors in the present communication. The author also points to the eviction of Roma who had been living close to an artificial lake in Tirana. See United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), Survey on Access to Justice in Albania (2017), according to which “[i]ndividuals have a fairly low level of awareness of their rights: more than a quarter of those surveyed cannot name a single constitutional right or freedom. … The low level of legal literacy is most pronounced among the Roma community.” 5