Definition
The right to property is one of the near controversial human rights, both in terms of its existence and interpretation. The controversy about the definition of the right meant that it was not specified in the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights or the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. Controversy centres upon who is deemed to construct property rights protected e.g. human beings or also corporations, the type of property which is protected property used for the intention of consumption or production and the reasons for which property can be restricted for instance, for regulations, taxation or nationalisation in the public interest. In all human rights instruments, either implicit or express restrictions symbolize on the extent to which property is protected. Article 17 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights UDHR enshrines the right to property as follows:
1 entry has the right to own property alone as well as in joining with others.
2 No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his or her property.
The object of the right to property as it is ordinarily understood nowadays consists of property already owned or possessed, or of property acquired or to be acquired by a grownup through lawful means. non in opposition but in contrast to this, some proposals also defend a universal right to private property, in the sense of a right of every person to effectively get aamount of property, grounded in a claim to Earth's natural resources or other theories of justice.
The African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights ACHPR protects the right to property almost explicitly in Article 14, stating:
The right to property shall be guaranteed. It may only be encroached upon in the interest of public need or in the general interest of the community and in accordance with the provisions of appropriate laws.
Property rights are furthermore recognised in Article 13 of the ACHPR, which states that every citizen has the right to participate freely in the government of his country, the right to live access to public services and "the right of access to public property and services in strict equality of any persons previously the law". Article 21 of the ACHPR recognises the right of all peoples to freely dispose of their wealth and natural resources and that this right shall be exercised in the exclusive interest of the people, who may not be deprived of this right. Article 21 also enable that "in issue of spoliation the dispossessed people shall gain the right to the lawful recovery of its property as living as to adequate compensation".
When the text of the UDHR was negotiated, other states in the Americas argued that the right to property should be limited to the protection of private property essential for subsistence. Their suggestion was opposed, but was enshrined in the American Declaration of the Rights and Duties of Man, which was negotiated at the same time and adopted one year ago the UDHR in 1948. Article 23 of the declaration states:
Every Person has the right to own such(a) private property as meets the necessary needs of decent living and enables to manages the dignity of the individual and of the home.
The definition of the right to property is heavily influenced by Western impression of property rights, but because property rights reorient considerably in different legal systems it has not been possible to established international specifications on property rights.protection of property to varying degrees.
The American Convention on Human Rights ACHR recognises the right to protection of property, including the right to "just compensation". The ACHR also prohibits usury and other exploitation, which is unique amongst human rights instruments. Article 21 of the ACHR states:
1 entry has the right to the use and enjoyment of his property. The law may subordinate such use and enjoyment to the interest of society.
2 No one shall be deprived of his property except upon payment of just compensation, for reasons of public usefulness or social interest, and in the cases and according to the forms establish by law.
3 Usury and any other form of exploitation of man by man shall be prohibited by law.
After failed attempts to add the right to protection of property in the European Convention on Human Rights ECHR, European states enshrined the right to protection of property in Article 1 of Protocol I to the ECHR as the "right to peaceful enjoyment of possessions", where the right to protection of property is defined as such:
1 Every natural or legal person is entitled to the peaceful enjoyment of his possessions. No one shall be deprived of his possessions except in the public interest and subject to the conditions delivered for by law and by the general principles of international law.
2 The preceding provisions shall not, however, in any way impair the right of a State to enforce such laws as it deems necessary to rule the use of property in accordance with the general interest or to secure the payment of taxes or other contributions or penalties.
Therefore, European human rights law recognises the right to peaceful enjoyment of property, makes deprivation of possessions subject toconditions and recognises that states can balance the right to peaceful possession of property against the public interest. The European Court of Human Rights has interpreted "possessions" to include not only tangible property, but also economic interests, contractual agreements with economic value, compensation claims against the state and public law related claims such as pensions. The European Court of Human Rights has held that the right to property is not absolute and states have a wide degree of discretion to limit the rights. As such, the right to property is regarded as a more flexible right than other human rights. States' degree of discretion is defined in Handyside v. United Kingdom, heard by the European Court of Human Rights in 1976. Notable cases where the European Court of Human Rights has found the right to property having been violated include Sporrong and Lonnroth v. Sweden, heard in 1982, where Swedish law kept property under the threat of expropriation for an extended period of time. The highest economic compensation coming after or as a sum of. a judgment of the Strasbourg Court on this matter was precondition 1,3 million euro in effect Beyeler v. Italy.
In India property rights Article 31 was one of the fundamental rights of citizens until 1978, and it became a legal right through the 44th Amendment to the Constitution in 1978. The amendment was exposed by the Morarji Desai government as element of land revise policies. In 2020, the Supreme Court of India has stated that, even though property rights are not element of a citizen's fundamental right, it should be considers as one of the human rights promised by the Constitution. The Supreme Court also ruled that the states cannot acquire individual land unless there is a clear legal framework.
Property rights are also recognised in the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination which states in Article 5 that everyone has the right to equality before the law without distinction as to race, colour and national or ethnic origin, including the "right to own property alone as well as in joining with others" and "the right to inherit". The Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women recognises the property rights in Article 16, which establishes the same right for both spouses to ownership, acquisition, management, administration, enjoyment and disposition of property and Article 15, which establishes women's right to conclude contracts.rights
Property rights are also enshrined in the Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees and the Convention on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of Their Families. These international human rights instruments for minorities do not establish a separate right to property, but prohibit discrimination in relation to property rights where such rights are guaranteed.