A/HRC/40/61 responsibility is incompatible with the principle of the rule of law, which must always be taken to include respect for international human rights obligations.” 21 When courts approve evictions without ensuring alternative accommodation or fail to provide remedies for violations of the right to life caused by homelessness, they violate international human rights and the rule of law and, in so doing, place the State in non-compliance with its international human rights obligations. Principle 8 – States must promote decision-making that is consistent with the right to housing. 20. Governments and courts must ensure that all exercises of statutory authority, administrative decisions and policies accord with a State’s obligations to ensure the right to housing. In litigation, Governments should promote and adopt interpretations of domestic law that are consistent with the obligation to ensure effective remedies, including when defending against alleged violations. 22 Decision makers with discretionary authority should exercise that authority consistently with the right to housing, for example by dismissing an eviction application which may result in homelessness or an application for zoning approval for a development which fails to further the realization of the right to housing. Principle 9 – Remedies must address both individual and systemic violations. 21. Individual remedies should include, where appropriate, compensation and reparation for any violation of the right to housing, including the right to return to a home after an illegal eviction. Remedies must also address the structural causes and policies that gave rise to the violation and ensure non-repetition. Where appropriate, Governments should be required to adopt or amend legislation, allocate necessary resources or regulate private actors in the housing market to address structural causes of violations of the right to housing. Principle 10 – Remedies must be implemented by Governments and enforced by courts with participation by rights holders. 22. Remedies ordered by courts with respect to the right to housing, whether to prevent threatened evictions or to implement effective housing strategies to address systemic violations, are too often ignored by Governments. It is fundamental to the rule of law that Governments respect the decisions of courts and human rights bodies by implementing required remedies. Where Governments or others require time to implement structural remedies, such as developing programmes to address the housing needs of particular groups, remedies should provide for independent supervision by the court or another authority, enforceable timelines, monitoring and reporting, and provision for participation and consultation with those affected. III. Access to justice for the progressive realization of the right to housing A. The standard of reasonableness 23. The majority of violations of the right to housing derive from the failure of States to progressively realize the right to housing by adopting appropriate measures to address the unacceptable circumstances in which people are living. Whether it is a failure to implement participatory upgrading plans in informal settlements or to implement plans to reduce and eliminate homelessness within a reasonable time, States’ failures to take positive measures to ensure the realization of the right to housing must be addressed as human rights violations affecting individuals and communities. Those affected must have access to justice to hold States accountable to the obligations described in article 2 (1) of the 21 22 Ibid., para. 14. E/C.12/CAN/CO/4-E/C.12/CAN/CO/5, paras. 11 (b) and 36. 7