A/HRC/22/46 urbanized land and housing. However, in cases of complete lack of alternative secure housing elsewhere, they can have detrimental effects, given the real threat of evictions with no or inadequate compensation and within an extremely short time frame.63 The issue is how to manage land in ways in which these temporary rights-holders are not left vulnerable to forced eviction and abuse, and are able to gain increased tenure security in the long term. 81. Conversely, such temporary permits could be a first step towards increased tenure security.64 For instance in Brazil, authorities can recognize, by way of leasehold rights to use and stay for an indefinite period, those individuals or communities who have settled on public land for at least five years—however these do not offer complete protection, as seen in the recent evictions of communities benefiting from such permits. 65 D. Urban planning 82. Urban planning policies, laws and regulations can have a direct impact on strengthening tenure security, or, conversely, on increasing insecurity. Planning rules that often disregard cultural specificities and are based solely on the housing products offered to the upper classes or dominant groups, coupled with rigid and costly regulatory frameworks for how land and housing should be developed, often fail to meet the needs of the poor or of marginalized groups, putting formalization out of their reach and rendering them or their homes de facto illegal. 83. Non-compliance with planning laws thus becomes a common justification for the evictions of long-established communities, often minorities or informal settlers. This has been the case in Israel, whereby non-issuance of construction permits often leads to irregular construction and, in some cases, to eviction and demolition orders to the detriment of minorities.66 In Turkey, an urban rehabilitation project within the framework of a law regulating the protection and renovation of historical and cultural buildings led to the demolition of the historic Romani neighbourhood and the eviction of its inhabitants. 67 84. Another issue is the lack of coherence and harmonization among the multiplicity of laws and regulations bearing upon urban security of tenure, leading to legal uncertainty, lack of implementation of key provisions, even unwanted impacts such as evictions. 68 Rights of adverse possession provided for by law might also be limited or denied by subsequent regulations, or in implementation. 69 In addition, even when planning laws provide for the regularization of informal settlements, questions of sustainability relating to the increase of land prices and full availability of services remain.70 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 18 Ibid. Such as the Certificate of Comfort in Trinidad and Tobago. See the City Statute (Federal Law No. 10.257/2001); Provisional Measure No. 2220 (2001); A/HRC/22/67, case BRA 14/2012. A/HRC/22/46/Add.1, para. 24. A/HRC/10/7/Add.1, paras. 86-87. See also A/HRC/22/46/Add.2, paras. 39-40. See NALAS, Challenges of Regularization of Informal Settlements in South East Europe: Overview of the Relevant Urban Planning and Legalization Laws and Practice (2011). For example, in Bulgaria, the moratorium on adverse possession of public land preventing Roma from legalizing their homes (A/HRC/19/56/Add.2 and Corr.1, para. 88); in Cambodia, the eviction of urban poor with possession rights under the Land Law (see Bridges Across Borders Southeast Asia, Untitled); in Brazil, expropriation with inadequate compensation of regularized communities (A/HRC/22/67, case BRA 14/2012). Edesio Fernandes, ―Informal settlements: What can South Africa learn from the Brazilian experience?‖, Transformer, vol. 18, No. 2, p. 30.