Guinea: Dar-es-Salam Evictions Raise Property Rights Concerns

In Guinea, authorities commenced eviction operations in areas deemed dangerous in Dar-es-Salam on Wednesday, August 26, 2026, following a recent devastating landslide at the Dar-es-Salam landfill.

This event carries profound legal significance, particularly concerning the balance between public safety, human rights, and the state's obligations. The evictions, described by authorities as a preventative measure after a landslide caused over 30 deaths and multiple injuries, directly impact vulnerable populations, as exemplified by Hawa Keïta. For legal professionals, this situation raises critical questions about the legality and proportionality of forced evictions, the right to adequate housing, property rights, and the state's duty to protect its citizens while adhering to due process. It underscores the complex interplay between disaster management, urban planning, and fundamental human rights, often leading to humanitarian crises and potential legal challenges.

The legal context for these evictions is rooted in Guinea's constitutional framework, which, like many African constitutions, guarantees rights such as property and housing, though these can be subject to limitations in the public interest. The Code Foncier et Domanial (Land and State Property Code) governs land ownership, expropriation procedures, and typically requires fair compensation and due process for any displacement. Furthermore, Guinea is a signatory to international human rights instruments, including the African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, which protect against arbitrary evictions and affirm the right to adequate housing. The state's emergency powers in disaster situations are also relevant, but these powers are not absolute and must be exercised within legal and human rights parameters. The key parties involved are the Guinean authorities (e.g., local government, disaster management agencies), the affected residents of Dar-es-Salam, and potentially human rights organizations.

Practitioners representing affected communities or individuals must meticulously assess the legality of the eviction procedures, including whether proper notice was given, genuine consultation occurred, and adequate resettlement or compensation mechanisms are in place. They should explore all available legal avenues, including constitutional challenges, administrative appeals, and claims under land law or international human rights standards, to protect the rights of the displaced. For government legal advisors, this situation highlights the critical need to ensure that public safety measures are implemented with strict adherence to legal frameworks, human rights obligations, and transparent processes, including providing humanitarian assistance and long-term solutions for displaced populations. The outcome of this specific matter, particularly regarding compensation, resettlement, or legal challenges, is not reported in the excerpt.