interpretation or components, but even its mere existence as a human right is challenged by many.31 This controversy is a reflection of the ideological divisions of the Cold War, and the diverse political systems across the globe – such as the communist bloc or many Latin American countries – that had different approaches regarding the ownership of private property. Eventually, after several discussions and amendments, Western states succeeded in incorporating this right into the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR).32 Article 17 of the UDHR states that “Everyone has the right to own property alone as well as in association with others. No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his property.” Usually, such declarations are considered soft law33 under international law; however, the UDHR has achieved the status of customary international law, and thus, it is considered binding.34 The right to property is not enshrined in the two main legally-binding human rights covenants, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) or the International Convention on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR). However, Article 17 of the ICCPR does protect against incidents of “unlawful interference with…. privacy, family, [and] home”, and states that everyone should be afforded protection “against such interference or attacks.” Accordingly, Article 2 of the ICCPR requires state parties to provide “an effective remedy” for persons whose rights have been violated. Under Article 2 of the ICESCR, states are obliged to use “all appropriate means” to realize the rights “recognized in the present Covenant,” which includes “refrain[ing] from forced evictions and ensur[ing] that the law is enforced against its agents or third parties who carry out forced evictions.”35 Deprivation of Property Under international law, private property confiscation by a state is not illegal or arbitrary per se. While arbitrary or unlawful deprivation of property is clearly prohibited by the core human rights conventions, there are international legal 31 Jacob Mchangama, “The Right to Property in Global Human Rights Law,” CATO Policy Report, CATO Institute, May-June 2011, available at: https://www.cato.org/policy-report/mayjune-2011/rightproperty-global-human-rights-law [accessed 19 September 2017]. 32 Ibid. 33 In contrast with “hard law,” the term “soft law” refers to quasi-legal instruments that are not legally binding, or where the binding force is somewhat “weaker.” 34 Hurst Hannum, The Status of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights in National and International Law, 25 Ga. J. Int’l & Comp. L. 287 (1996): 289-290, available at: http://digitalcommons.law.uga.edu/ gjicl/vol25/iss1/13 [accessed 19 September 2017]. 35 UN Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (CESCR), General Comment No. 7: The right to adequate housing (Art.11.1): forced evictions, 20 May 1997, E/1998/22, available at: http://www. refworld.org/docid/47a70799d.html [accessed 17 October 2017]. 18