Justice, power and informal settlements: Understanding the juridical view of property rights in Central Asia

Abstract

The article examines how judges and lawyers struggle to legitimise and normalise private property rights against attempts by poor and migrant groups to politicise housing and social needs in Central Asia. It discusses the juridical understanding of justice and equality in relation to property rights violations on the outskirts of major cities in Kyrgyzstan and Kazakhstan. It argues that the juridical system is central in construing property rights and obligations, and in so doing social inequalities are legitimised and naturalised in a neoliberalising post-Soviet space. The article uses the concepts of ‘the moral economy’ and ‘the juridical field’ to examine how judges and lawyers justify and normalise their ways of interpreting and ordering the social world.

The other road to serfdom: The rise of the rentier class in post-Soviet economies

“…They became the focus of three qualitative case studies. This article draws on these case studies to examine how banks, property developers, judges, international financial institutions and state officials morally construed and justified property relations and rentier activities (see Sanghera, 2020; Sanghera & Satybaldieva, forthcoming for further details).…”

“…In legitimizing the unequal ownership and control of land, the judges rationalized and de-politicized the social suffering of poor and migrant groups. This form of judicial justice was also applied to other unequal social relationships, such as between lenders and borrowers and property owners and tenants, where the rights of the propertied class often trumped the needs and well-being of the propertyless (Sanghera, 2020; Sanghera & Satybaldieva, forthcoming).…”

“…Under neoliberalism, the judiciary becomes an important site of struggle for the ownership and control of existing assets, and the ability to extract economic rent (Sanghera, 2020). It can create unequal social relations between people in the economy in terms of differential rights, responsibilities and access to resources.…”

“…When borrowers reneged on their promise, the courts adjudicated against them, forcing them to comply. In cases of contract violation, Central Asian judges tend to uphold powerful owners' property rights against disadvantaged groups' needs and well-being (Sanghera, 2020). The rule of law and the security of private property are used to promote the sanctity of contracts and debt claims (Hudson, 2017).…”

Bad debt: The women’s mobilization against the financial industry in Kyrgyzstan

“…The Committee on Economic and Fiscal Policy (2013) found that judges did not believe that banking and microfinance laws violated Article 12 of the Constitution of the Kyrgyz Republic, which stipulates that private property is an inalienable right and that people cannot be involuntarily deprived of their property. Sanghera (2020) argues that the judiciary in post-Soviet countries protected property owners' rights to own, speculate and dispose assets at a profit over poor groups' basic human needs. In Central Asia, the courts defended lenders in cases of default on the basis of the rule of law and the sanctity of the contract (see also Sanghera & Satybaldieva, 2020a).…”