Section 28(c)(5) also provides that evictions and demolitions shall only take place during regular office hours and during good weather, unless those affected consent otherwise. To fully comply with standard 3.8 on the time and condition of evictions, further restrictions should be extended to prohibit evictions and demolitions during festivals, prior to elections and during or prior to school examination periods. (d) Restitution and Return Standard 3.10 requires government to prioritise restitution and return to the site of the inhabitants’ original dwellings, where possible. In its 1995 State report to the CESCR, this was explicitly made out as a matter of policy of the Philippine Government to promote on-site redevelopment of informal settlements, a policy which has been reinforced further under the current Aquino Administration’s 10-point covenant with the urban poor. Section 26 of the UDHA also provides for on-site development to be implemented whenever possible ‘in order to ensure minimum resettlement of the beneficiaries of the Program from their existing places of occupancy’. This prioritisation of on-site redevelopment as a feature of the legislative regime is encouraging and promotes compliance with international standards. However, there is no mention in either section 28 or its IRRs of matters concerning on-site resettlement. As mentioned above, these provisions appear to presuppose that a resettlement site has already been determined and provide no specific requirements for different avenues of resettlement. For on-site development to be effective, specific measures are needed to facilitate communities’ resettlement back to their original site, which must be provided for at law. Indeed, standard 3.10 notes that special measures are required to facilitate the return of affected communities to their original residential site if they have been relocated temporarily for the implementation of a development project. The UDHA or IRRs should be updated to reflect this standard. There should be specific provision for the process of resettlement back to the original site of residence, where possible. In addition, the prioritisation of on-site resettlement should be reflected not only in the overarching statutory provisions, but also during the various processes mandated by the IRRs, such as consultations with communities prior to eviction and resettlement. (e) Legal Aid and Rem edies A concerning absence in both the UDHA and relevant regulatory instruments is a comprehensive system of legal aid, administrative review and remedies against adverse decisions of government in the context of the eviction and resettlement process. Nowhere does the UDHA provide sufficient channels for review of decisions taken by responsible agencies. The IRRs to section 28 of the UDHA provide a catalogue of potential avenues for recourse for aggrieved parties to complain against government officials and agencies for alleged non-compliance with relevant provisions.67 Many of these grievance measures require the assistance of government authorities to process the complaint. For instance, complaints against the Philippine National Police or LGU executives must be lodged with the DILG. Complaints against 67 s. 7. 38  Human Rights in the Rubble