studies and stakeholder consultations. It is recognised that the limited evidence provided by these case studies does not represent the experience of all communities subjected to eviction and resettlement. Although the fact-finding approach cannot replace a comprehensive statistical review of compliance during the eviction and resettlement process, the individual experiences of these communities are important from the perspective of human rights. The focus of human rights on individuals as right-holders demands that their individual experiences are recognised and represented. Essentially, where these stories offer strong evidence of government non-compliance with established standards, even where in the minority, they should of themselves trigger reform in government policies and practices. Housing in the Philippines is a notably divisive issue and first-hand information in the context of human rights violations can often be influenced by the experiences of those interviewed, which can make the evidence less reliable. During the course of factfinding, significant difficulties also arose in balancing the evidence provided by communities against that provided by government stakeholders. Community, civil society and government representatives were eager to volunteer information they had heard from other sources or pass judgement on other stakeholders for various reasons. In the consideration of evidence provided by all stakeholders, the review prioritised first-hand information. While evidence considered was generally confined to that which was first-hand and relevant, the opinions of stakeholders were sought in relation to the deficiencies of the legal and policy framework and potential reform measures to improve housing service delivery and the enforcement of human rights standards. These opinions and perspectives have been incorporated into the analysis of the review, where relevant. xix