Senate Rejected Uzbekistan’s Housing Code Due to Contradictions and Duplication of Provisions

Tashkent, Uzbekistan (UzDaily.com) — At a plenary session, the Senate reviewed the Law “On the Approval of the Housing Code of the Republic of Uzbekistan.”

Senators noted that the absence of a unified system of legal regulation governing housing relations hampers the consistent implementation of housing policy and necessitates a review of state governance mechanisms in this sphere.

In addition, instances of duplication and contradictions between the provisions of the Housing Code and the Civil Code were identified, creating difficulties in law enforcement practice.

During the analysis of the Law, senators drew attention to a number of key issues. In particular, Article 7 of the Code assigns oversight of compliance with the rules for the operation of apartment buildings to the Ministry of Construction and Housing and Communal Services, while similar powers under the Law “On the Management of Apartment Buildings” are vested in the Inspectorate for Control in the Field of Operation of the Apartment Housing Stock.

In the context of the administrative reform carried out in accordance with Presidential Decree No. UP-151 of 28 August 2023, the Inspectorate for Control in the Field of Construction and Housing and Communal Services was established under the Cabinet of Ministers, which necessitates a revision of the powers assigned to the ministry.

Duplication of provisions was also identified: Articles 30 and 36 of the Code regulate the procedure for the demolition of residential premises and the construction of new buildings in their place. Senators emphasized the need to harmonize these articles.

Article 40 of the Code defines categories of citizens in need of improved housing conditions.

At the same time, the previously effective Cabinet of Ministers Resolution No. 170 of 26 February 2019, which served as the basis for determining these categories, has been repealed. A new Resolution No. 124 of 11 March 2024 additionally stipulates that such citizens include individuals who have resided and been registered in the relevant locality for at least three years. Senators noted that the categories of those in need require revision.

In addition, contradictory provisions of the Law and issues related to the reorganization of inspectorates as part of the ongoing administrative reforms were discussed.

Taking into account the identified inconsistencies and the need for further refinement, the senators rejected the Law.