IRIN Web Special on Internal Displacement

Differentiating IDPs

Critical to responding to the requirements of IDPs is to recognise that they are not an anonymous mass, but invariably a highly differentiated body of people. Their situations vary enormously. Some attention is being devoted to the particular needs of elderly IDPs, but those of the young, women, handicapped and others also have to be addressed.

Nor do all IDPs face the same level of threat. Young cites the example of Sudan, where many people displaced from their homes in western Upper Nile, where the civil war has been bitterly fought, are in a desperate situation, while the needs of millions of southern IDPs in the capital, Khartoum, and other cities and towns in northern Sudan face different and usually less pressing problems. "Protection is the basic requirement of the first group, while the second group's survival is not at stake," Young says.

When is an IDP no longer an IDP?

As noted in the accompanying articles, it is not always easy to ascertain when IDPs cease to hold that status. Some IDPs, such as those who fled from war in the rural areas of Angola, Sudan, and Somalia have now resided in their respective capitals for many years and effectively been economically and socially integrated. These might well not return to their original homes even with peace. On the other hand, others not so fully integrated will begin returning with the first signs of improving security.

In the case of Rwanda, many IDPs were forcibly relocated in 'permanent' villages other than their original homes, and as a result are now no longer considered IDPs by the government, according to the Global IDP Project. In neighbouring Burundi, under the government's policy of "regroupment", some IDPs have been forced against their will to reside in villages.

These examples and others are challenging the international community's understanding of when IDPs cease to be IDPs, and this in turn has led the independent US Brookings Institution to examine the entire issue, with the result that a policy paper is expected to be released shortly. [More details]

Right of return

Another area for debate has been the focus in the GPs on the right of IDPs to return to their homes. Whereas the right is not likely to be challenged in theory, it may either not be realisable in practice or can only be realised in circumstances that may threaten their security. At a regional workshop on internal displacement in the South Caucasus held in Tbilisi in May 2000, participants noted that while most IDPs had a very strong desire to return home, in part not to reward perceived past injustices, where the root causes of various conflicts had not been resolved large-scale and durable returns were unlikely.

Like refugees, IDPs may be forced to reside away from their homes for many years, which not only robs them of the right to pursue a decent life but may also place them in a position where they became politically marginalised. In Georgia, while the internally displaced are able to vote in presidential elections, they are not able to vote for their local parliamentary and municipal representatives - that is, for those who could most directly help improve their conditions. [More information]

According to Young: "The reality of the circumstances faced by IDPs may thus practically be little different from that of refugees who cross international boundaries (and indeed some critics contend that they should not be distinguished), but while the latter may use their status to apply for resettlement in a third country, the former frequently do not always have that opportunity. And this raises the further problem of the efforts of the international community to encourage IDPs to remain in their country of origin when by so doing they may eliminate or reduce their prospects of resettlement in a third country."

"In northern Uganda, IDPs fearful of the Lord's Resistance Army have been crowded into protected villages, where hygienic conditions are poor, and the IDPs sometimes appear to be even more vulnerable to rebel attacks. Once again, a genuine concern to rectify the problems of IDPs can only be accomplished in the political realm and that remains problematic."

PART III