Internally Displaced Persons: The Road ahead for the United Nations

Introduction:-

'People are always neglecting something they can do in trying to do something they can't do.' - Edgar Watson

The same can be stated to be true for a world order that has in its relentless pursuit of lasting world peace or, for that matter, sending spacecrafts to reach distant planets, tended to forget at times, the scores of their brethren treading the forsaken stretches of mother earth. Those, who are yet to enjoy the basic amenities that signify human dignity and are inalienable to human dignity. Among many such forsaken groups of people, those who are referred to as Internally Displaced Persons or IDPs, constitute a sizeable number. Unfortunately, the world was seen to be unwilling to take up the issue of the IDPs head on, till as late as in the early 1990s.

The International Community's response to the Problem of IDPs: A Historic Account:-

The formulation of a proper legal definition based on a clear cut concept of the IDPs is a product of recent history. Laws to deal with human migration were not considered to be necessary till the early 20th century because the practice of sheltering those compelled to flight was not perceived as a burden, but rather as a necessary incident of power and indeed as a source of communal enrichment[1]. It was only in the 1920s when the League of Nations established the office of the High Commissioner for Russian Refugees on the 27th of June, 1921[2]. Dr. Fridtjof Nansen of Norway was appointed as the first High Commissioner on 20th August, 1921[3]. The mandate of the High Commissioner was extended to cover Armenian Refugees in 1923[4], the Assyrian-Chaldean and the Turkish refugees in 1928[5]. Later on the task was entrusted to the Nansen International Office for Refugees. The mandate of the Office was increased to include within its fold of operations, Spanish refugees in 1933[6], German refugees in 1938[7] and Austrian refugees in 1939[8].

Analysis of the above mentioned arrangements and conventions reveal three distinct approaches to the problem of migration between 1920 to 1950. They are:-

1. The Judicial Perspective (1920-1935) of protection for people displaced from their homes, based on the criterion of ethnic or territorial origin, coupled with the stipulation that they did not enjoy de jure national protection and only those outside the country of their origin were eligible[9].

2. The Social Perspective (1935-1939) of protection for people displaced from their homes wherein it was considered to be ethical to extend the scope mentioned above, to those who were victims of social and political events which resulted in a de facto, if not de jure, loss of state protection[10].

3.  The Individualist Perspective (1939- 1950) of protection for even individuals who have been displaced. This approach was directed at individuals in search of an escape from perceived injustice as a result of which he had to flee his country of origin[11].

Then came the 1951 Convention relating to the Status of Refugees[12], wherein Article 1(A)(2) defined the term 'refugees'. The definition was restricted to people who are under fear of persecution due to race, religion, political opinion, membership of a particular group and are outside their country of nationality or country of former habitual residence.. After this Convention, the Convention relating to the Status of Stateless Persons was formulated in 1954[13], thereby extending international protection to yet another group of persons who had hitherto remained unprotected against violation of human rights. The scope of protections under this Convention extended only to those people who were not recognised as nationals by any State. So basically, none of the above mentioned approaches or Conventions managed to provide for the protection of the rights of the IDPs.

In the late 1940s Greece had suggested that those internally displaced by civil war should accorded international help because even if they enjoyed legal protection of the country of their origin, the situation in many countries was such that the material needs of the IDPs exceeded what their countries could provide them with in the face of domestic conflict and foreign occupation.  India and Pakistan had emphasized that the UN should take a universal approach not excluding refugees merely by reason of the fact that they possessed the nationality of the country in which they found themselves in after displacement. The USA on the other hand felt that the UN should continue to assist specific categories of refugees[14].

Move from 'Responsibility of the State' to 'International Involvement':-

The IDPs are the responsibility of the State and interfering on their behalf would amount to violation of both the principles of State Sovereignty and Non-Interference, continued to be the popular refrain at the international circle. It has now, however, been recognized as a legitimate matter of international concern after the realisation dawned upon the international community that IDPs require international protection on account of their miserable conditions. It was seen that mostly internal displacement took place due to civil conflicts during which in situations where the authority of the central government is itself in dispute and its capacity or willingness to provide protection and assistance are equally in doubt[15].

The Need for the protection of IDPs:-

The major reasons[16] why the need was felt for bringing into existence a legal regime for the protection of the IDPs are as follows-

•  IDPs may be required to hide or they may be forced towards unhealthy and inhospitable environments, thereby making them vulnerable.

•  The social organisations of the IDPs may be destroyed and family groups separated, thereby leading to women having to take up non-traditional roles or face particular vulnerabilities.

•   IDPs, especially children, elderly people and pregnant women may experience profound psychosocial distress related to displacement.

•  Removal from sources of income and livelihood may add to physical and psychosocial vulnerability for displaced people.

• Schooling and education of children may be disrupted.

•  Internal displacement to areas where local inhabitants are of different groups and/or speak in a different language and/or are inhospitable, may increase risk to internally displaced communities.

• IDPs may be abused by armed combatants or other parties to the conflict.

• They may lack identity and other documents essential for receiving benefits and getting legal recognition.

The UN's taking up of the problem of the IDPs:-

'People must be made to see… the cost in torments and in tears of the glory of the battlefield.'-  Honourable General Guillaume- Henri Dufour[17]

It is failure of the human race to see what General Dufour had been able to envisage after a lifetime at the battle field, is perhaps what is stopping the world order from being able to do away with the problem of migrants, who are having to leave their homes and scavenge around the globe in order to spend a peaceful life without their lives being cut short by a bullet or a bomb. Incidentally, it is such violence and war that has given rise to this huge population of migrants among whom, the IDPs, numbering 26.4 million, have slowly taken the centre-stage, ahead of the refugees[18].

The Commission on Human Rights, in its Resolution no. 1991/25[19] of 5th March, 1991, requested the Secretary-General to submit an analytical report on internally displaced persons, based on the information submitted by the different governments.

In the absence of any proper definition, the then Secretary General of the UN, Mr. Boutros Boutros-Ghali, came up with a working definition, which stated that IDPs are 'Persons or groups who have been forced to flee their homes suddenly or unexpectedly in large numbers, as a result of armed conflict, internal strife, systematic violations of human rights or natural or man-made disaster, and who are within the territory of their own country'[20].

The positives that could be derived out of the above mentioned definition would be: -

i) The fact that it enumerated the range of circumstances in which internal displacement could occur was bound to be helpful[21],

ii) It served as a starting point at a time when there was no proper definition of the IDPs[22] and

iii) It Included persons uprooted by natural and man-made disasters within its ambit as well, along with those who had been displaced due to the other, more obvious reasons[23].

The negative points relating to the above mentioned definition were also quite a few in number. To start with,

i) The words 'suddenly and unexpectedly' overlooked situations in which displacement was not spontaneous but an organised state policy implemented over a period of years or decades, for e.g. in Burma, Ethiopia, Iraq[24] etc.,

ii) The words 'forced to flee' excluded all situations wherein people were 'obliged' to leave their homes, for e.g. in Bosnia, Zimbabwe[25] etc. and iii) The words 'in large numbers' invariably excluded people who fled in small groups or on an individual basis[26].

The Commission on Human Rights, further requested the Secretary General in its Resolution no. 1992/73[27] of 5th March, 1992, to designate a representative to seek again views and information from all Governments on the human rights issues related to internally displaced persons, including an examination of existing international human rights, humanitarian and refugee law and standardsand their applicability to the protection of and relief assistance to internally[28].

In furtherance of the request made by the Commission on Human Rights, the then Secretary General appointed Dr. Francis Deng as the Representative of the United Nations Secretary General on Internally Displaced Persons in 1992[29].

The Guiding Principles on Internal Displacement were prepared and submitted by Dr. Deng to the Commission on Human Rights in 1996. The Commission requested him to develop a normative framework to enhance the protection of Internally Displaced Persons. In response, Dr. Deng presented a new set of Guiding Principles on IDPs in 1998[30], which went on to form the cornerstone of the IDP protection regime. The Guiding Principles[31], in its introductory section defined IDPs as 'persons of groups of persons who have been forced or obliged to flee or to leave their homes or places of habitual residence, in particular as a result of or in order to avoid the effects of armed conflict, situations of generalized violence, violations of human rights or natural or human-made disasters, and who have not crossed an internationally recognized State border.'

The new definition was an improvement over the earlier 'working definition' of IDPs in the following ways:-

a)  The definition prefaces the list of causes with the qualifier “in particular” so as not to exclude the possibility of other situations that meet the key core criteria of involuntary movement within one's country[32].

b)  The words 'sudden and unexpected' have been done away with and so have the words 'in large numbers'[33].

c)  The words 'obliged to flee' have been included in the definition along with the words 'forced to flee[34]'.

Views regarding the definition:

Many were of the opinion that the definition of IDPs should have been limited to persons subjected to persecution or conflict and those displaced by natural or man-made disasters should not have been included within the ambit of the protections. Many States seemed to be suspicious regarding whether it was a covert attempt at interfering into their sovereignty or not[35]. Some forwarded the view that IDPs could have been held to be 'victims of war' and hence there was no need for separate laws to deal with them. Many NGOs mounted a counter to the above views by stating that if the above mentioned views were to be taken into consideration, it would run the risk of formulating a definition which would not accurately depict the variety of root causes for displacement. They tried to portray the thought that the Guiding Principles were a restatement of the States' obligations.

Nature and Importance of the Principles:-

The nature of the Guiding Principles is as follows:

•  The Principles are merely directive and not legally binding[36].

• It doesn't even enjoy the status of a Declaration or Convention[37].

• It forms the core for the protection of the rights of IDPs world wide[38] [39].

Its importance is vindicated due to the following reasons:

• Going by the magnitude of the problem, things would have had been worse had it not been for the Guiding principles.

• It lays down the characteristics of the IDPs and also looks into the protection of their rights during displacement and advises State Governments on how to return, resettle and re-integrate the IDPs in their former places of residence.

• IDPs are often wrongly called refugees[40]. This is a very common mistake and a very grave one as well since this had been one of the main reasons which prevented the problems of IDPs from coming up at the high table of the United Nations for an extended period of time. The Pricniples helped in doing away with this confusion[41].

Refugees and IDPs: Distinction and Justification for separate laws:-

IDPs are often wrongly called refugees[42]. This is a very common mistake and a very grave one as well since this had been one of the main reasons which prevented the problems of IDPs from coming up at the high table of the United Nations for an extended period of time.

Despite the common mistake in this regard, the two groups differ from each other in the following manners[43]:

a) Refugee law originated after the 2nd World War. The fact that its definition in the 1951 Convention had temporal and geographical restrictions shows that it was initially intended to address a very specific situation, i.e. to address the problem of political opponents fleeing the communist States. Essentially, the definition of refugee was guided by ideological and political considerations. This is not the case with IDPs, the Guiding Principles for whom were created under much wider, humanitarian considerations[44].

b) The causes enumerated as ones that give arise to refugees are exhaustive whereas the words 'in particular', as included in the definition of the IDPs, point to the fact that the list of causes that may give arise to IDPs is not exhaustive, unlike in the case of refugees[45].

c) The biggest difference between refugees and IDPs is the fact that the refugee status can only be granted if the displaced person has crossed any international border. The case is just the opposite when it comes to IDPs[46].

d) The requirements to become a refugee according to the 1951 convention are precise and limited – there has to be a “well-founded fear of persecution” and this fear must be linked to one of the enumerated grounds. The IDP definition is much broader, and includes natural and human-made disasters[47].

e) The mandate for the protection of the rights and interests of the refugees lie with the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees whereas the mandate for the protection of the rights and interests of the IDPs primarily lie with the Special Rapporteur on the Human Rights of Internally Displaced Persons, which replaced the office of the Representative of the Secretary General on Internally Displaced persons[48], who is aided in his work by many other UN Agencies.

f) The legal status of refugees is determined primarily by an international legal document, namely the 1951 Convention on the Status of Refugees. The document that lies at the heart of the IDP protection regime is not a legally enforceable document but rather a non-binding directive in the form of principles and hence does not command the same force as that of the 1951 Convention[49].

g) The status of refugee entitles the individual to certain rights. Being internally displaced does not entitle one to any additional rights – internally displaced persons have the same rights as other citizens of the country[50].

It is because of the above mentioned distinctions and also because of the fact that Sovereign. States might try to block international aid to IDPs who are within their jurisdiction, unlike in the case of the refugees, and due to the fact that displacement due to natural or man-made disasters or due to large-scale development are not covered by the refugee laws, it became that much more necessary to formulate separate laws in order to deal with the IDPs.

The protection extended to the refugees is by and large, surrogate in nature, since they are no longer under the protection of their own state whereas the protection extended to the IDPs shall have to continue to be largely complementary in nature, i.e. over and above those that are already available at the national level. And thus, the existence of separate laws for the two groups is thus justified.

UN Institutions confronting the problem of IDPs:-

The Representative of the Secretary General on Internally Displaced Persons was the first office created in 1992, in order to confront the problem of the IDPs. In 2004, a new Representative, Walter Kalin was appointed to replace the first Representative, Dr. Deng. In 2004, the office of the Representative was replaced by the office of the Special Rapporteur on the Human Rights of Internally Displaced Persons, with Dr. Chaloka Beyani taking over as the first Rapporteur[51].

In the absence of any binding convention or any Office in line with that of the UNHCR or UNHCHR, the Special Rapporteur's role has largely been persuasive. He has relentlessly promoted respect for the human rights if the IDPs while engaging with the Governments for the purposes of advocating promotion of National Policies and Laws on Internal Displacement and ensuring a deeper understanding of the rights of the IDPs while at the same time Disseminating the Guiding Principles on Internal Displacement to more and more law and policy makers[52]. He has engaged in dialogues with Governments, NGOs and other actors, undertaken Country visits and has convened and supported seminars that bring together Government representatives, civil society, international and regional bodies to develop a more effective national response.

He has supported national human rights institutions[53] and tried to build a link of the same with the civil society while trying to engage the non-State actors in order to ensure their compliance with the Guiding Principles. It has also been in the schedule of the Special Rapporteur to raise human rights and protection concerns of the IDPs at the international level[54] and trying to integrate IDP issues into the work of the regional organizations, and as well as the different agencies of the UN. Mainstreaming the Human Rights of IDPs in the UN System has been one of the major concerns of the Special Rapporteur which is why he has attempted to strengthen the Cooperation with OHCHR, Treaty Bodies and other Special Procedures through inter-UN Agency advocacy. His submission of Annual Reports to the Human Rights Council and General Assembly, ensures the maximum audience to the concerns being raised by the Special Rapporteur[55]. 

Over and above the Special Rapporteur, institutions such as the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees and as well as the International Committee of the Red Cross have contributed in a major manner to the deal with the problems of the IDPs. Even though the UNHCR's original mandate was to protect refugees but in recent years it has been involved in programmes for Internally Displaced Persons as well. The Agency can act to help these people at the request of the Secretary General or a competent principal organ of the United Nations and with the consent of the government of the country involved[56].

The Red Cross on the other hand treats those IDPs who have been displaced due to violence or war as victims of war and works for them while staying within their original mandate as laid down by Common Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions[57]. Their jurisdictions sometimes tend to overlap[58].

What the concerted efforts of the Special Rapporteur, the UNHCR, the ICRC and other UN Agencies has lead to is the increased awareness among different nations and regions, regarding the plight if the IDPs. This has resulted in the formulation of Regional Conventions, such as the African Union Convention for the Protection and Assistance of Internally Displaced Persons in Africa, popularly known as the Kampala Convention[59], looking to implement the provisions of the Guiding Principles on Internal Displacement and leading to the establishment of institutions and offices such as those of the Humanitarian, Refugees and Displacement Unit of the African Union Commission[60] and Special Rapporteur on Refugees, Asylum Seekers, IDPs and Migrants in Africa[61] are positive steps towards elimination of the scourge of internal displacement.

Also, Legislations and National Policies, based on the Guiding Principles have been formulated in many countries, for e.g. in Angola[62], Burundi[63], Liberia[64], and Uganda[65] in Africa and Columbia[66] in South America.

Problems faced in the protection of IDPs:-

International Law is in any case referred to as a soft law. Considering the fact that the Guiding Principles have absolutely no binding effect on anyone, it makes the law relating to the IDPs even softer[67].  

The office of the Special Rapporteur, without having that many staff, is infrastructurally incapable of addressing a problem as big as that of the IDPs[68].

While most armed conflicts previously took place on the international plane, today most conflicts are internal, pitting Government forces against non-state actors like rebels and militia[69]. This has only increased the magnitude of the problem, so much so that the UNHCR, which is the largest of the UN Agencies involved in alleviation of the problems of the IDPs is able to help only about 15.5 million of them in 26 countries out of an estimated 26.4 million IDPs all over the world[70].

The Cluster Approach was conceived amid concerns about coordination and capacity that arose from the weak operational capacity of the previous Collaborative approach where no sector leaders were determined leading to confusion among the agencies. As per this approach, 'sector leaders' from among the UN Agencies are to coordinate operations in specific areas to try to plug the identified gaps vis-à-vis protection of the IDPs. However, unfortunately, even the cluster approach has not quite proved to be enough, thus far, thereby raising demands to centralize the efforts to take care of the IDPs under one specialized agency[71].

Despite the proper designation of sector leaders as per the Cluster Approach, an outstanding problem has been an overlapping institutional and operational mandate of the UNHCR and ICRC with regard to IDP protection[72].

Another outstanding problem with the IDP protection regime and its implementation is that almost all concentration is solely given only to those IDPs who are displaced due to violence, at the cost of those who are displaced due to man-made projects, natural disasters or climate change[73].

Conclusion and Suggestions:-

Hence, it can be concluded that despite the problem of IDPs being about 2 decades old, it continues to be an ever emerging challenge for the UN to handle. Though it can't be denied the requisite steps have been taken in this regard, a lot more needs to be done.

To start with, there is a need for the enactment of a proper Convention to deal with this massive problem[74] since a Guiding Principle won't be of much help in dealing with the problem.

Also, the UN would be better placed if it were to create a full fledged office in tandem with the Office of the UNHCR that would better enable the Rapporteur to be able to reach out to the IDPs in a better manner[75].

The fact that the UNHCR is able to reach out to just above half of the IDPs worldwide, despite its appreciable presence and network in every corner of the earth, further underlines the need for the creation of another agency that shall be mandated to look into the issues of the IDPs alone[76].

As far as the Cluster Approach is concerned, either the mandate has to be further clarified with major overall control being given to the UNHCR, it being the largest and most well resourced UN Agency involved with the IDPs, while the other Agencies continue to work in their respective fields or else the whole Approach needs to be overhauled and replaced with a more functional approach to the problem[77].

The most proper manner of doing away with the overlap of the institutional and operational mandate of the UNHCR and ICRC, thereby leading to gaps in protection of the IDPs, would be to create an independent organization/agency mandated to handle the problem of the IDPs[78].

More concentration shall have to be paid to those IDPs who are displaced due to man-made projects, natural disasters or climate change[79], considering the fact that by 2011, some 14.9 million people had became internally displaced due to natural disasters, with the great majority of them across Asia[80].

[1].The Development of the Refugee Definition in International Law' (The Law of Refugee Status) accessed 28 April 2013 1. 

[2]. Dr. H.O. Agarwal, International Law and Human Rights (17th edn, Central Law Publications 2010) 843.

[3]. Ibid

[4]. 'The Nansen International Office for Refugees - History of Organization' (Nobelprize.org). accessed 28 April 2013.

[5]. Dr. S.R. Myneni, Human Rights (1st edn, Asia Law House 2012).

[6]. Collection of International Instruments and Legal Texts Concerning Refugees and Others of Concern to UNHCR, vol 1 (United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees 2007) 36.

[7]. Ibid.

[8]. Ibid 37.

[9]. James C. Hathaway, The Law of Refugee Status (1st edn, Butterworths 1991) 2. 

[10]. Ibid 4.

[11] .Ibid 5.

[12]. '1951 Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees' (UNHCR Communications and Public Information Servic)e < http://www.unhcr.org /3b66c2aa10.html> accessed 31 December 2012.

[13]. '1954 Convention relating to the Status of Stateless Persons' (Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights) < http:// www2.ohchr.org /english/law/stateless.htm> accessed 31 December 2012.

[14]. Guy S. Goodwin-Gill, Jane McAdam, The Refugee in International Law (3rd edn, Oxford University Press 2009) 482.

[15]. Ibid 481.

[16]. 'The definition of an Internally Displaced Person' (Internal Displacement Monitoring Centre) < http://www .internal-displacement.org/idp> accessed 31 December, 2012.

[17]. Henry Dunant, A Memory of Solferino (International Committee of the Red Cross 1959).

[18]. 'Internally Displaced People' (The UN refugee Agency) < http://www.unhcr.org/pages/49c3646c146.html> accessed 29 April  2013.

[19]. 'Internally displaced persons', UN Commission on Human Rights:  E/CN.4/RES/1991/25 ( 5 March 1991) < http://www.unhcr .org/refworld /docid/3b00f0b1c.html>  accessed 28 April 2013 .

[20]. E.Mooney, 'The Concept of Internal Displacement and the Case for Internally Displaced Persons as a Category of Concern' (2005) 24 RSQ 9.

[21]. Rhodri C. Williams, Protecting Internally Displaced Persons: A Manual for Law and Policy Makers (Universitat Bern 2008) 94.

[22]. Ibid., 95.

[23]. Ibid., 97.

[24]. Ibid 11.

[25] Ibid.

[26]. Dr. H.O. Agarwal, International Law and Human Rights (17th edn, Central Law Publications 2010) 855.

[27]. 'Internally displaced persons', UN Commission on Human Rights:   E/CN.4/RES/1992/73 ( 5 March 1992) < http://www.unhcr .org/refworld/ docid/3b00f0b1c.html>  accessed 28 April  2013 .

[28]. Ibid.

[29]. 'Introduction to the mandate of the Special Rapporteur of internally displaced persons, Dr. Chaloka Beyani' (Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights) accessed 28 April, 2013.

[30]. Dr. H.O. Agarwal, International Law and Human Rights (17th edn, Central Law Publications 2010) 854.

[31]. 'Guiding Principles on Internal Displacemnt', UN Commission on Human Rights:   E/CN.4/1998/53/Add.2  (11 February 1998) < http://daccess-dds-ny.un.org/doc/UNDOC/GEN/G98/104/93/PDF/G9810493.pdf?OpenElement>  accessed 28 April 2013.

[32]. Dr. H.O. Agarwal, International Law and Human Rights (17th edn, Central Law Publications 2010) 854.

[33]. Ibid.

[34].  Ibid., 855.

[35]. Kalin Walter and others (eds), 'Incorporating the Guiding Principles on Displacement into Domestic Law: Issues and Challenges' (The Americas Society of International Law 2010).

[36]. Jean-Philippe Lavoyer, 'Comments on the Guilding Principles on Internal Displacement' (1998) 324 IRRC.

[37]. Ibid.

[38]. 'Brookings-LSE Project on Internal Displacement' (Brookings Institution Press) < http://www.brookings.edu/ about/projects/idp/gp-page> accessed 28 April 2013.

[39]. Walter Kalin, 'Guilding Principles on Internal Displacement' (American Society of International Law and Brookings Institution Project on Internal Displacement 2000) 32 STLP 1.

[40]. Rahul Pandita, Our Moon has Blood Clots (Random House India 2013) 111.

[41]. Niteesh Kumar Upadhyay, 'Role of UNHCR in the Protection of Refugees' (2011) 1 LGS 24, 25.

[42]. Ibid.

[43]. Ibid.

[44]. James C. Hathaway, 'Refugees and Asylum' in Brian Opeskins and others, Foundations of International Migration Law (1st edn, Cambridge University Press 2012) 179.

[45]. Ibid.

[46]. Ibid., 180.

[47]. Ibid., 182.

[48]. James C. Hathaway, The Law of Refugee Status (1st edn, Butterworths 1991) 25.

[49]. Ibid., 26.

[50]. Ibid.

[51]. 'Introduction to the mandate of the Special Rapporteur of internally displaced persons, Dr. Chaloka Beyani' (Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights) accessed  28 April, 2013.

[52]. 'Areas of activity of the Special Rapporteur' (United Nations Human Rights: Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights) < http://www.ohchr.org/EN/Issues/IDPersons/Pages/Activity.aspx> accessed 29 April 2013.

[53]. 'Internally Displaced Persons' (Asia Pacific Forum) < http://www.asiapacificforum.net/support/issues/regional-workshops/idp> accessed 29 April 2013.

[54]. 'Forced Displacement in the context of climate change: Challenges for States under International Law' (Inter-Agency Standing Committee 2009) < http://www.humanitarianinfo.org/iasc/pageloader.aspx?page=content-search-fastsearch&query=internally %20displaced%20persons > accessed 29 April 2013.

[55]. 'Annual Reports' Rapporteur' (United Nations Human Rights: Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights) < http://www.ohchr .org/EN/Issues/IDPersons/Pages/Annual.aspx> accessed 29 April 2013.

[56].. Dr. H.O. Agarwal, International Organisations (1st edn, Central Law Publications 2011) 218

[57]. 'The Geneva Conventions of August 12, 1949' (International Committee of the Red Cross: Resource Centre) < http://www.icrc.org /eng/resources/documents/publication/p0173.htm> accessed 29 April 2013.

[58].E. Odhiambo-Abuya, 'Refugees and Internally Displaced Persons- Examining Overlapping Institutional Mandates of the ICRC and UNHCR' (2003)  7 Sing. J. Int'l & Comp. L. 236

[59]. 'Kampala Declaration on Refugees, Returnees and Internally Displaced Persons in Africa', UN Commission on Human Rights :   E/CN.4/1998/53/Add.2(22-23 October 2009) < http://daccess-dds ny.un.org/doc/UNDOC/ GEN/G98/104/93/PDF/ G9810493.pdf? OpenElement>  accessed 29 April 2013.

[60]. B.T. Nyanduga, 'Ten Years of Guiding Principles on Internal Displacement' (Oslo Conference) < http://www.internaldisplacement .org/8025747B0037BAC5/(httpPages)n /27358963822E83E4C12574E200482E9C ?OpenDocument&parentunid= 2A570681A064057280 25747B003B5D4A > accessed 29 April 2013.

[61]. 'Special Rapporteur on Refugees, Asylum Seekers, Migrants and Internally Displaced Persons in Africa' (African Commission on Human and People's Rights) accessed 29 April, 2013.

[62]. Jessica Wyndham, 'A Developing Trend: Laws and Policies on Internal Displacement' (Washington College of Law: American University) < http://www.wcl.american.edu/hrbrief/14/1wyndham.pdf> accessed 29 April, 2013 8.

[63]. Ibid.

[64]. 'Focus for IDP returnees move from conflict to development' (Internal Displacement Monitoring Centre) < http://www.internal-displacement .org/8025708F004CE90B/(httpCountries)/78D50A458CC54720802570A7 004B5690?OpenDocument > accessed 29 April, 2013.

[65]. 'IDPLaws and Policies: Uganda' (Brookings-LSE Project on Internal Displacement) accessed 29 April, 2013.

[66]. Columbia Laws and Policies on Internal Displacement (Brookings-LSE Project on Internal Displacement) accessed 29 April, 2013.

[67]. South Asian Human Rights Documentation Centre, Human Rights and Humanitarian Law (1st edn, Oxford University Press 2008). 

[68]. Ibid.

[69]. E. Odhiambo-Abuya, 'Refugees and Internally Displaced Persons- Examining Overlapping Institutional Mandates of the ICRC and UNHCR' (2003)  7 Sing. J. Int'l & Comp. L. 236 

[70]. 'Internally Displaced People' (The UN refugee Agency) < http://www.unhcr.org/pages/49c3646c146.html> accessed 29 April  2013.

[71]. A. Davies and M.W. Murray, 'Implementation of the Collaborative response in Liberia', (2005) FMR.

[72]. E. Odhiambo-Abuya, 'Refugees and Internally Displaced Persons- Examining Overlapping Institutional Mandates of the ICRC and UNHCR' (2003)  7 Sing. J. Int'l & Comp. L. 240. 

[73]. Md Shamsuddoha and Rezaul Karim Chowdhury, 'Climate change induced forced migrants: in need of dignified recognition under a new protocol' (Equity and Justice Working Group Bangladesh 2009) 4.

[74]. South Asian Human Rights Documentation Centre, Human Rights and Humanitarian Law (1st edn, Oxford University Press 2008). 

[75]. Ibid.

[76]. A. Davies and M.W. Murray, 'Implementation of the Collaborative response in Liberia', (2005) FMR.

[77]. A. Davies and M.W. Murray, 'Implementation of the Collaborative response in Liberia', (2005) FMR.

[78]. E. Odhiambo-Abuya, 'Refugees and Internally Displaced Persons- Examining Overlapping Institutional Mandates of the ICRC and UNHCR' (2003)  7 Sing. J. Int'l & Comp. L. 240. 

[79]. Md Shamsuddoha and Rezaul Karim Chowdhury, 'Climate change induced forced migrants: in need of dignified recognition under a new protocol' (Equity and Justice Working Group Bangladesh 2009) 4.

[80]. 'Internally Displaced People' (The UN refugee Agency) < http://www.unhcr.org/pages/49c3646c146.html> accessed 29 April  2013.