From Responsibility to Response: Assessing National - Brookings

CHAPTER 1 Assessing National Approaches to Internal Displacement: Findings from 15 Countries
humanitarian law and international human rights law—
underscore that regardless of the cause of displacement,
“the competent authorities have the primary duty and
responsibility to establish conditions, as well as provide
the means, which allow IDPs to return voluntarily, in
safety and with dignity, to their homes or places of habitual
residence, or to resettle voluntarily in another
part of the country.” The human rights of IDPs must be
respected during the process of finding durable solutions,
and certain basic conditions must be met before
it can be said that a durable solution has been realized.
Based on the Guiding Principles, the Framework for
Durable Solutions specifies that the process of resolving
displacement must include the following: 2
—voluntary and informed choice by IDPs of a
location for a durable solution
—participation of IDPs in planning and management
of durable solutions
—access to actors supporting durable solutions
—access to effective monitoring
—involvement of IDPs in peace processes and
peace building and reinforcement of durable
solutions for IDPs within those processes.
The Framework also spells out a set of criteria for determining
the extent to which a durable solution has
been achieved. There are four criteria of universal
importance:
—long-term safety and security
—enjoyment of an adequate standard of living,
without discrimination
—access to livelihoods and employment
—effective and accessible mechanisms to
2 Framework on Durable Solutions, 2010, p. 5.
130
restore housing, land and property.
In a number of contexts, consideration also needs to be
given to ensuring that IDPs enjoy, without discrimination,
—access to personal and other documentation,
without discrimination
—family reunification
—participation in public affairs, without
discrimination
—access to effective legal remedies and justice.
Taken together, these are high standards, and not all
of them have been met in any of the fifteen countries
included in this study (or in most other situations of
internal displacement worldwide). That fact underscores
the challenges and considerable investment—of
time, resources and political will—required to achieve
lasting solutions to displacement. Nevertheless, it must
be pointed out that most governments represented in
this study took some measures to promote solutions for
those displaced within their borders.
Overview of research findings
Finding solutions to displacement caused by conflict
inevitably is closely linked to conflict-resolution efforts.
When IDPs are able to return to their homes and communities
in safety and dignity, it is a clear sign that a
conflict is over or moving toward resolution or at least
stabilization. Conversely, protracted displacement may
be a result of protracted conflict. Yet even when a conflict
is resolved, full implementation of a peace agreement
and of durable solutions for all those displaced can
take years. There also are cases in which governments
seek to demonstrate that a conflict has been resolved by
promoting IDP return—even when violence and insecurity
persist in the area that they fled. In the consolidated