From Responsibility to Response: Assessing National - Brookings
From Responsibility to Response: Assessing National - Brookings
From Responsibility to Response: Assessing National - Brookings
You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles
YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.
<strong>From</strong> <strong>Responsibility</strong> <strong>to</strong> <strong>Response</strong>: <strong>Assessing</strong> <strong>National</strong> Approaches <strong>to</strong> Internal Displacement<br />
national policy on internal displacement drafted by the<br />
government for having “ignored international guidelines<br />
on establishing a framework for national responsibility.” 57<br />
Important <strong>to</strong> note is that the Framework is being applied<br />
<strong>to</strong> and used in all types of internal displacement.<br />
The country examples cited above all relate <strong>to</strong> conflictinduced<br />
displacement. However, the Framework also is<br />
being promoted and used <strong>to</strong> advocate and guide national<br />
responses <strong>to</strong> internal displacement caused by natural<br />
disasters. For example, in the United States of America,<br />
lawyers’ groups have drawn upon the Framework<br />
<strong>to</strong> advocate for the protection of IDPs displaced by<br />
Hurricane Katrina. 58 More generally, UN OCHA<br />
refers UN Resident Coordina<strong>to</strong>rs and Humanitarian<br />
Coordina<strong>to</strong>rs <strong>to</strong> the Framework as among the sources of<br />
guidance in situations of natural disaster. 59 In addition,<br />
the World Bank is among those promoting reference <strong>to</strong><br />
the Framework in examining responses <strong>to</strong> displacement<br />
in the context of development. 60<br />
The wide dissemination and use that the Framework<br />
has enjoyed by governments and other ac<strong>to</strong>rs supporting<br />
the promotion of IDP rights protection since its<br />
publication in 2005 is testament <strong>to</strong> the interest in and<br />
57 The Kenya <strong>National</strong> Dialogue and Reconciliation<br />
Moni<strong>to</strong>ring Project, Agenda Item 2: Addressing the<br />
Humanitarian Crisis and Promoting <strong>National</strong> Healing and<br />
Reconciliation, Report on Status of Implementation (January<br />
2009).(www.dialoguekenya.org/docs/Agenda%20<br />
Item%20Two%20chapter.pdf).<br />
58 Hon. Cynthia Diane Stephens and Jerome Reide,<br />
“Katrina & Internally Displaced Persons: More than Mere<br />
Semantics,” Human Rights, Fall 2006, vol. 33, no. 4, p.2-4<br />
(www.americanbar.org/publications/human_rights_<br />
magazine_home/irr_hr_fall06_stephensreide.html).<br />
59 See, for example, “Protection in Disasters,” presentation by<br />
UN OCHA at Resident Coordina<strong>to</strong>rs Regional Workshop<br />
on Humanitarian Coordination, 16-18 June 2008, Panama<br />
City, Panama.<br />
60 Asger Christensen and Niels Harild, Forced Displacement<br />
– The Development Challenge, The World Bank Group,<br />
December 2009, p. 7 (http://siteresources.worldbank.<br />
org/EXTSOCIALDEVELOPMENT/Resources/ 244362-<br />
1164107274725/3182370-1164201144397/Forced_<br />
Displacement.pdf).<br />
12<br />
need for guidance on IDP protection and assistance.<br />
Indeed, what is clear from the above examples is that the<br />
Framework is used primarily as an awareness-raising,<br />
moni<strong>to</strong>ring and training <strong>to</strong>ol. Such activities are useful<br />
and can indeed further implementation of a number<br />
of the benchmarks, namely those concerning a state’s<br />
acknowledgment of the occurrence of internal displacement<br />
(Benchmark 2), training of government officials<br />
on IDP issues (Benchmark 4) and moni<strong>to</strong>ring the<br />
government response, for instance, by national human<br />
rights institutions (Benchmark 8).<br />
Methodology<br />
This study seeks <strong>to</strong> use the Framework for <strong>National</strong><br />
<strong>Responsibility</strong>, in particular its twelve benchmarks,<br />
<strong>to</strong> understand and assess the specific measures that<br />
national authorities have taken or have failed <strong>to</strong> take <strong>to</strong><br />
meet their obligations <strong>to</strong> protect the human rights of<br />
internally displaced persons in fifteen countries.<br />
Country selection<br />
Using this template of benchmarks, in addition <strong>to</strong> indica<strong>to</strong>rs<br />
developed for each benchmark (see below), data<br />
on national responses <strong>to</strong> internal displacement in fifteen<br />
countries was collected and analyzed. The countries<br />
included in the study (see map 1) were selected from<br />
a list of the twenty countries with the largest populations<br />
of IDPs, according <strong>to</strong> global figures on internal<br />
displacement in situations of armed conflict, generalized<br />
violence and human rights violations. Together,<br />
these 15 countries represent around 72 percent of the<br />
world’s 27.5 million IDPs (see figure 1). 61 Nine of the<br />
ten countries with the highest number of IDPs were<br />
included in the study; Somalia was excluded on the<br />
grounds that the Somali government does not exercise<br />
effective control over more than a few square kilometers<br />
61 Percent estimate is according <strong>to</strong> correspondence with<br />
IDMC, based on the best estimates of IDPs displaced by<br />
armed conflict, generalized violence and human rights<br />
violations as of December 2010.