Internally Displaced Persons

Aderomola Adeola is the Director of the Global Hub on Internal Displacement. She holds an LLM from Harvard Law School and has a PhD from the University of Pretoria. She was previously a Steinberg Fellow in International Migration Law and Policy at McGill University in Canada. She is the author of various academic works, including The Internally Displaced Person in International Law (Edward Elgar, 2020) and Development-Induced Displacement and Human Rights in Africa: The Kampala Convention (Routledge, 2020), and has provided significant expertise to governments on the protection of internally displaced persons.

1. Introduction

The global regime on displaced populations post-1945 was specific to the protection of persons displaced outside the borders of states.[1] The humanitarian crisis that had emerged from World War II and the challenges that emerged across newly independent states across Africa and Latin America made the global regime on refugee protection an imperative.[2] However, there was another kind of crisis that was emerging within state borders. Populations were being displaced within the territories of states with limited access to adequate protection, but it was daunting to pay attention to their protection at the global level, particularly because the global legal structure did not permit interference in the domestic affairs of states. The UN Charter is explicit in this.[3] Still, the evident concern that there were populations within states that needed protection, which sometimes certain states were either unwilling or unable to provide, meant that it was important to pay attention to how the narrative on sovereignty was constructed. Around the 1990s, normative croons on sovereignty not as a shield but as responsibility began to gain some ground, first from the place of humanitarian intervention, culminating in the emergence of the responsibility to protect.[4] In this era, the global normative regime on internal displacement emerged, notably with the adoption of the 1998 UN Guiding Principles on Internal Displacement (Guiding Principles) (E/CN.4/1998/53/Add.2).[5] With the adoption of the Guiding Principles, there has been a normative focus on internally displaced persons (IDPs) in international law. In this article, I examine the issue of internal displacement from a legal perspective with the Guiding Principles as a focal reference.

2. Who Are Internally Displaced Persons?

The question of who the Internally Displaced Persons (IDPs) are was not an easy question to resolve during the development of the Guiding Principles. There were divergent views on who these categories of persons represent. Some argued that it was needful to view IDPs as internal refugees, and others emphasized that it was important to describe them separately concerning their peculiar situation. Some wondered if it was needful to have a separate description, or perhaps it was just useful to categorize IDPs within the broader context of displaced persons and include refugees. After all, both categories had similar concerns, and the defining difference is that one group of persons moved outside the borders of the state, while the other stayed within the state borders.

There was a broader question at the time: whether the matter of internal displacement was for the global community to regulate. Arguably, states had responsibility for persons within their borders, and that was a sacrosanct principle reinforced in the UN Charter.[6] So why was it important to begin to redefine the character of such a principle if it was considered sacrosanct in international law? This argument was fairly settled with the rhetoric that emerged around this time, which saw some countries failing to protect populations within their territories. The international community began to question whether actions within states were ever to be considered important for the global community. Lending credence to this line of thought were the situations in Rwanda and Srebrenica (Bosnia and Herzegovina). The culmination of discussions in this period led to a redefinition of sovereignty, not as a shield but as responsibility.[7] In 1992, Boutros Boutros-Ghali echoed the emerging rhetoric that “[t]he time of absolute and exclusive sovereignty, however, has passed; its theory was never matched by reality. It is the task of leaders of States today to understand this and to find a balance between the needs of good internal governance and the requirements of an ever more interdependent world.”[8]

Upon appointing Francis Deng as the UN Secretary-General Representative on IDPs, the question of who IDPs are was central to the elaboration of a global standard.[9] The basis of elaboration was a description earlier proffered by the UN Secretary-General to the effect that IDPs are “persons 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 disasters; and who are within the territory of their own country.”[10] While this description closely mirrors the outcome, there were certain areas where adjustments were considered crucial.

First, it was considered crucial to include the ideation of being obliged to flee as opposed to solely being forced on the premise that there were instances where displacement was induced, even while not forcibly. Second, the term “suddenly” was removed, as situations of internal displacement may also not be sudden. This position resonates with existing realities, especially thinking about natural or human-made disasters and the question of climate change. Third, there was a revision of the term “unexpectedly in large numbers” due to the challenge of quantification. There are times when a smaller group of people can be displaced. Fourth, there was a revision of the term “territory of their own country,” which is important as displaced populations may not necessarily also be citizens of the territories in which they are displaced.

In the end, the Guiding Principles described IDPs as persons or groups of persons who have been forced or obliged to flee or to leave their homes or places of habitual residence, in particular because of or 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.[11]

This description is globally accepted for IDPs, and in fact, finds expression as a legal definition in regional contexts.[12]

3. The Guiding Principles as the Springboard of Global Law

Comprising thirty principles, the Guiding Principles are divided into an introductory part and five main sections.[13] The introductory section defines the scope and purpose, reinforcing the Guiding Principles as the applicable standard on internal displacement globally. This part further defines an IDP and reflects the fact that its provisions are consistent with international human rights law and international humanitarian law.[14] The objectives of the Guiding Principles are also defined as providing a roadmap for states and various actors, including humanitarian agencies, organisations, groups, and various other stakeholders involved in addressing the issue of internal displacement.[15]

The first part articulates general principles. Notably, it emphasises the fact that IDPs shall not experience discrimination and “shall enjoy, in full equality, the same rights and freedoms under international and domestic law as do other persons in their country.”[16] Also, the Guiding Principles are not to be interpreted in a manner that impairs international human rights and humanitarian law.[17] Further, emphasis is placed on the primary duty of national authorities in the protection and assistance of IDPs.[18] IDPs have the “right to request and to receive protection and assistance.”[19] This part further emphasises the application of the Guiding Principles based on the principle of non-discrimination.[20] Specific groups are also entitled to special protection, including children, pregnant women, persons with disabilities, and the elderly.[21]

The second part articulates principles relating to protection from displacement. Principle 5 explicitly requires “all authorities and international actors” to “respect and ensure respect for their obligations under international law” to prevent situations that may result in displacement.[22] In this part, the right not to be arbitrarily displaced is also recognised. Situations that may constitute arbitrary forms of displacement are mentioned, and safeguards for IDPs are provided.[23] Further required is the fact that displacement shall not be conducted in violation of “the rights to life, dignity, liberty, and security of those affected.”[24] Moreover, states are specifically obligated to protect “indigenous peoples, minorities, peasants, pastoralists and other groups with a special dependency on and attachment to their lands.”[25]

The third part articulates protection during displacement. This part emphasises the right to life and protection from crimes, including genocide.[26] It further prohibits attacks on IDPs and reinforces the right of all persons to “dignity and physical, mental and moral integrity,”[27] “liberty and security of persons,”[28] and the recruitment of internally displaced children.[29] Moreover, the rights to freedom of movement and choice of residence, seek asylum, know the fate and whereabouts of missing relatives, respect for family life, and an adequate standard of living are to be protected.[30] The wounded and sick, as well as those with disabilities, are to be accorded medical care. Also, IDPs are to be granted “access to psychosocial and social services.”[31] The health needs of women are to be accorded special attention.[32] This part further provides that particular consideration should be accorded in preventing “contagious and infectious diseases.”[33] The right to recognition before the law is also explicitly provided.[34] Arbitrary deprivation of property is also prohibited.[35] Whether in camps or elsewhere, IDPs are not to be discriminated against due to their displacement concerning the rights to freedom of expression, employment, association, vote, and communicate in their language.[36] Moreover, the right to education of all persons is affirmed.[37]

The fourth part emphasises humanitarian assistance in line with the principle of humanity, impartiality, and non-discrimination.[38] This part addresses situations where humanitarian assistance may be diverted for “political or military reasons” as witnessed in some displacement contexts, emphasising an explicit prohibition of such situations.[39] Moreover, it further accentuates the primary duty on national authorities to provide humanitarian assistance, while recognising that humanitarian actors have “the right to offer services in support” of IDPs. States are not to arbitrarily withhold their consent. Such offers are to be regarded “in good faith” and not as “unfriendly acts” or interference in national affairs.[40] Humanitarian actors are also to be protected and “shall not be the object of attack or other acts of violence.”[41] Moreover, these actors are required to respect their organizational codes of conduct and “give due regard to the protection needs and human rights of internally displaced persons and take appropriate measures in this regard.”[42]

The fifth part articulates durable solutions, notably emphasising the need for full participation of IDPs in the process of the “planning and management” of the process.[43] Principle 29 further requires that IDPs who return or are resettled are not discriminated against and are assured “the right to participate fully and equally in public affairs at all levels and have equal access to public services.”[44] Competent authorities are required to assist IDPs to recover their properties and possessions, and where this is not feasible, “provide or assist these persons in obtaining appropriate compensation or another form of just reparation.”[45] Unrestrained access to international humanitarian actors in the discharge of their functions towards IDPs is also to be ensured.[46]

4. Regional Standards as Epicenters of IDP Law

Since the development of the Guiding Principles, a plethora of norms have emerged on internal displacement. Specific standards on internal displacement are mostly visible across three main regions: Europe, Latin America, and Africa.

The Council of Europe developed a set of recommendations (Recommendation Rec(2006) 6) on addressing internal displacement in 2006, reinforcing the provisions of the Guiding Principles and emphasizing the need for states to develop national legislation on internal displacement.[47] In 2018, the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (IACHR) developed Internal Displacement in the Northern Triangle of Central America Public Policy Guidelines (OEA/Ser.L/V/II. Doc.101/18) (July 27, 2018) (Guidelines).[48] The Guidelines, which are based on a study by the IACHR on the Northern Triangle, provide a roadmap for addressing internal displacement in the Latin American region across twelve sets of standards. While the regional strategy on internal displacement in both Europe and Latin America is primarily soft law, a different approach resonates within the African context. In 2009, the AU Assembly adopted the Kampala Convention (African Union Convention for the Protection and Assistance of Internally Displaced Persons in Africa) (adopted October 23, 2009; entered into force December 6, 2012) with an emphasis on binding obligations on states in the furtherance of protection and assistance to IDPs.[49]

There are also ongoing normative formations in the League of Arab States with the adoption of a resolution on the preparation of an Arab Convention on the Protection and Assistance of Internally Displaced Persons in the Arab Region (2021). Moreover, there are efforts towards advancing IDP norms in the Association of Southeast Asia Nations (ASEAN), leveraging on the Guiding Principles.

5. The Impact of the Guiding Principles

Although the Guiding Principles are a set of soft norms, their wide reception, usage, and infusion in law and policy formations have significantly “hardened” their provisions as international law on internal displacement. Since 1998, the Guiding Principles have had major impacts in shaping the global landscape on protection and assistance for IDPs. A direct material impact of the Guiding Principles is its normative influence on law and policy formations. Across various countries and regions, this impact is reflected. In Africa, this is reflected through the Great Lakes Protocol and Kampala Convention.

Moreover, there are also direct impacts on national laws, policies, and strategies in countries such as Angola, Ethiopia, Niger, Nigeria, South Sudan, Uganda, and Somalia.[50] In South America, the framework in Mexico and the judicial decision in Colombia reflect this direct impact.[51] In the Middle East, this influence is reflected in the national policy of Yemen. In Eastern Europe, there have been normative developments in Ukraine premised on the Guiding Principles. Asian countries, notably Afghanistan, Bangladesh, the Philippines, and Sri Lanka, have also adopted laws based on the Guiding Principles.[52] In the last two decades, the Guiding Principles have become an authoritative source on the normative protection and assistance of IDPs, shaping regional and national designs.

Aside from direct impact, the Guiding Principles have also influenced global advocacy concerning internal displacement. This indirect impact has been reflected in the activities of local and international actors at global, regional, and national levels. Since the development of the Guiding Principles, several workshops and studies have emerged based on the Guiding Principles. Activities by the UN agencies and a plethora of other notable actors–including the Brookings Institution, the Norwegian Refugee Council, the Internal Displacement Monitoring Centre, and the International Committee of the Red Cross–are notable.[53]

Moreover, there are also direct symbolic impacts of the Guiding Principles that relate to shaping media coverage on the issue of internal displacement. In the two decades, a plethora of media reports have emerged on the Guiding Principles across new agencies in various parts of the world.[54] The Guiding Principles have been significantly used to shape the narrative on internal displacement and in spotlighting the need for protection and assistance of IDPs. An indirect symbolic impact of the Guiding Principles is reflected in the way it has shaped perceptions of internal displacement as an urgent global concern. One of the ways this has occurred is through its anniversaries, which have become important reminders of the urgency of addressing the issue of internal displacement.[55]

In the last two decades, the anniversaries of the UN Guiding Principles have served as moments of reflection on strengthening national protection, leveraging the utility of the norm in advancing durable solutions, and protecting IDPs through actionable commitments. Actors from various fields have engaged in the development of long-term solutions to the challenge of internal displacement, leveraging the value of the Guiding Principles as the globally accepted benchmark. Through these anniversaries, renewed interest in IDP issues has also emerged.[56] On the 20th Anniversary of the Guiding Principles, a Multi-Stakeholder Plan of Action for Advancing Prevention, Protection and Solutions for Internally Displaced Persons was launched to “galvanize and reinforce multi-stakeholder engagements towards reducing and resolving internal displacement through prevention, protection and solutions for internally displaced persons.”[57] Four key areas were identified: the need to facilitate and strengthen IDP participation, promote law and policy formation on internal displacement, produce quality data and analysis on internal displacement, address protracted displacement, and provide support for durable solutions.

Research on internal displacement has also flourished over the last decade from a plethora of disciplines and at various governance levels.[58] One of the pertinent insights that has emerged in the scholarship relates to the identification of root causes of internal displacement, which are varied across contexts. Across various regions, scholars have produced research identifying the root causes, including conflict, climate change, disasters, development projects, and generalized violence. This has shaped an understanding of internal displacement as one that is not solely constricted to conflict, even though a significant body of research on this issue has emerged from this context. Moreover, discussions on regional and institutional standards have emerged across two main streams, notably international human rights and international humanitarian law.

6. Moving Beyond the Rhetoric

While the discussion on internal displacement has flourished in international law, an important factor essential for moving beyond the rhetoric is implementation. For implementation, it is imperative to understand what makes for the furtherance of the normative standards, primarily by states (given that they have the primary responsibility to protect and assist IDPs) and by non-state actors (including armed groups). Across various national contexts, what will account for implementation is multifaceted. However, integral to such a process is developing studies that examine implementation drivers across various national frontiers. Implementation can be due to external pressure, transnational civic networks, or norm entrepreneurs. However, it can also be mixed. Still, it is mostly contextual. As such, it is imperative to launch studies in this process.

Moreover, states must develop institutional capacities on IDP issues. For this, it is pertinent to emphasise that specific institutions on IDP issues are crucial. Existing practice across some jurisdictions demonstrates that IDP protection is sometimes placed within existing institutions, for instance, on refugee protection. However, a good practice is to establish specific IDP institutions. Placing such institutions at the highest level of governance is crucial for effective coordination and multi-sectoral engagement. This can be through the creation of specific government ministries within the government cabinet or within the executive organ at the national level.

Beyond these, it is crucial to constantly monitor and evaluate activities geared towards protecting IDPs in the furtherance of the normative standards on IDP protection. A significant focus should be on durable solutions.

7. Conclusion

When the global refugee framework was being discussed, there was a sense in which countries were mindful of the fact that certain populations were also affected within the territories of the state due to the circumstances that give rise to populations leaving their countries in a quest for asylum. However, it was believed that the matter of internal displacement was not meant for international legal regulation. This was a domestic issue. However, with the adoption of the Guiding Principles in 1998, there has been a paradigm shift in the conceptualization of internal displacement as a matter that is solely for states and not for the international community. This paradigm shift has led to significant discussions of internal displacement in international law. Since the formation of the Guiding Principles, there has been a significant rise in law and institutional responses to the issue of internal displacement. Norms and institutional responses have become a significant driver of action on internal displacement, building political momentum that is crucial to action at the national level. While there is some action building in this regard, there is a need for norm implementation. In building momentum on this, future research must focus on this area as a priority. Understanding the extent to which norms are being implemented is important for building action on internal displacement. Moreover, understanding institutional capacities is important in moving action within these ecosystems. Further, it is important to monitor interventions and develop a matrix for defining the extent to which they exist. Beyond these, there is a need to ensure that the dynamics of internal displacement are understood beyond conflict, development projects, and disasters.

---

[1] See Guy S Goodwin-Gill and Jane McAdam, The Refugee in International Law (Oxford University Press, 2007); James C Hathaway and Michelle Foster, The Law of Refugee Status (Cambridge University Press, 2014).

[2] Cristiano D’Orsi, Asylum-Seeker and Refugee Protection in Sub-Saharan Africa: The Peregrination of a Persecuted Human Being in Search of a Haven (Routledge, 2016); Marina Sharpe, Refugee Protection in Africa (Oxford University Press, 2018); David J Cantor and S Barichello, Protection of Asylum Seekers Under the Inter-American Human Rights System in Ademola Abass and Francesca Ippolito (eds); “Regional Approaches to the Protection of Asylum Seekers: An International Legal Perspective” (Routledge, 2014).

[3] UN Charter (1945), art 2(4).

[4] Francis Deng, From “Sovereignty as Responsibility” to the Responsibility to Protect in Adrian Gallagher, Charles T Hunt, and Cecilia Jacob, “Global Responsibility to Protect” 353 (Brill, 2010).

[5] UN Guiding Principles on Internal Displacement (1998).

[6] UN Charter (n 3).

[7] See generally Dan Kuwali, The Responsibility to Protect: Implementation of Article 4(h) Intervention (Martinus Nijhoff, 2011); Alex J Bellamy, The Responsibility to Protect: A Defense (Oxford University Press, 2015); Sarah Teitt, Sovereignty as Responsibility in Tim Dunne and Christian Reus-Smit (eds), “The Globalization of International Society” 336 (Oxford University Press, 2017).

[8] Boutros Boutros Ghali, An Agenda for Peace: Preventive Diplomacy, Peacemaking and Peace-Keeping, Report of the Secretary-General Pursuant to the Statement Adopted by the Summit Meeting of the Security Council on 31 January 1992 9 (United Nations, 1992).

[9] See Romola Adeola, The Internally Displaced Person in International Law 2-5 (Edward Elgar, 2020).

[10] UN Commission on Human Rights, Analytical Report of the Secretary-General on Internally Displaced Persons (UN Doc E/CN.4/1992/23, 14 February 1992), para 17.

[11] Guiding Principles No. 5, para 2.

[12] See International Conference on the Great Lakes Region Protocol on the Protection and Assistance of Internally Displaced Persons (2006); African Union Convention for the Protection and Assistance of Internally Displaced Persons in Africa (2009).

[13] Guiding Principles (n 5).

[14] Ibid, principles 1 & 3.

[15] Ibid, principle 3.

[16] Ibid, principle 1.

[17] Ibid, principle 2(2).

[18] Ibid, principle 3(1).

[19] Ibid, principle 3(2).

[20] Principle 4 provides that the Guiding Principles “shall be applied without discrimination of any kind, such as race, color, sex, language, religion or belief, political or other opinion, national, ethnic or social origin, legal or social status, age, disability, property, birth, or on any other similar criteria.” Guiding Principles (n 5), principle 4(1).

[21] Guiding Principles (n 5), principle 4(2).

[22] 22 Ibid, principle 5.

[23] 23 Ibid, principles 6-7

[24] Ibid, principle 8.

[25] Ibid, principle 9.

[26] Ibid, principle 10(1).

[27] Ibid, principle 11.

[28] Ibid, principle 12.

[29] Ibid, principle 13.

[30] 30 Ibid, principles 14-18.

[31] Ibid, principle 19(1).

[32] Ibid, principle 19(2).

[33] Ibid, principle 19(3).

[34] Principle 20(2) of the Guiding Principles provides that “[t]o give effect to this right for internally displaced persons, the authorities concerned shall issue to them all documents necessary for the enjoyment and exercise of their legal rights, such as passports, personal identification documents, birth certificates and marriage certificates. In particular, the authorities shall facilitate the issuance of new documents, or the replacement of documents lost during displacement, without imposing unreasonable conditions, such as requiring the return to one’s area of habitual residence to obtain these or other required documents.’ Moreover, principle 20(3) provides that: ‘Women and men shall have equal rights to obtain such necessary documents and shall have the right to have such documentation issued in their names.” Guiding Principles (n 5), principle 20 (1) & (2).

[35] 35 Ibid, principle 21.

[36] Ibid, principle 22(1)(a)-(e).

[37] Ibid, principle 23(1).

[38] Ibid, principle 24 (1).

[39] Ibid, principle 24 (2).

[40] Ibid, principle 25 (1).

[41] Ibid, principle 26.

[42] Ibid, principle 27.

[43] Ibid, principle 28.

[44] Ibid, principle 29 (1).

[45] Ibid, principle 29 (2)

[46] Ibid, principle 30.

[47] Council of Europe, Recommendation Rec (2006) 6 of the Committee of Ministers to Member States on Internally Displaced Persons (2006).

[48] Inter-American Commission on Human Rights, Guidelines for the Formulation of Public Policies on Internal Displacement (2018).

[49] Kampala Convention (n 12).

[50] Angola: Decree No 1/01: Norms on the Resettlement of Displaced Populations (2001); Uganda: National Policy for Internally Displaced Persons (2004), 2; Nigeria: National Policy on Internally Displaced Persons (2021); Ethiopia: Somali Region Durable Solutions Strategy (2017-2020); Niger: Law Relating to the Protection and Assistance of Internally Displaced Persons (2018); South Sudan: Framework for Return, Reintegration and Relocation of Displaced Persons: Achieving Durable Solutions in South Sudan (2017).

[51] Columbia Constitutional Court, Decision T-025 of 2004; Mexico: Law for the Prevention of and Response to Internal Displacement in the State of Chiapas (Law 158 of 22, February 2012); Manuel JS Espinosa, The constitutional protection of IDPs in Columbia in Rodolfo A Rivadeneira (ed) Judicial Protection of Internally Displaced Persons: The Columbian Experience (Brookings, November 2009) 1-48; Elizabeth Ferris, Good News from Chiapas–But a Larger Challenge for Mexico (Brookings, 17 February 2012).

[52] Afghanistan: National Policy on Internally Displaced Persons (2013); Philippines: An Act Protecting the Rights of Internally Displaced Persons and Penalizing the Acts of Arbitrary Internal Displacement (2014); Bangladesh: National Strategy on the Management of Disaster and Climate induced Internal Displacement (2015); Sri Lanka: National Policy on Durable Solutions for Conflict-Affected Displacement (2016).

[53] The Brookings Institution Project on Internal Displacement, Handbook for Applying the Guiding Principles on Internal Displacement (1999); Norwegian Refugee Council, Workshop on the UN Guiding Principles on Internal Displacement (Freetown, Sierra Leone, 12-14 March 2001); Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights), Review of Compliance of Domestic Legislation of Armenia, Georgia, and Azerbaijan with Guiding Principles on Internal Displacement (Project Report, 2001-2002); Norwegian Refugee Council, Global IDP Project: 2001 Activity Report (March, 2002); Profile of Internal Displacement: Sierra Leone, Compilation of the information available in the Global IDP database of the Norwegian Refugee Council (15 October 2003); Summary Report of the Seminar on Internal Displacement in Southern Sudan, UN Doc E/CN.4/2003/86/Add.6 (10 January 2003); Seminar/Workshop on return, resettlement and reintegration of IDPs in Columbia, Bogota, Columbia (3 December 2003); Inter-Agency Standing Committee, Framework on Durable Solutions for Internally Displaced Persons (2010); Brookings-LSE Project on Internal Displacement, Regional Workshop on Internal Displacement caused by Natural Disasters and Climate Change in the Pacific, Pacific Island Forum Secretariat, Suva, Fiji, (4-6 May 2011); Global Protection Cluster (Task Team on Learning), IDP Protection Workshop and Protection Sector Coordination Workshop for the Libya Operation, Tunis, Tunisia (24-27 January 2017); Internal Displacement Monitoring Centre, Getting to 2030: Internal Displacement and Sustainable Development, Commemorating the 20th Anniversary of the Guiding Principles on Internal Displacement and of the Internal Displacement Monitoring Centre: Summary Report (18 October 2018).

[54] Philippines: Protect Zamboanga’s Displaced Minorities: Evacuees Barred from Returning Home, Face Arbitrary Relocation; Zulfiqar Ali, Call IDPs Temporarily Dislocated Persons, Govt Agencies Told (Dawn, 13 September 2014); Elizabeth Ferris and Walter Kälin, El Salvador has a Historic Opportunity to Address Internal Displacement (Refugee Deeply, 4 October 2018).

[55] “Ten years of Guiding Principles on Internal Displacement: achievements and future challenges” – Keynote address by Mr. António Guterres, United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, Oslo, Norway (16 October 2008); Kim Bode and Charlotte Alfred, Experts Views: What Would Refocus Attention on Internal Displacement? (Refugees Deeply, 16 November 2017); 20th Anniversary of the Guiding Principles on Internal Displacement: A Plan of Action for Advancing Prevention, Protection and Solutions for Internally Displaced People 2018-2020 (23 May 2018); JRS renews its commitment to IDPs on the anniversary of the Guiding Principles (Jesuit Refugee Service, 17 April 2019).

[56] Paragraph 9 of the Protection of and assistance to internally displaced persons “[e]ncourages Member States, United Nations organizations, the Special Rapporteur, regional organizations and national human rights institutions, as well as non-governmental organizations and other stakeholders, to mark the twentieth anniversary of the Guiding Principles on Internal Displacement to further demonstrate and strengthen collaboration on practices in addressing the challenges of internal displacement.” See UN General Assembly, Protection of and Assistance to Internally Displaced Persons (UN Doc A/C.3/72/L.46/Rev. 1, 14 November 2017).

[57] 20th Anniversary of the Guiding Principles on Internal Displacement: A Plan of Action for Advancing Prevention, Protection and Solutions for Internally Displaced People 2018-2020 (n 55).

[58] See also Roberta Cohen and Francis M Deng, Masses in Flight: The Global Crisis of Internal Displacement (Brookings Institution Press, 1998); Francis M Deng, Internal Displacement: A Global Overview (Brookings Institution, 22 February 2000); Catherine Phuong, The International Protection of Internally Displaced Persons (Cambridge University Press, 2005); Roberta Cohen, Developing an International System for Internally Displaced Persons ( International Studies Perspectives, 2006) 7(2) 87; Walter Kälin, The Guiding Principles on Internal Displacement as international minimum standard and protection tool (Refugee Survey Quarterly, 2005) 24(3) 27; Elizabeth Ferris, Assessing the Impact of the Principles: An Unfinished Task (2008); Forced Migration Review, Ten Years of the Guiding Principles on Internal Displacement 10; David J Cantor, ‘The IDP in international law?’ Developments, debates, prospects (International Journal of Refugee Law, 2018) 30(2) 191; Gabriel Cardona-Fox, Exile Within Borders: A Global Look at Commitment to the International Regime to Protect Internally Displaced Persons (Brill, 2019); Phil Orchard, Protecting the Internally Displaced: Rhetoric and Reality (Routledge, 2019); Romola Adeola, The Internally Displaced Person in International Law (Edward Elgar, 2020).