Although internally displaced persons experience similar circumstances
as refugees or other displaced people during the period of escape, what they
encounter afterwards is different than other people due to their unique
positions of being trapped inside of their states’ borders. In this post, I
have summarized the main troubles that block the assistance to and also the protection of IDPs. Clauses given below are not
the only difficulties but the main ones. What I believe is that secondary problems are also created by these primary ones.
 |
| http://www.wunrn.com |
1. The
lack of an agency which works specifically for the rights of internally
displaced persons and which assigns responsibilities and shows rapid reactions
during internal conflicts leaves IDPs alone vis-à-vis tyrant governments and/or
insurgent groups.
2. Sovereignty: instead of people-oriented approaches state-oriented ones dominate the international system.
3. Interfering interests of the variety of actors: Global super states, regional powers, multinational corporations, neighbour states or host regimes mostly ignore the wretched situation of internally displaced for the sake of their own benefits.
4. Lack of an international agreement that protects the rights of the internally displaced in full. Current international law covers IDPs, however, indirectly. The term of ‘internally displaced persons’ does not exist in any international agreement. Guiding Principles are not legally binding while the regional binding agreements such as the Kampala Convention cover only states that ratified them in that region.
5. Protection of physical safety often takes second place to the provision of food, medical care, and shelter. Although the fundamental need of the internally displaced is protection, international aid commonly focuses on the food and shelter supply because of the hardships of the former.
6. When the response strategies are discussed, IDPs and their opinions are excluded from the relief techniques. Whereas, it shouldn’t be forgotten that the best solutions are only reached including the people directly affected by the problems.
7. For international organizations, delivering the necessary aid to internally displaced persons, who are mostly stuck in the middle of active armed struggles, is not as easy as reaching refugees who could pass the borders of relatively secure neighbouring countries.
8. Monitoring the prospective internal displacements is inadequate just as the unsatisfactory rapid reactions to the first movements mostly originating from the problems given above.
9. Although in most of the cases of internal displacement people flee from the oppression of their own governments, international law gives the sole responsibility of IDPs’ protection to these regimes.
2. Sovereignty: instead of people-oriented approaches state-oriented ones dominate the international system.
3. Interfering interests of the variety of actors: Global super states, regional powers, multinational corporations, neighbour states or host regimes mostly ignore the wretched situation of internally displaced for the sake of their own benefits.
4. Lack of an international agreement that protects the rights of the internally displaced in full. Current international law covers IDPs, however, indirectly. The term of ‘internally displaced persons’ does not exist in any international agreement. Guiding Principles are not legally binding while the regional binding agreements such as the Kampala Convention cover only states that ratified them in that region.
5. Protection of physical safety often takes second place to the provision of food, medical care, and shelter. Although the fundamental need of the internally displaced is protection, international aid commonly focuses on the food and shelter supply because of the hardships of the former.
6. When the response strategies are discussed, IDPs and their opinions are excluded from the relief techniques. Whereas, it shouldn’t be forgotten that the best solutions are only reached including the people directly affected by the problems.
7. For international organizations, delivering the necessary aid to internally displaced persons, who are mostly stuck in the middle of active armed struggles, is not as easy as reaching refugees who could pass the borders of relatively secure neighbouring countries.
8. Monitoring the prospective internal displacements is inadequate just as the unsatisfactory rapid reactions to the first movements mostly originating from the problems given above.
9. Although in most of the cases of internal displacement people flee from the oppression of their own governments, international law gives the sole responsibility of IDPs’ protection to these regimes.
No comments:
Post a Comment