The Role of the UNHCR in Protecting Internally Displaced Persons (IDPs): Case Studies of Russia, Sri Lanka and Sudan

In contemporary world, most conflicts are internal conflicts i.e. within the state. Thus people who are displaced generally stay within the boundaries of a particular country so that they can easily return to their place of origin. It is the responsibility of a state to protect its citizens. The state is supposed to behave on the basis of two basic humanitarian principles; the first is impartiality and the second is neutrality. However, many countries because of the ―shield of sovereignty‖ fail to do that (Cernea 2006: 25). It is this behaviour of certain states when they enjoy the immunity of sovereignty that creates problems for IDPs (Weiss 1999: 364). Therefore, IDPs need the protection and support of the international community. States are able to prevent or limit the role of external actors by invoking the principle of sovereignty, which provides them considerable resistance. However, this indicates a traditional notion of sovereignty, whereas in the contemporary world, sovereignty is considered as ‗responsibility to protect‘. Thus, international community is obliged to intervene and protect the masses where the state fails to do so. This study focuses specifically on those states, where states deliberately displace people by states are not able to meet their obligations; sometimes, they are not even willing to do so. Moreover some states do not want international intervention in the matter of IDPs (Newman and Selm 2003: 21). Cohen and Deng (1998) argue that the state sovereignty is valid only till it provides protection to its people. Therefore, if a state fails to protect its own citizens including IDPs, it fails to qualify as a sovereign state in front of International Community (Cohen and Deng 1998: 7). Therefore, International organisations could not remain indifferent to the suffering of IDPs. The problem of IDPs poses a challenge to the international community, Although UN Secretary General has appointed Special Rapporteur for IDPs and Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) has been assigned as the focal point for IDPs. UNHCR has done work for IDPs but the agency has its own inherent limitations because IDP is not the core issue of its mandate. Thus it‘s response to the IDP problem is limited, that too is on Ad-hoc basis. In this context former UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan pointed out the necessity of broadening the international response towards the problem of IDPs in the preface of the Masses in Flight: The Global Crisis of Internal Displacement as: ―Internal displacement has emerged as one of the great human tragedies of our time; to find ways to respond to what is essentially an internal crisis…protection should be central to the international response and [with] assistance should be provided in a comprehensive way that brings together the humanitarian, human rights, and development components of the United Nations.‖ (Cohen and Deng 1998) The present study seeks to analyse the role of UNHCR in protecting IDPs in the cases of Russia, Sri Lanka and Sudan. This study concentrates on those situations where state violence is primarily responsible for internal displacement. In this regard Russia, Sri Lanka and Sudan have been chosen as case studies. It is to be noted that these states are sovereign independent states. Although the primary variable (state violence) is constant still there is a noticeable variation in terms of response given by UNHCR in these countries. It is assumed that this variation is because of different geographical locations and power of the particular state in international level. These states have denied International assistance for IDPs at one point of time for their own reasons. This study will assess the part played by UNHCR in these countries in spite these hurdles. It will also examine the level of efficiency of UNHCR in respect of protection of IDPs in following mention states. Displaced persons (IDPs). The literature indicates different definitions. The definition of IDP depends on the criteria that have been identified for displacement. A narrow definition restricts IDP to those ‗displaced by conflict‘ (Mooney 2005: 9). The broader definition includes people who are displaced as a result of natural disasters and development programmes. The definition of IDPs has evolved over a period of time. The beginning was made when the following working definition was proposed by the United Nations Secretary-General in 1992. 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 (United Nations Commission on Human Rights 1992). This definition was too restrictive in its scope; it was confined to those people who left their homes ‗suddenly or unexpectedly‘ (Mooney 2005: 11). Thus, various changes were made to the definition. The changed definition is mentioned in the ‗Guiding Principles on Internal Displacement‘, which were presented to the United Nations in 1998 (Mooney 2005: 11). The revised definition characterises internally displaced person in the following manner: 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 as a result of or in order to avoid the effects of armed conflict, situations of generalised violence, violations of human rights or natural or human-made disasters, and who have not crossed an internationally recognized state border (Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights 1998). The literature on the subject provides a detailed account of the difference in terms of status between Internally Displaced Persons (IDPs) and refugees. The difference in movement between the two categories has a great deal of significance in terms of support provided by the international community. Refugees get assistance from the international community the moment they cross the borders, whereas IDPs are trapped within the boundaries of the state, which makes it difficult for the international community to intervene (Cohen 2006: 88) This categorization of refugees and IDPs poses a significant hurdle in providing humanitarian assistance to IDPs. Terminology relating to different type of displacement is confusing. Mooney terms IDPs as ―internal refugee‖ because the level of human right violation is equal in both cases (Newman and Selm 2003: 21). Similarly, the term, ‗forced migrant‘ is used to denote both the refugee and IDP (Moore and Shellman 2006: 600). In the IDPs. There is a clear gap in the level of involvement related to IDPs; IDPs do not have binding mandate. This lack of internationally accepted mechanism could be seen as an ―Institutional gap‖ according to Stavropoulou (1998), as she point out that there is no legal structure or institution to specifically address the problem of internal displacement in UN (Stavropoulou 1998: 552). Recent works question the distinction and the dichotomy in terms of ‗granting refugee status‘ to those persons who cross the borders and denying any protection to those who reside within the state (Haddad 2008 quoted in Cohen 2009: 589). Some scholars emphasise that refugees and IDPs could be combined into a single category (Lee 1996). Others do not agree on this point. They point out that removing the distinction between the two categories may have a negative impact. The state‘s responsibility towards IDPs may get diluted if such a divide disappears (Phuong 2004). IDPs are discriminated by the state, which does not treat them on par with other citizens. In other words, they are considered different from local citizens. This point is made by Cathrine Brun who highlights the reality in Sri Lanka, where the IDP status of the suffering population has separated them from local citizens (Brun 2003: 376). Brun (2003) argues that the forced migration of people has changed the traditional notion of citizenship and rights. Internal displacement is often considered as a post-cold war phenomenon. However, this is not entirely true. It is observed that internal conflict, which causes internal displacement, has always been there and Cold War, in terms of the origin and end, was not an important factor (Cohen and Deng 1998). Any conflict between a government and a minority community is considered as the most significant cause for internal displacement. It is in the last decade that internal armed conflict has emerged as the major factor contributing to the problem of IDPs (IDMC 2010: 9). There are causes other than internal conflict that result in internal displacement. In 2009, out of the twenty-three states that witnessed displacement, armed conflict was one of the causes in the case of twenty-one states (IDMC 2010: 16). Human rights violations and generalised violence were the other causes that led to internal displacement (IDMC 2010: 16). In first and second world war the nature of displacement used to be cross border thus that time the number of refugees were very large. It was felt that there should be an agency to assist this large number of displaced population at international level, thus the main aim behind the establishment of UNHCR was to provide assistance to refugees. According to UNHCR website there are near about 27 million IDPs throughout the world. UNHCR is assisting around

increasingly getting involved in improving the condition of IDPs. Most organisations, which are working in this field, rely on Guiding Principles on Internal Displacement which was presented to the United Nations Commission on Human Rights in 1998. These principles specify the rights of IDPs and the ‗obligations of governments, insurgent groups and all other actors toward these populations‘ (Cohen 2006: 192). The original mandate of the UNHCR is limited to the protection of refugees. It does not include IDPs. Article 1 of UNHCR mandate defines that the primary responsibility of UNHCR would be ―permanent solutions to the problem of refugees‖ (UNHCR mandate). It has been serving refugees worldwide till date, but now days the nature of conflicts is changing from cross border to internal conflict thus it is important for UNHCR to expand its role. The Organization itself is taking interest in providing assistance to internally displaced people around the world. The scope of the mandate can be expanded by the United Nations General Assembly and the Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC) (Bakircioglu 2008: 103). Article 9 of UNHCR mandate indicates for such expansion as it says that ―..shall engage in such additional activities...as General Assembly may determine‖(UNHCR 2010: 1). Security Council has clearly directed UNHCR to address the issue of IDPs (operative para 11 (k) of Security Council resolution 1244 (1999) on Kosovo). It encourages UNHCR to play a supervisory role with respect to the refugees and displaced persons. UNHCR had started its involvement with IDPs in the criteria given by the UN general assembly resolution 48/116 of 1993. This resolution says that UNHCR can involve itself with IDPs on the request of UN secretary general especially in the cases where the refugee problem is linked with the IDP problem, like Sri Lanka, Yugoslavia (now Serbia, Montenegro and Kosovo) and Tajikistan (GA/RES/48/116 of 1993). UNHCR plays a lead role in assisting IDPs where displacement is caused specifically by conflict. In a condition where people are internally displaced only because of natural or human made disasters, UNHCR supervises the work done by UNICEF and OHCHR. UNHCR generally do not get involved in IDPs problem caused by natural or manmade disaster, only in certain cases like 2004 Tsunami in South and South east Asia, 2005 earthquake in Pakistan and 2008 cyclone ―NARGIS‖ in Myanmar it assisted IDPs (UNHCR 2008: 20). In conflict areas UNHCR collaborates with other regional and international organizations to deal with the particular country concern. Currently UNHCR is engaged with IDPs in the framework of ―cluster approach‖. This approach focuses on those people who are displaced because of armed conflict within a risk of getting displaced (UNHCR 2008:1 ). It was decided by a general assembly resolution {RES/47/105(1992) and 48/116(1993) and 49/169(1994)} that UNHCR can involve in any country if the Secretary General or General Assembly or Security Council would ask it to intervene. It is also important that the concerned state should give its consent that whether it really wants UNHCR‘s assistance to tackle with the problem of IDPs. The role of the UNHCR in protecting IDPs has been criticised. It is argued that other international organisations and NGOs should protect the IDPs (Bakircioglu 2008: 106). The other argument is that the role of the UNHCR needs to be expanded so as to protect the IDPs. This is because human suffering has to be addressed urgently (Deng 1995).

The UN General Assembly resolution 2444 of 1969 clearly states that in all armed conflicts including internal conflicts ―it is prohibited to launch attacks against the civilian populations‖ {UN Doc. A/RES/ 2444 (XXIII)}. Russia sidelined this resolution and launched a military operation named ―battle for Grozny‖, and attacked Chechnya in December 1994. If Russia would have wanted it could have avoided civilian causalities but in its ―War on Terror‖ thousands of civilians became target and got displaced because of bombing in civilian areas (Cornell 1999:87; Jersild 2004; Menon & Graham 2000). The UNHCR was noticeably absent from Chechnya at this time because of Russian imposed restrictions. Some political reasons also barred UNHCR to provide aid to the displaced population; even the whole UN system was very reserved and did not respond much in this case (Hansen and Robert 1996; Balian 1995). Authors like Balian clearly indicate in his work that protection IDPs in such situation was not possible without international help: It becomes obvious...that effective preventive action, protection, and durable solutions for the IDP crisis...will prove impossible without the UN humanitarian agencies, especially UNHCR, having a presence in Chechnya.....(Balian 1995) As mentioned earlier, UNHCR involve on behalf of displaced persons only on the special request from the UN secretary-general and with the consent of concern country. In this case also UNHCR received a formal request in 1995 then only it got involved in its operation in Chechnya. UNHCR‘s Chechnya operation is an example where refugees are a minor component of massive internal displacement. Although, UNHCR primarily get involve in IDP situations only where the same situation produces both internal displacement and refugee flows, still, Chechnya because of its geography and history IDPs took shelter within the country i.e. Russia. In such cases UNHCR has to cover IDPs in their operations. In a quick response UNHCR launched the project ―vulnerable‖ to assist IDPs in Chechnya. In September 1995 1,20,000 IDPs returned to Grozny, the capital of Chechen Republic, and still thousands were staying in neighbouring Ingushetia. UNHCR later winding down its operations launched a ―spot-check‖ system to update itself about current number of IDPs and their needs (Hansen & Robert 1996:37). Thus UNHCR had done a lot of work in terms of assisting IDPs in Chechnya and other regions of Russia; still the question of ―Consent‖ is very complex. In Russian case the role of UNHCR is very crucial because the state itself started violence and did not allow UNHCR to intervene in the first place. There is a gross Human Right violation happening on the name of ―Removing Terrorism‖ by state to its people. Still, UNHCR had to depend on state‘s consent in assisting IDPs, thus it is a challenge for UNHCR to protect them inside the state border. Sri Lanka

UNHCR is one of the main providers of humanitarian assistance to IDPs in Sri Lanka. UNHCR and the Sri Lankan government have signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) in 1993. The Government of Sri Lanka requested UNHCR to provide support to IDPs thus it is assisting IDPs there since 1987 (Jens and elts 2002:4). UNHCR gradually involved in more IDP operations in Sri Lanka with time, when the population of IDPs were increasing. It has seven offices in Sri Lanka and the branch office in Colombo. As mentioned before UNHCR works with close collaboration with international, national and local organizations in its program implementation. In Sri Lanka, it is working with one governmental and 12 non-governmental organization. UNHCR is working directly with people and communities. It is running ―Shelter cash grant‖ and Quick-impact projects (QIPs) programs in Sri Lanka. Shelter and grant program facilitates IDPs for their resettlement. UNHCR also provides basic non-food items (NFIs) under these programs (UNHCR: 2004). Sudan Third and very important case is Sudan. Sudan has the highest number of IDPs in the world (IDMC 2010: 41). There are various conflicts in Sudan. The first is the conflict between northern Sudan and southern Sudan. The second conflict is in Darfur. The total number of IDPs in Sudan for 2009, including all the conflicts, is estimated to be 1.7 million by the UNHCR (IDMC 2010). It is observed that the international response to the crisis in Sudan was inadequate. In Sudan, IDPs are more vulnerable because they are trapped between state and conflict parties. Sometimes, they are even bombed and both (state and conflict parties) attacks in the areas of IDP camps. Sudan is unique example of ambiguous presentation of IDP situation because most of the scholars focus on the situation in IDP camps, which is sometime biased (Elnur 2009 :99). There is an example where Sudanese government had a clash with LRA in Gumbo IDP camp (August 2002) in Bahr el Jebel. After this attack IDPs, who were staying in the camp, had to flee again for some other place (Benetti 2003: 2). After 1989 revolution, Sudanese government adopted ―Islamization policy‖ (Assal 2006). Thus government used displacement as a counter-insurgency policy. Internal displacement is treated in an ad hoc manner in Sudan, because of that the rights of IDPs were totally ignored. Thus in Sudan IDPs are seen as a threat to security, and there is no such policy to advocate the rights of IDPs. United Nations headquarter in New York is Working with OCHA‘s IDP Unit in a form of a single working group. UN Resident and Humanitarian Coordinator in collaboration with SRRA (Sudan Relief and Rehabilitation Association) have established a Humanitarian Information Center on IDPs (Nilsson 2000). UNHCR is active in dealing with the problem of IDPs in Sudan, but it has to face many problems in assisting IDPs in Sudan. As mentioned earlier, states do not wish to allow international intervention in their ―internal matter‖. In a same way, Sudan also blocked International humanitarian assistance for displaced people on the name of sovereignty during September and October 2002, at this time government suspend international aid flights for 9 days. Around 3 million

(Benetti 2003: 8). It becomes really difficult for UNHCR to assist IDPs when the government deny access to the vulnerable population. Although this denial to access inhibits UNHCR‘s operations, still it is a challenge for them to still provide basic needs to IDPs in order to meet its responsibility to Protect displaced people. The problem of IDPs is very severe in African continent, thus African countries themselves understand the need of protecting IDPs. Thus African Union (AU) has taken a very strong step at regional level to combat with this problem. In 2009, 31 countries of African Union (out of 53) have signed a convention in Uganda. It is a legally bind convention, which is known as ―Kampala convention‖ on the name of that place where it was signed. This convention basically draws a roadmap to protect IDPs in African states. This convention induces states to protect the rights of IDPs. It also makes them responsible about the human rights of IDPs. It will come into force when 15 countries would ratify it, but so far only seven countries (Uganda, Sierra Leone, Chad, CAR, Zambia, Gabon and Somalia) have ratified it. Sudan has not even signed Kampala convention (IDMC website). It is a good start in terms of making legally binding conventions for IDPs.

The absence of specific international mechanism for addressing the IDP problem has led to the persistence of the problem necessitating the presence of a specific UN organisation to deal with the problem of IDPs. Powerful states like Russia and Sri Lanka are evading their responsibility and are involved in acts of violence under the pretext of war on terror, which is why they limit the access of international organisations in their sovereign territory. UNHCR is interesting in assisting IDPs where the problem is linked with refugees. In spite of limited access it is exploring ways to assist IDPs by expanding its mandate. UNHCR has a special expertise in the protection and welfare of persons who have been displaced by situations of massive violence, conflict or violations of human rights. There are many reasons as to why UNHCR was forced to expand its mandate to assist IDPs. One important reason was a clear and direct linkage between IDPs and refugees. UNHCR had to face many challenges in reintegration of returnees (mainly refugees), because it requires assistance to be extended also to the internally displaced in the same locality or community. For example in Sri Lanka refugees returned home only to become internally displaced, which forced UNHCR to relocate its programme on internal displacement. In some situations refugees seek asylums across the border were living together in similar conditions. So it was operationally difficult for UNHCR to assist only refugees and leave IDPs. In such situations it is morally also improper to distinguish between IDPs and refugees (UNHCR 2000; UNHCR 2007). Therefore, in recent years UNHCR has decided to provided protection and assistance on the basis of humanitarian needs, rather than refugee status. It is clear that UNHCR's concern in the internally displaced is motivated basically by two factors first the risk of a refugee outflow and second refugee-like nature of internal displacement, which requires UNHCR‘s expertise to solve the IDP problem (UNHCR 2000; UNHCR 2007). There are pros and cons of involvement of UNHCR with IDPs, which UNHCR assess in every case, thus the protection provided to IDPs is bases on case to case and mostly on Ad-hoc basic. Although, political and operational constraints limit UNHCR‘s actions, still it is willing to works under the leadership of the UN Secretary General and in collaboration with other relevant agencies even in those cases where state government deny UNHCR‘s access to IDPs. In such cases also, UNHCR makes sure that other actors are able to provide assistance and protection to IDPs. UNHCR is developing its policies to protect IDPs wherever needed thus it is reviewing its operations and its level of involvement with the internally displaced in different countries throughout the world.

(* indicates a primary source) Amnesty International (1997), Refugees: Human Rights Have No Borders, London. Amnesty International and International Service for Human Rights (1997), The UN and Refugees’ Human Rights, London. Assal, Munzoul A. M. (2006). Whose Rights Count? National and International Responses to the Rights of IDPs in the Sudan, Development Research Centre on Migration, [Online web] Accessed on 12 April 2011, URL: http://www.migrationdrc.org/publications/research_reports/IDPS-DRC-AUC-FRMS-ASSAL.pdf Bacon Kenneth H. And Lynch Maureen (2002-03). ―Lost in Purgatory: The Plight of Displaced Persons in the Caucasus‖, World Policy Journal, Vol. 19(4): pp. 66-71. Review, 5(1): pp. 101-110.

Benetti, Cathy (2003). ―Sudan: IDP crises worsens, Norwegian Refugee Council: Switzerland, [Online Web] Accessed on 13 march 2011,URL: http://www.who.int/disasters/repo/9160.pdf Black, R. and Koser, K. (1998) (eds.), The End of the Refugee Cycle? Refugee Repatriation and Reconstruction, Oxford: Berghahn Books. Brun, Cathrine (2003). ―Local citizens or Internally Displaced Persons? Dilemmas of Long Term Displaced in Sri Lanka‖, Journal of Refugee Studies, 16(4): pp. 376-397. Bulley, Dan (2010). ―Home is where the Human is? Ethics, Intervention and Hospitality in Kosovo‖, Millennium Journal of International Studies, 39(43): pp. 43-63. Cernea, Michael M. (2006). ―Development included and conflict included IDPs: Bridging the research divide‖, Forced Migration Review, (27): pp. 25-27. Cohen, Roberta and Deng, F. (1998) (eds.), The Forsaken People: Case Studies of the Internally Displaced, Washington DC: Brookings Institution. ......................................... (1998). Masses in Flight: The Global Crisis of Internal Displacement, Washington DC: Brookings Institution. Cohen, Roberta (2004). ―Some Reflections on National and International Responsibility in Situations of Internal Displacement‖, in O. Mishra (ed.), Forced Migration in the South Asian Region: Displacement, Human Rights & Conflict Resolution, Jadavpur University and Manak: New Delhi. -----------(2006). ―Developing an International System for Internally Displaced Persons‖, The Cohen, Robin (1995) (ed.), The Cambridge Survey of World Migration, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Cohen, Robin (1997). Global Diasporas: An Introduction, London: University College.

Deng, Francis M. (1995), ―Dealing with the Displaced: A Challenge to International Community‖, Global Governance, 1(1): pp. 45-58. Deng, F. M. (2000). IDPs in Africa: IRIN interview with Francis Deng, IRIN News service: New York [Online Web] Access on 21 February2011,URL:http://www.reliefweb.int/rw/rwb.nsf/AllDocsByUNID/3ff858c014c01c32852568e4006d298c Elnu Ibrahim (2009). Contested Sudan: the political economy of war and reconstruction, New York: Routledge. Economic and Social Council Commission (1999). Human Rights specific groups and individual: Mass Exoduses and displaced persons, UN doc. E/CN.4/2000/83/Add.2. [Omline Web] Accessed on 25 Faburary 2011, URL:http://www.internal-displacement.org/8025708F004CFA06/(httpKeyDocumentsByCategory)/A3E789C152A77BFE802570A000403F61/$file/Colombia_16Nov99.pdf European Council on Refugees and Exiles (1996). Safe Third Countries: Myths and Realities, London: European Council on Refugees and Exiles. Feller, Erika (2006). ―UNHCR‘s role in IDP protection: opportunities and challenges‖, Forced Migration Review, Special Issue, December: 11-13, [Online: Web] Accessed on 20 October 2010 URL: http://www.fmreview.org/textOnlyContent/FMR/BrookingsSpecial/07.htm Geoffroy, de Agnès (2007). From Internal to International Displacement in Sudan ,Migration and Refugee Movements in the Middle East and North Africa, The Forced Migration & Refugee Studies Program , [Online Web]Access on 22 April 2011 URL:

Gibney, Mark (1988). Open Borders, Closed Societies: The Ethical and Political Issues, New York: Greenwood Press. Gomez Mario (2002). National Human Rights Institutions and Internally Displaced Persons: Illustrated by the Sri Lankan Experience (Brookings Institution-SAIS Project on Internal Displacement, [Online Web] Accesed on 10 April 2011 URL: http://www.brookings.edu/fp/projects/idp/articles/gomez2002.pdf Goodwin-Gill, G.S. (1978). International Law and the Movement of Persons Between States, Oxford: Clarendon Press. Gowlland-Debbas V. (1996). The Problem of Refugees in the Light of Contemporary International Law, The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff. Gutner, Tamar and Alexander Thomson (2010). ―The Politics of IO Performance: A framework‖, Review of International Organizations, 5: pp. 227-248. Haddad, Emma (2008). The Refugee in International Society: Between Sovereigns, Malden: Polity Press. Hampton, J. (1998) (ed.), Internally Displaced People: A Global Survey, London: Norwegian Refugee Council and Earthscan Publications. Hansen Greg and Seely Robert (1996). War and Humanitarian Action In Chechnya, Stimson Avenue Providence :Brown University. Human Right Council (2010). Report of the representative of the secretary General Walter Kalin on Human Rights of Internally displaced Persons Addendum, framework on Durable Solutions for Internally displaced persons, UN doc A/HRC/13/21 Add. 4. ------------(2010), Internal Displacement: Global Overview of Trends and Developments in 2009, Geneva: Internal Displacement Monitoring Centre. Internal Displacement Monitoring Centre (IDMC)(2007), SUDAN: Outlook for IDPs remains bleak, A profile of the internal displacement situation, [Online Web] Accssed on 14 April 2011, URL: http://www.internal-displacement.org/8025708F004BE3B1/(httpI --------------------(IDMC) (2010), Internal Displacement: Global Overview of Trends and Developments in 2009, Geneva: Internal Displacement Monitoring Centre. ----------- (2010), Making the KAMPALA Convention work for IDPs: Guide for civil society on supporting the ratification and implementation of the Convention for the Protection and Assistance of Internally Displaced Persons in Africa [Online Web] Accessed on 21 February 2011,URL:http://www.internal-displacement.org/8025708F004BE3B1/(httpInfoFiles)/E611153E537FCD4BC12577C300550D98/$file/AU_guide_EN.pdf Jens, Nicola elts and others (2002), UNHCR‘s programme for internally displaced persons in Sri Lanka Report of a joint appraisal mission by the UK Department for International Development and UNHCR, [Online Web] Accessed on 5 March 2011, URL: http://www.chs.ubc.ca/srilanka/PDFs/UNHCR%20programme%20for%20IDPs%20in%20Sri%20Lanka.pdf Jersild, Austin (2004), Review: The Chechen Wars in Historical Perspective: New Work on Contemporary RussianChechen Relations, Slavic Review, Vol. 63(2): 367-377 Kälin Walter etal and others (2010), Incorporating the Guiding Principles on Internal Displacement into Domestic Law: Issues and Challenges, Washington DC: The American Society of International Law. Keen, D. (1992), Refugees: Rationing the Right to Life: The Crisis in Emergency Relief, Books, London: Zed Books. Korn, D. (1998), Exodus within Borders: An Introduction to the Crisis of Internal Displacement, Washington DC: Brookings Institution. Kourula, P. (1997), Broadening the Edges: Refugee Definition and International Protection Revisited, The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff. Lavoyer Jean- Philippe (1995), ―Refugees and internally displaced persons: International Humanitarian law and the role of ICRC‖, Lee, Luke T. (1996), ―Internally Displaced Persons and Refugees: Toward a Legal Synthesis?‖, Journal of Refugee Studies, 9(1): pp. 27–42. Martin, Susan F. (2001), ―Forced Migration and Professionalism‖, International Migration Review, 35(1): pp. 226-243. Menon, Rajan and Fuller Graham E. (2000), ―Russia's Ruinous Chechen War‖, Foreign Affairs, Vol. 79(2): pp. 32-44 Messina, Claire and Shamshur, Oleg (1997), ―Regional Conference to Address the Problems of Refugees, Displaced Persons, Other Forms of Involuntary Displacement and Returnees in the Countries of the Commonwealth of Independent States and Relevant Neighbouring States‖, International Migration Review, 31(2): pp. 461-467. Mills, Kurt (2005), ―Neo-Humanitarianism: The Role of International Humanitarian Norms and Organizations in Contemporary Conflict‖, Global Governance, 11: pp. 161-183. Mishra, Omprakash (edi.) (2004) Forced Migration in the South Asian Region: Displacement Human Rights and Conflict Resolution, Kolkata: Jadavpur University. Mooney, Erin D. (2000), ―Principles of Protection for Internally Displaced Persons‖, International Migration, 38 (6): pp. 81-101. ------- Erin (2005), ―The Concept of Internal Displacement and the Case for Internally Displaced Persons as a Category of Concern‖, Refugee Survey Quarterly, 24(3): pp. 9-26. Moore, Will H and Stephen M. Shellman (2006), ―Refugee or Internally Displaced? To Where Should One Flee?‖, Comparative Political Studies 39(5): pp. 599-622. Mundt, Alex and Ferris, Elizabeth (2008), Durable Solutions for IDPs in protracted situations: Three case studies, in ARC/Austcare Symposium ―Enhancing Protection of Civilians in Protected Conflicts [Online Web] Access on 12 march 2011, URL: http://www.brookings.edu/~/media/Files/rc/papers/2008/1028_internal_displacement_mundt/1028_internal_displacement_mundt.pdf Muni, S.D. and Lok Raj Baral (1996) (eds.), Refugees and Regional Security in South Asia, Regional Centre for Strategic Studies, Colombo: Konark Publishers. and the state, New York: United Nations University Press. Nilsson Desirée (2000) Internally displaced, refugees and returnees from and in the Sudan: a review, Sweden : Uppsala University. Office of United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (1998), ―Guiding Principles on Internal Displacement‖, [Online: Web] Accessed on 30 October 2010 URL: http://daccess-dds-ny.un.org/doc/UNDOC/GEN/G98/104/93/PDF/G9810493.pdf?OpenElement Office of United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (1998), Internally Displaced Persons: Compilation and Analysis of Legal Norms, New York: United Nations. Orchard, Phil (2010), ―Protection of internally displaced persons: soft law as a norm-generating mechanism‖, Review of International Studies, (36): pp. 281–303. Patrick, Erin (2005), ―Intent to destroy: The Genocidal Impact of Forced Migration in Darfur, Sudan‖, Journal of Refugee Studies, 18(4): pp. 410-429. Phuong, Catherine (2004). The International Protection of Internally Displaced Persons, Cambridge: University Press. Republic of Sudan (2009) National Policy on Internally displaced persons, [Online: Web] Accessed on 11 march 2011, URL: http://www.internal-displacement.org/8025708F004CE90B/(httpDocuments)/1D313FB8223D139DC12575C500349C8C/$file/GoS+National+Policy+on+IDPs.pdf Russell John (2006). Obstacles to Peace in Chechnya: What Scope for International Involvement? , Europe-Asia Studies, 58(6): pp. 941-964. Stein, B.N., Cuny, F.C. and Reed, P. (1978) (eds.). Refugee Repatriation during Conflict, Dallas TX: Centre for the Study of Societies in Crisis. Stavropoulou, Maria (1994). ―The Right not to be Displaced‖ American University Journal of International Law and Policy, 9: pp. 689–717. Stavropoulou, Maria (1998). ―Displacement AND human rights Reflection on UN practices‖,

[Online Web] Accessed on 22 February 2011,URL:http://www.suffolk.edu/images/content/AU_Kampala_Convention_Nastasia_TIMA.pdf Tuitt, P. (1996). False Images: The Law’s Construction of the Refugee, London: Pluto Press. UNHCR (1995). The State of the World’s Refugees: In Search of Solutions, Oxford: Oxford University Press. ----------- (2000). The Role of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees: Summary of the Position Paper Online Accessed on 25 April 2011 URL : http://www.icva.ch/doc00000119.html --------- (2004). Quick Impact Projects (QiPs): A Provisional Guide, [Online Web] Accessed on 25 February 2011, URL: http://www.unhcr.org/refworld/docid/416bd5a44.html -----------(2007). Global Report [Online Web] Accessed on 12 April 2011, URL: http://www.unhcr.org/gr07/index.html UNHCR (2008). Protecting Refugees and the role of UNHCR, [Online Web] Accessed on 12 April 2011, URL: http://www.unhcr.ie/pdf/4034b6a34.pdf ----------- (2010). Handbook for the Protection of Internally displaced Persons, Global Protection working cluster group: Geneva [Online Web] Accessed on 10 march 2011, URL:http://www.humanitarianreform.org/humanitarianreform/Portals/1/cluster%20approach%20page/clusters%20pages/Protection/Protection%20Handbook/the%20international%20institutional%20framework.pdf UNHCR Website (2011). Internally Displaced People: on the run of their own Land [Online Web] Access on 10 February 2011, URL: http://www.unhcr.org/pages/49c3646c146.html United Nations (1968). Respect for Human Rights in Armed Conflicts. Resolution 2444 (XXIII) of the United Nations General Assembly, UN Doc. A/RES/2444 (XXIII). ---------------------- (2002). ―Indonesia: Internally Displaced Persons, Consolidated Inter-Agency Appeals Mid-Year Review 2002‖, New York: United Nations. high Commissioner for Refugees to Carry out its mandate, Executive committee of the high commissioner‘s programme‖ UN doc. GA/AC.96/980. --------------- (2005). Sixtieth session Agenda items 46 and 120 05-48760, Resolution adopted by the General Assembly [without reference to a Main Committee (A/60/L.1)] UN doc. GA/RES/60/1 [Online web] Accessed on 1 march 2011, URL: http://unpan1.un.org/intradoc/groups/public/documents/un/unpan021752.pdf --------------- (2009). Report of the representative of the secretary General Walter Kalin on Human Rights of Internally displaced Persons Addenum follow-up visit to Serbia and Montenegro including Kosovo in 2005, UN doc. GA/HRC/13/21/Add.1. United Nations Economic and Social Council (1995). UN Doc E/CN.4/1996/52/Add.2. [Online: Web] Accessed on 11 October 2010, URL: http://www.unhchr.ch/Huridocda/Huridoca.nsf/0/75550ee91a4fb1ff802566cc005c2c63?Opendocument United Nations Commission on Human Rights (1992). Analytical report of the Secretary-General on Internally displaced Persons, UN doc. E/CN.4/1992/23. Weiss, Thomas G. (1999). ―Whither Institutional efforts for IDP?‖, Journal of Peace Research, 36 (3): pp. 363-373. Weiss, T. and Collins, C. (1996). Humanitarian Challenges and Intervention: World Politics and the Dilemmas of Help, Boulder: West view Press. Wille, Petter F. (2006). ―Placing IDPs on the international agenda: lessons learned‖, Forced Migration Review, Special Issue, December: 7-8, [Online: Web] Accessed on 5 November 2010 URL: http://www.fmreview.org/FMRpdfs/BrookingsSpecial/full.pdf

Assistant Professor, Amity University, Noida bhawna.64@gmail.com