Guiding Principles on Internal Displacement

Guiding Principles on Internal Displacement
Name	Guiding Principles on Internal Displacement
Subject	Humanitarian law; human rights
Adopted	1998
Author	Representative of the United Nations Secretary-General on Internally Displaced Persons
Jurisdiction	International
Status	Influential non-binding framework

Contents

Overview

The document, finalized in 1998 by the Representative of the United Nations Secretary-General on internally displaced persons, consolidates protections drawn from the United Nations system, the International Committee of the Red Cross, and major NGOs like Human Rights Watch, Médecins Sans Frontières, and Oxfam International to address displacement caused by armed conflict, generalized violence, human rights violations, and natural disasters, affecting populations in situations such as the Rwandan Genocide, the Syrian Civil War, the Darfur conflict, and the Haiti earthquake. The Principles define internally displaced persons in continuity with usages found in reports by the World Bank, the International Criminal Court, the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights, and the African Union, and frame obligations echoed in policies of states like Colombia, Nepal, Liberia, and Philippines.

The Principles rest on existing norms from the Geneva Conventions I–IV, the Additional Protocol I, the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, and rulings of bodies such as the European Court of Human Rights, the Inter-American Court of Human Rights, and the International Court of Justice. Key tenets parallel guarantees found in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, emphasizing protections against arbitrary displacement, non-discrimination as in decisions by the African Commission on Human and Peoples' Rights, and rights to security and basic services recognized by the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, the Human Rights Committee, and the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child.

The Principles assign primary responsibility for protection and assistance to the authorities of the affected state, consistent with obligations articulated in instruments enforced by the United Nations Security Council, the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, the United Nations Development Programme, and humanitarian actors such as International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies, Care International, and Save the Children. They prescribe safeguards during displacement, return, resettlement, and reintegration phases, responsibilities reflected in operational guidance from the Sphere Project, humanitarian policy of the European Union, and country strategies of the United States Agency for International Development and the World Food Programme.

Implementation has involved coordination mechanisms like the Cluster Approach initiated by the United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs, national frameworks influenced by the Nansen Initiative, the Platform on Disaster Displacement, and legislative measures in states such as Ethiopia, Georgia, Peru, and Yemen. International institutions including the International Committee of the Red Cross, the UN Refugee Agency, the Inter-Agency Standing Committee, and regional bodies like the European Union, the African Union, and the Organization of American States have mainstreamed the Principles into policy, training by the International Organization for Migration, and programming by NGOs including Mercy Corps and International Rescue Committee.

Monitoring has been conducted by the United Nations Secretary-General through country reports to the UN General Assembly, thematic reports by the Representative of the Secretary-General on internally displaced persons, and reporting by civil society organizations such as Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, and the Internal Displacement Monitoring Centre. Accountability mechanisms draw on jurisprudence from the International Criminal Court, the European Court of Human Rights, reparations jurisprudence of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights, and domestic litigation in courts of South Africa, Kenya, India, and Colombia.

Critiques focus on the non-binding nature of the Principles, with scholars and practitioners from institutions like the Human Rights Watch, International Crisis Group, Refugees International, and academic centers at Oxford University, Harvard University, and Columbia University arguing that enforcement gaps persist amid sovereign resistance exemplified in cases involving Myanmar, China, Russia, and Venezuela. Operational challenges include limited funding from donors such as the European Commission Humanitarian Aid Office, constraints within the United Nations system during Security Council impasses, access restrictions in conflicts like Afghanistan and Yemen, and coordination hurdles highlighted in evaluations by the World Bank, the OECD, and the Global Protection Cluster.