New clashes between the Senegalese army and members of the separatist Movement of Democratic Forces in the Casamance (MFDC) have caused new displacements since 2009 and hindered durable solutions for long-term internally displaced people (IDPs). Estimates of the overall number of IDPs in Casamance in 2010 range between 10,000 and 40,000, and figures remain unreliable in the absence of a comprehensive survey. The vast majority of IDPs have sought refuge with family, friends and host communities. In line with wider rural-urban migration trends, many have found refuge in Ziguinchor, the largest city of Casamance. It is estimated that between 10,000 and 14,000 IDPs are sheltering in the city. 

Large return movements have also been witnessed since 2008. Anecdotal evidence shows IDPs’ wish to return but there has been no survey of their intentions nor data on how many have successfully locally integrated or settled nearby or elsewhere in the country.

Restricted access to farm land because of continuous rebel attacks has affected the livelihoods of both rural and urban IDPs as well as host communities. Women heads of households in particular have had to find alternatives to farming and in some cases have resorted to prostitution. Internally displaced children often fail in school or risk being abandoned by families facing poverty and stress, with many adults having been forced to look elsewhere for income. Social and psychosocial problems are also prevalent among IDPs.

In areas of return, the legacy of the long conflict has continued to hamper IDPs’ sustainable reintegration. Infrastructure and services remain limited, and the presence of mines has stopped people farming again. Extended humanitarian demining operations as well as increased access to basic social services and the inclusion of land grievances in reconstruction programmes are all necessary for the achievement of sustainable returns.

This paper draws upon the findings of IDMC’s analysis of normative frameworks relating to internal displacement in Kenya, a research project we conducted between February and June 2015 with the help of international and national institutions and civil society organisations working to respond to the phenomenon. The project aimed to identify gaps and inconsistencies in the country’s laws and policies, and other possible challenges to implementation. 

Since the Lord’s Resistance Army first emerged in the 1980s, the group’s violence has displaced an estimated 2.5 million people within and across borders in central Africa. It originated in Uganda, where it took up arms in response to the central government’s marginalisation of the Acholi people, and by 2005, around 1.8 million people had been internally displaced by the conflict. As early as 1993, the LRA began operating what is now South Sudan before moving into north-eastern Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) and south-eastern Central African Republic (CAR). Its campaign of violence against civilians, often carried out in retaliation for military operations against it, has caused significant internal displacement, especially in DRC where most LRA attacks have taken place in recent years. An estimated 420,000 people are currently living in internal displacement as a result of LRA violence in Uganda, South Sudan, DRC and CAR, representing 20 per cent of the population in the affected areas of the latter three countries.
 

Internal displacement is a common consequence across Nigeria of inter-communal and political violence, flooding and forced evictions. While some of the conflicts appear to be caused by overlapping and mutually reinforcing regional, religious and ethnic divisions, but violence often stems from competition for scarce opportunities and communal resources.

Current levels of displacement are deemed particularly high by a number of organisations, but in the absence of a functioning monitoring mechanism, no accurate figures are available. Ad-hoc local registration exercises have hinted at the scale of the phenomenon, but those who seek shelter and support from family and friends - and who make up the majority of internally displaced people (IDPs) - tend not to be counted. 

The government has not yet adopted a national IDP policy, leaving national, international and local agencies to assist IDPs in an uncoordinated way and on a sometimes selective basis. Ratification of the legally-binding Kampala Convention, which Nigeria signed on 23 October 2009, is expected to be completed shortly. This may signal the government’s intention to address internal displacement in a more consistent and coherent manner.

Attacks by Islamist Boko Haram militants increased dramatically from mid-2014, causing an unprecedented protection crisis in northeastern Nigeria. The insurgency has reportedly forced 1.5 million people to flee to other parts of the country and at least another 150,000 have taken refuge in neighbouring Chad, Niger and Cameroon. Government counter-insurgency operations have also contributed to insecurity and displacement, both in the north-east and in neighbouring countries.
 
International attention has tended to focus on Boko Haram’s brutality, but inter-communal conflicts, flooding, desertification and forced evictions have also caused significant internal displacement. With presidential and parliamentary elections due in February 2015, there are fears of recurrence of the violence and displacement that accompanied the 2011 polls, particularly in the north of the country.

Brutal attacks by the Islamist militant group Boko Haram, including this month’s pre-dawn raid on a boarding school in which members of the group doused a student dormitory in fuel and set it ablaze as children slept, have focused attention on Nigeria’s embattled north-eastern region. Boko Haram’s violence and the heavy-handed counterinsurgency operations against it have triggered significant displacement in recent years, but they constitute only one of many crises that force people to flee their homes. Other causes include recurrent inter-communal conflicts, widespread and serious flooding, and forced evictions.

Most internally displaced people (IDPs) live with host families, and their needs are neither assessed nor addressed by government or international actors. Those who live in camps receive relief, but they still often lack access to sufficient food, essential household items and health facilities. Most camps and camp-like settings close after a few weeks after displacement takes place, and little is done to help IDPs find durable solutions to their displacement. Protection risks are widespread in areas that suffer conflict and violence, and many people are afraid to return home. Whether their property has been damaged or destroyed by conflict or flooding, many IDPs do not have a home to go back to.

Figures on displacement are often only available after larger scale crises, but they suggest that violence and disasters caused by natural hazards have forced a staggering number of people to flee their homes. Millions were displaced by flooding in 2012 alone. The full scale and impact of internal displacement in Nigeria are unclear, in part because data collection is poor and inconsistent. These gaps result in an alarming lack of understanding of the country’s displacement dynamics, most notably how people’s vulnerabilities are complicated by multiple cycles of displacement, and lead to response efforts that are fragmented and generally inadequate.

Progress made in recent years to protect and assist IDPs in Nigeria is encouraging. The country ratified the African Union “Kampala Convention” on internal displacement in May 2012 and rewrote a draft policy on IDPs to incorporate its provisions. One year on, however, the country’s cabinet, the Federal Executive Council, and the National Assembly are still to adopt the policy, or a domestic law to implement the Convention. The absence of such frameworks as a means of clearly defining roles and responsibilities has, and will continue to, hamper humanitarian and development efforts to mitigate the effects of internal displacement. They are also essential to a holistic approach in supporting IDPs’ search for durable solutions, and in preparing for and preventing future displacement.

Down from a peak of 350,000 in June 2013, there are currently nearly 200,000 internally displaced people (IDPs) who fled the violence in the north during Mali’s 2012-2013 crisis and are still sheltering far from their homes. Tens of thousands have attempted to go back to rebuild but, in many cases, this has been premature and they have been forced to uproot their families once more. While attention understandably turns to the country’s north, where the conflict hit hardest, nearly half of the country’s IDPs have been left behind in Mali’s southern cities.

Mali has engaged in a process of slow recovery from the 2012 Tuareg and Islamist takeover of the north and March coup d’état. Dramatic events in 2012 and early 2013 plunged the country into complex security, political and humanitarian crises, causing the internal displacement of hundreds of thousands of people. Today, Malians and the international community have guarded confidence regarding the near future.

Significant security improvements, exemplified by the peaceful presidential elections in July and August 2013, have allowed many of the 311,000 internally displaced persons (IDPs) still living in dire conditions to start thinking beyond their displacement. Indeed, tens of thousands have begun to return to their homes in northern Mali, but many obstacles remain for them to secure truly durable solutions to their displacement. Sporadic attacks and battles have continued in the north, particularly in Kidal. Fighting forces have left behind many explosive remnants of war, putting populations, especially children, at risk. Ethnic tensions have worsened and caused the further displacement of communities at risk of being associated with one group or the other. The Tuareg Mouvement National de Libération de l’Azawad (MNLA), which remains in control of Kidal, pulled out and then rejoined a June 2013 agreement with the government, allowing for the return of some state representation in the region. The overall situation remains tense and negotiations over the status of northern Mali as a whole are yet to start.

Many of the thousands of IDPs left in southern cities – the vast majority of whom wish to return north but are waiting for reassurance that their home towns are truly stable – have been impoverished by months of hardship, unsatisfied basic needs and lack of livelihoods. Whether they decide to return, integrate locally or move elsewhere they all need assistance to resume normal lives and restart economic activities. Health and psychological scars must be addressed for many have been victims or witnesses of violence. Unaccompanied and separated children, children associated with armed groups and victims of sexual- and gender-based violence are particularly vulnerable.
 

Few could have predicted that Mali, long considered a beacon of democracy in West Africa, would in less than a year see half its territory overrun by Islamic militants and a tenth of its northern population internally displaced. Instability and insecurity resulting from clashes between government forces and Tuareg separatists and proliferation of armed groups in northern Mali in the wake of a coup d’état have combined with a Sahel-wide food crisis to force some 393,000 Malians from their homes since January 2012, some 118,800 of whom are estimated to be internally displaced. 
 
Some 35,300 people are displaced across Mali’s vast three northern regions, living in town with host families or out in the open in makeshift shelters. Most of the 83,400 IDPs who have taken refuge in the south are staying with host families. Both IDPs and host families face severe shortages of food, access to health care and basic necessities. Many IDPs have lost their sources of livelihoods and children’s education has been severely jeopardised. 
 
The nascent government of national unity, which took power in August 2012 after prolonged instability, has taken some steps to respond to health, nutrition and education needs but serious concerns remain for the vast majority of the displaced who still lack access to basic services. State functions have virtually ceased in conflict-affected regions and civil servants have fled, further limiting capacity to meet the needs of the vulnerable. The displaced have urgent needs which are not being met due to widespread insecurity, lack of sufficient humanitarian access and grossly insufficient funding.

Conflict and violence are on the rise in Kenya. In 2012 more than 118,000 people are estimated to have been newly displaced as a result of inter-communal and resource-based violence, linked to a combination of ethnic, political and economic factors. Tens of thousands more have been displaced as a result of natural disasters and development projects. 

Although a large number of Kenyans displaced during the post-election violence of 2007 and 2008 are still struggling to find durable solutions, the level of service provision and donor attention is rapidly declining. Many assume that the emergency has ended, however there are still humanitarian needs for the IDPs. There is a clear gap between short-term emergency measures and the comprehensive medium and long-term initiatives that internally displaced people (IDPs) need to end their displacement and restart their lives.

Current displacements, mainly affecting pastoralists in arid and semi-arid areas, also need to be acknowledged as significant needs and protection concerns remain. The lack of reliable data on IDPs and their location, including those who have returned to their places of origin or resettled elsewhere, remains a major challenge.

The humanitarian community has begun contingency planning for any large-scale displacement associated with the March 2013 general election, but so far – with the exception of the Kenya Red Cross - it is not fully prepared to respond. Ongoing peace and reconciliation projects, which are critical to the achievement of durable solutions and the prevention of future displacement, are currently at risk of being cut because of insufficient funding. Kenya has made laudable progress in passing a bill and adopting a policy on IDPs, which now need to be implemented.