SOME recent surveys and protests by internally displaced persons (IDPs) have drawn attention to the urgency of developing a rational and adequate response to problems related to displacement.

The hardships faced by the more than 687,550 IDPs from Khyber Agency, mainly from Bara tehsil, have been regularly reported for quite some time. Now Unicef says that 50 per cent of them are children. School facilities are available only at the Jalozai camp near Peshawar, where less than one-third of the Khyber IDPs are housed and where living conditions are quite bad. Many of these people were forced to leave their homes when military operations began in Bara about 30 months ago. The need to save the children among these IDPs from falling into the clutches of undesirable elements cannot be overemphasised.

Some weeks ago, the people put up at Jalozai made strong protests against lack of facilities and as a result of violence in the camp the UNHCR had to suspend its relief work for a brief period. Earlier, the long-forgotten IDPs from Dera Bugti held a demonstration to demand IDP status for the 80,000 or so people rendered homeless about six years ago and who have been facing abject misery in makeshift shelters, or without any shelter, in the neighbouring districts of Balochistan and Sindh. The indifference and callousness with which these evacuees have been treated is one of the greatest scandals relating to IDPs in Pakistan.

Notice should also be taken of the weather experts’ prediction of heavier than normal precipitation this year, especially in Sindh. Considering the mess that the authorities made of the relief and rehabilitation operations after the 2010 flood havoc and the 2011 rainstorms, it is difficult to dispel fears of a costly disaster for the third year in succession.

What the government does not seem to have realised, despite frequent urging by civil society organisations, is the fact that displacement is no longer a once-in-years phenomenon. The domestic conflicts are unlikely to end soon and more and more people are going to be displaced because of them. Likewise, natural disasters have become more frequent than ever and the country’s capacity to withstand their consequences is going down. This means Pakistan needs to create permanent mechanisms for dealing with displacement and matters related to it.

The first requirement is allocation of adequate funds in the coming federal and provincial budgets for management of displacement. But money is only one component of a forward-looking policy. Much more needs to be done to establish an institutional framework for taking care of IDPs.

A recent study jointly carried out by the Brookings Institution, New York, and the London School of Economics, released under the title From Responsibility to Response, scrutinises national approaches to internal displacement. The study covers 15 countries that accounted for 72 per cent of the world’s 27.5 million IDPs (as of December 2010) — five from Africa, five from Asia (including Pakistan), two from Middle East, two from Europe and one from Latin America.

The performance of these countries was examined with reference to 12 benchmarks derived from the Guiding Principles on Internal Displacement. Pakistan’s policymakers and the authorities dealing with IDPs will do well to take note of the deficiencies and flaws in their policies and practices. The observations on Pakistan’s performance in relation to benchmarks 1 to 12 are as under:

1. Prevent displacement and minimise its adverse effects: The study notes that Pakistan suffered a loss of about $6bn in 14 floods during 1947-2006 and $9-7bn in 2010. The flood warning systems are dated and unreliable. The disaster management system is limited in terms of both capacity and financial resources.2. Raise national awareness of the problem: Pakistan is among the countries that are reluctant to concede displacement as a result of military operations. Examples are cited from South Waziristan and Balochistan to prove the point. Some government statements are noted as positive developments but “there are questions as to the government’s intentions to pursue a rights-based approach to IDPs”.

3. Collection of data on the number and conditions of IDPs: None of the 15 governments (including Pakistan) has “a completely reliable and inclusive system of data collection”.

4. Training of authorities in protection of the rights of IDPs: The study notes an impressive listing of training initiatives in the 15 countries surveyed but no Pakistani initiative is mentioned.

5. Create a legal framework for upholding the rights of IDPs: Pakistan is the only country in the group of 15 that has not developed laws on or pertaining to internal displacement.

6. Develop a national policy on internal displacement: Pakistan figures among the nine (out of the 15) countries “that had developed at some point a specific policy, strategy or plan on internal displacement. In Pakistan and Turkey, the policy is a regional, not a national, policy”. Development of a national policy has been recommended.

7. Designate an institutional focal point on IDPs: Pakistan has met this requirement by designating the National Disaster Management Authority (NDMA) as the focal point.

8. Support NHRIs to integrate internal displacement into their work: Pakistan is among the four countries that do not have an NHRI. (We may soon have one in the form of a National Commission for Human Rights).

9. Facilitate IDPs’ participation in decision-making: “In Pakistan, meanwhile, there is no evidence that the national authorities encourage participation of IDPs”.

10. Establish the conditions and provide the means for IDPs to secure durable solutions: Data on Pakistan is scarce but “it seems the authorities have made minimal efforts to establish conditions to enable IDPs to secure durable solutions”. The emphasis is on return, whatever the odds.

11. Allocate adequate resources to the problem. The budgetary allocations tell a story of short-sightedness

12. Cooperation with international and regional organisations: Pakistan is complimented on easing visa restrictions on international humanitarian workers after the 2010 floods but it is criticised for blocking humanitarian assistance in Waziristan and Balochistan before 2009, the expulsion of the Red Cross from Swat in 2009 and for barring access to IDPs in the conflict areas.

The development of a strategy on IDPs is necessary not only to institutionalise relief and rehabilitation measures but also to prevent the affected people’s alienation from the state, from the tradition of collective action itself, and for minimising losses in conflict areas or as a result of natural disasters. Acceptance of international criteria will help in comparative studies and enable us to profit from best practices in any part of the world. Above all, the displaced people must not be denied their rights as IDPs. To forget them will amount to condemning them to incredible suffering, undeserved and unmitigated.