NATIONAL POLICY ON INTERNALLY DISPLACED PERSONS (IDPs) IN

NIGERIA: THE GRAVE EXCLUSION

*Akanmu, A. A., *Ogunsesan, A. S., **Omotosho, B. O. and *Adejare, J. A.

* Department of Urban & Regional Planning, The Polytechnic, Ibadan, Nigeria
** Department of Urban & Regional Planning, The Oke-Ogun Polytechnic, Saki, Nigeria
ademolakanmu@gmail.com

ABSTRACT

Nigeria is not only a vast country, but populous with over 140 million population (NPC,
2007). It is not an overstatement that associated disasters and other disorderly occurrences do
result in the disruption of socio-economic life and residences of people due to naturally and
humanly induced incidences of higher magnitude. Hence, internal displacements are ushered
in at different locations in the country. Therefore, in order to improve the well-being of the
internally displaced persons in the country, this paper examined the National Policy on
Internationally Displaced Persons (IDPs) (FGN, 2002) and Internally Displaced Persons
Camp (IDPC) in Nigeria. Anchored on the concept of Internal Displacement and Policy, the
paper revolved round secondary data in which publications on disaster, internal displacement
and policy were consulted both in the country and in other parts of the world. It is on this
basis that it is observed that various policy statements on the IDPs and IDPC gravely
excluded core environmentalists in the scheme of planning and management of both the IDPs
and IDPC in Nigeria. With phenomenal increase in disaster and internal displacement in the
country, the contents and context of policy framework for IDP need to be revisited. Hence,
this paper observed and recommended urgent review of policy statements towards including
core environmentalists in the planning, designing and management of programmes and core
actions for improved well-beings of the internally displaced persons and camps in the
country.
Keywords: Environmentalists, IDPs, IDPC, Policy and Nigeria

Being a paper presented at the First National Conference of The Faculty of Environmental
Studies, The Oke-Ogun Polytechnic, Saki held on 16th -18th February, 2016.
1.0 Introduction

1.1 Background to the IDPs and IDPC

The twin issues of Internally Displaced Persons (IDPs) and Internally Displaced

Persons Camp (IDPC) has been in front burner among the comity of nations in recent time,

most especially in the early 90s. This is as a result of increasing wave of incidences leading to

forced displacement of population that are products of conflicts (such as ethnic, religious,

economic and boundary conflicts), communal classes, natural and man-made disasters among

others with their attendant massive destruction to lives and properties.

Globally, during the last decade, the estimated number of Internally Displaced

Persons as a result of armed conflicts and generalized violence, excluding natural disasters

and development-induced displacement has been estimated to be 25 million (FGN, 20012).

With Africa accounting for more than half of global displacement, global attention has

repeatedly be drawn to the growing danger of displacement which may upsurge the little gain

recorded in the Millennium Development Goals.

The quest to evolve durable solutions to the plights of IDPs has influenced

government decisions of setting up IDPs and enabling policy. As a result, the United Nations

High Commission for Refugees has been in the vanguard of advancing both the course and

welfare of the IDPs globally, of which other member nations are keying into the project. This

is to ensuring speedy restoration of previous socio-economic conditions of the displaced and

host communities.

According to Ocha (2003), the set of Guiding Principles was seeing as a tool for the

prevention and management of internal displacement by nations all over the world, and as a

guide to all governmental and non-governmental humanitarian actors working with Internally

Displaced Persons.

2
 Based on this, policies on IDPs are formulated by governments for improved socio-

economic and psychological conditions of the IDPs during the crisis and transition periods as

well as after leaving the camp. of different countries in line with the guiding principles earlier

adopted by the United Nations General Assembly in 1998.

1.2 Materials and Methods

This study is conceptual and doctrinal in nature as it involves an analysis of policies

on the IDPs both at international and regional conventions. Hence, secondary sources of data

were consulted. Thus, while IDPs policy in Nigeria was consulted, those of Uganda and

Gambia were also used together in order to provide theoretical basis for this study. Hence,

publications of legislation, scholarly article, journals and government bulletins consulted

showed dearth of accurate data on internally displaced persons (IDPs) in the world generally,

and Nigeria in particular.

1.3 Brief Historical Evolution of Nigeria 2012 National Policy of IDPs

The United Nations guiding principles set the foundation for the African Union

Convention for Assistance and Protection of the Internally Displaced Persons. The principles

was endorsed by all West African Nations in Abuja on the 28th April, 2006. Its subsequent

adoption by the African Union Summit on Refugees, Returnees and Internally Displaced

Persons in Kampala (Uganda), October 2009 signaled the commencement of the policy

framework in Africa. Thus, countries such as Nigeria, Uganda and Gambia formulated their

own IDPs policy within the framework of United Nation’s framework.

In Nigeria, the idea of developing a National Policy on Internally Displaced Persons

was first mooted by the National Commission for Refugees, where a draft was prepared in

2003 (FGN, 2002). This results in a working document which was given to the Presidential

Committee to Draft a National Policy on Internally Displaced Persons to further develop into

a comprehensive National Policy. The Committee was charged with developing a framework
3
that would enhance the prevention of Internal Displacement, propose best practices for the

management of Internally Displaced Persons in the country.

The Policy outlines roles and responsibilities for the Federal, State and Local

Governments, non-governmental organizations, community based organizations, IDP host

communities, civil society groups, humanitarian actors both nationally and internationally

and the general public as well as educating persons about their rights and obligations before,

during and after displacement.

With the submission of report by the Committee, National Commission for Refugees

in concert with the office of the Attorney General of the Federation came up with a draft bill

and submitted the original draft IDP Policy in October 2010. Further review of the Policy was

down towards integrating present realities in the country and based on the original draft of

2004 towards showing financial commitment of government in finding durable solutions to

displaced persons and lasting peace and security in the displaced communities.

A Technical Working Group (TWG), comprising of different stakeholders, was

constituted to work on the Council’s directive and revise the policy and align it with the

provisions of the AU Convention for the Protection and Assistance of IDPs in Africa to

which Nigeria has signed and ratified. This TWG was extensively supported by national and

international technical experts, with wide stakeholder consultations. The recommendations

thereafter submitted by the TWG were geared towards saving lives, preventing of large-scale

displacements, wanton destruction of property, engendering national unity, promoting human

and socio-economic development, as well as protecting the human rights of all persons.

1.4 IDPs as a Concept

Both the concept and meaning of IDPs are derived from legal connotations. Ladan

(2006) are of the view that displaced persons under international law, are persons or groups

of persons who have been forced or obligated to flee or to have cause to leave their homes or
4
place of habitual residence in particular, due to or in order to stave off the effect of armed

conflict, military engagement, violations of human rights, situations of generalized violence,

natural or manmade disasters, to another place considered relatively safe within their own

national borders. Thus, IDPs are persons or groups of persons who because of armed conflict,

systematic violations of human rights, internal strife, or natural or man-made disasters have

been forced to flee their homes or places of habitual residence suddenly or unexpectedly, to

another location but have not crossed an internationally recognized state border (Ocha, 2003).

Such displacement may also extend to construction and expansion of development

projects (Robinson, 2003), although sympathetic attentions and international aid usually

centre round those displaced by disaster than for victims of project development. For

instance, it was documented by the Centre on Housing Rights and Evictions and the Social

and Economic Right Action Centre (2008) that over 2 million people were forcibly evicted

from their homes between 2000 and 2007 in major Nigeria cities of Abuja, Port Harcourt and

Lagos due to government urban renewal programs.

1.5 Components of Nigeria 2012 IDPs Policy

Chapter one addresses the introduction which encloses the contextual background and

situational analysis, causes of displacement in Nigeria, impact of internal displacement on

IDPs and their host communities and definition of key terms. Chapter two gives detains of

policy thrust through the policy framework and scope, policy vision and mission, policy goal

and objectives, policy guiding principles, general principles and humanitarian principles. The

rights and obligations of IDPs are presented in chapter three with rights of IDPs, general and

specific rights, rights to protection from displacement, rights to protection and assistance

during displacement and rights of internally displaced children, rights of internally displaced

women, rights of internally displaced persons with disabilities, rights of internally displaced

5
persons living with HIV, rights of internally displaced elderly persons, rights of IDPs during

return, resettlement and re-integration and obligations of IDPs.

Chapter four of the policy addresses responsibilities of government, humanitarian

agencies, host, communities and armed groups to IDPs. here, obligations and responsibilities

of government, obligations of humanitarian agencies, compliance with the law and policy

guidelines, code of conduct and standard operating procedures, adherence to minimum

standards, rights and obligations of host communities, rights of host communities,

responsibilities of host communities and obligations of armed groups. chapter five focuses on

policy implementation framework and strategies as broad strategies which encompasses

strategies for prevention of internal displacement, strategies for protection and assistance of

IDPs during displacement, strategies for rehabilitation of IDPs, strategies for return,

relocation and local integration of IDPs.

Others are achieving durable solutions to internal displacement, institutional

mechanism for coordination and collaboration, designation of an IDP focal coordinating

institution, establishment of internal displacement coordination sectors, terms of reference for

sector coordination leads, broad institutional framework and implementing agencies,

framework for international cooperation, the roles of the government, the roles of regional,

international humanitarian and development actors and legal framework. The concluding

chapter ‘six’ of the policy address issues of funding, monitoring, evaluation and policy

review mechanism. Thus, funding mechanisms and resource mobilisation, monitoring and

evaluation and policy review process are catered for.

1.6 Perceived Shortcomings in the Policy

Critical examination of the provisions and contents of the 2012 National Policy on

Internally Displaced Persons (IDPs) in Nigeria shows many shortcomings which are regarded

6
as grave exclusion in the policy. Among the shortcomings perceived in the policy are the

following:

 Legal connotation, definition and interpretation of IDPs while spatial dimension and

implications are either grossly excluded or salient.

 There is much emphasis on the proportion and protection of human rights of the IDPs

than advancing their comfort during the transition periods at the IDPC. This is because

the need to strengthen good governance and ensuring full respect of all human rights and

international humanitarian law if the internally displaced due to conflict and generalized

violence are much more articulated. With this, all forms of exploitation, abuse and neglect

are expected to be curtailed without due consideration of advanced planning for IDPC.

 The exclusion of environmentalists and environmental professions in the scheme of

IDPC are major setback to the policy. It is of note that professionals in the legal and

health professions are mostly saddled with responsibilities in the Policy. Also, Non

Government Organisations such as Civil Society Organisations, Nigerian Red Cross

Society and host communities are adequately catered for in the ;provisions of the policy,

while professionals in the built environment who constitute core environmentalist are

grossly excluded.

 Like the Red Cross Society, the Institute of Peace and Conflict Resolution was included

in the IDP scheme, while environmentally related institutes such as the Nigerian Institute

of Town Planners, Nigerian Institute of Architects, Nigerian Institute of Builders and

Nigerian Society of Engineers among others were excluded. Similarly, armed group (such

as police and military), government ministries, departments and agencies such as National

Human Rights Commission, National Emergency Management Agency and other

international organisations like United Nations High commission for Refugees had their

shared responsibilities and commitments on fostering the well-being of the IDPs and
7
 IDPC in the country. Whereas, Ministries of Environment, Ministry of Works and

Housing, Ministry of Transport and the likes are grossly excluded.

1.7 Matters Arising

The most fundamental matter arising is the quest to advance the welfare of the

internally displaced together with protection of right to life most especially during the

transition period of violent crisis. These two crucial elements are of importance and transcend

both legal and health professionals who see ‘habitability and livability’ from literary view.

Hence, both habitability and livability of IDPC can only be catered for through spatial

integration of urban and regional planning into IDPs policy framework.

However, the exclusion of environmentalists and environmental professions from

IDPs policy is not restricted to Nigeria, but cut across members of the United Nations. The

failure of member countries to look beyond and integrate local dimensions into the policy

framework is a major matter requiring urgent attention. Therefore, policies on IDPs have to

be reviewed accordingly.

It is also disheartening that existing planning laws and regulations in the country

failed to capture IDPs and IDPC in their provisions. For instance, the Supreme Court’s

annulled Decree 88, 1992, and other previous laws have no reference made to the issues of

IDPs and IDPC in the country

For IDPC to be habitable and livable, it has to transform from being a ‘camp’ or

shelter to Specialized Social Housing (SSH) for the IDPs. It is trough this platform that water,

electricity, conveniences, waste and sanitation facilities and services can be provided and

guaranteed. Therefore, environmentalists, most especially the urban and regional planning

professionals are mostly needed.

8
1.8 Conclusion and Recommendations

‘Camp’ is defined by 2012 IDPs Policy as erected sites with non-permanent shelters

(e.g. tents) used for the collective and communal accommodation of evacuated or displaced

persons are unsuitable to provide the required and expected succor to the IDPs. As a result,

there is need to advance the course of IDPs through the provision of better residences that can

guarantee not only safety, but livability and habitability. Supporting this view, Ekpa and

Dahlan (2015) opined that displaced victims are confronted with wide range of physical and

psychological trauma coupled with loss of their homes, and other lifetime investments during

internal conflicts. Hence, relocating these victims to IDPs camps alone will be far from given

them much touted hope for returning to normal lives.

This paper observed that the facilitation of access to healthcare services, education,

employment, economic activities, water, waste and sanitation facilities for the IDPs can only

be guaranteed through the integration of environmentalists in the policy framework and

mechanism. Hence, it is strongly recommended that policy framework for IDPs required

urgent review to integrate and assign responsibilities to the environmental professions and

professionals. It is by this, psychological stress and trauma of IDPs can be speedily restored

with comfortable life/living during the transition period, while mechanism for resettlement to

their former place of above or elsewhere would be considered.

Therefore, the exclusion of environmentalists such as urban and regional planners,

architects, builders, quantity surveyors, transporters, land surveyors and estate managers in

the planning and management of IDPC in the country and other parts of the world is therefore

regarded as grave exclusion.

Conclusively, the environmental professionals have great roles to play in the

planning, development, construction and management of IDPC for optimal performance.

Thus, the review of IDPs policy has to incorporate and designate suitable responsibilities to
9
environmental professionals and their respective professional bodies. This will go a long way

in ensuring and promoting the well-being of the IDPs in the country and other parts of the

world where internal displacement and refugee crisis are rampart.

REFERENCES

Adesote, S. A. and Peters, A. O, (2015). A Historical Analysis Of Violence And Internal

Population Displacement In Nigeria’s Fourth Republic, 1999-2011, International

Journal of Peace and Conflict Studies (IJPCS), Vol. 2, No 3, pp 13-22

Ekpa, S. and Dahlan, N. H. (2015). Towards the Evolution of Right to Reparation for Loss of

Housing and Property of Internally Displaced Persons (IDPS) in Nigeria,

Mediterranean Journal of Social Science, Vol 6 No 3, pp 380-386.

FGN (2012). National Policy on Internally Displaced Persons (IDPs) in Nigeria, Government

Press, Lagos.

IDMC (2009). Internal Displacement. Global overview of trends and developments in 2008

Internal Displacement Monitoring Centre. Norwegian Refugee Council.

IDMC (2010). Internal Displacement. Global over Displacement Monitoring Centre.

Norwegian Refugee Council.

IDMC (2011). Resolving Internal Displacement: Prospects for Local Integration. The

Brookings Institution London School of Economics Project on In

IDMC (2013). Nigeria: Increasing violence continues to cause internal displacement A

profile of the internal displacement situation. Internal Displacement Monitoring

Centre, Norwegian Refugee Council.

Ocha, T. (2003). Guiding Principles on Internally Displacement, 2nd Ed., UN., New York,

USA.

UNHCR (2005). Guiding Principles on Internal Displacement, Geneva.

United Nations (1998). Guiding Principles on Internal Displacement available at

10
ww.drc.dk/fileadmin/uploads/pdf/IA_PDF/facts/C6.%20guiding%20. accessed on 2

February 2016.

11