The Plight of Internally Displaced Persons: Seeking Protection and Rights

Millions of people across South Asia find themselves forced from their homes yet trapped within their own national borders. These internally displaced persons face a humanitarian crisis that often goes unnoticed, struggling without the international protections afforded to refugees who cross borders. Whether fleeing ethnic violence in Northeast India, escaping natural disasters in Bangladesh, or caught in the crossfire of conflict in Myanmar, these individuals remain in a legal grey area where national governments hold primary responsibility for their welfare, yet often lack the capacity or political will to provide adequate protection.

Understanding internal displacement in South Asia 🔗

Internal displacement occurs when people are forced to flee their homes due to conflict, violence, natural disasters, or human rights violations, yet remain within their country’s borders. Unlike refugees, IDPs do not cross international boundaries and therefore fall outside the protections of the 1951 Refugee Convention. South Asia reported 9.2 million disaster-related displacements in 2024, nearly tripling from the previous year and representing the second-highest figure for the region in over a decade.

The region faces displacement from multiple causes. Conflict-induced displacement remains significant, with ethnic tensions in states like Manipur, Kashmir, and Myanmar’s Rakhine State forcing hundreds of thousands from their homes. In 2023, Manipur alone accounted for 67,000 internal displacements, representing around 97 percent of all conflict-induced displacement in South Asia that year. Meanwhile, climate-related disasters such as floods, cyclones, and droughts continue to uproot millions annually, with Bangladesh particularly vulnerable to environmental displacement.

The Rohingya crisis: displacement within and beyond borders 🔗

The Rohingya community in Myanmar exemplifies the complex nature of displacement in South Asia. Hundreds of thousands of Rohingya remain internally displaced within Myanmar, while nearly one million have crossed into Bangladesh as refugees. Those who remain in Myanmar’s Rakhine State face forced labor, movement restrictions, and food insecurity in overcrowded camps.

Recent reports indicate deteriorating conditions in IDP camps, where displaced Rohingya describe arbitrary detentions, forced conscription, and severe restrictions on movement. The conflict between Myanmar’s military and the Arakan Army has intensified these challenges, with civilians caught between warring factions. Many IDPs in northern Rakhine State report eating infrequently and relying on contaminated water sources, with children dying from preventable diseases.

Legal protection gaps for IDPs 🔗

Unlike refugees who benefit from an international legal framework, IDPs lack a binding treaty specifically designed to protect their rights. This absence creates significant vulnerability. The UN Guiding Principles on Internal Displacement, adopted in 1998, represent the primary international standard addressing IDP protection, but these principles are not legally binding.

The Guiding Principles restate and compile existing human rights and humanitarian law relevant to IDPs, addressing gaps where general norms needed specific application to displacement situations. For instance, while international law recognizes the right to family life, the Principles explicitly state that separated families should be reunited as quickly as possible. Similarly, the prohibition against cruel treatment is applied specifically to prevent IDPs from being forcibly returned to dangerous areas within their countries.

Key provisions of the UN Guiding Principles 🔗

The Guiding Principles establish comprehensive standards across all phases of displacement. They begin by articulating a right not to be arbitrarily displaced, prohibiting displacement based on ethnic cleansing, collective punishment, or policies aimed at altering the demographic composition of areas. This protection holds particular relevance for communities facing ethnic violence or forced relocation in South Asia.

During displacement, the Principles ensure IDPs should have access to essential survival needs including food, water, shelter, clothing, medical services, and sanitation. Protection extends beyond material needs to encompass safety from violence, sexual assault, arbitrary detention, and forced return to areas of danger. Property rights receive specific attention, with provisions protecting against arbitrary appropriation or destruction of possessions.

The principle of sovereignty as responsibility 🔗

At the core of the Guiding Principles lies the concept of sovereignty as responsibility. National governments bear primary duty to protect and assist IDPs as their own citizens or residents. When states prove unable or unwilling to provide assistance, international organizations have the right to offer services, and consent should not be arbitrarily withheld. This framework acknowledges state sovereignty while creating space for international support when needed.

The Principles also address return, resettlement, and reintegration, emphasizing voluntary movement in safety. IDPs maintain options to return home or resettle elsewhere within their country. Provisions for property recovery and compensation recognize that displacement often results in loss of homes and livelihoods, requiring concrete mechanisms for restitution or alternative remedies.

Implementation challenges in South Asia 🔗

Despite the Guiding Principles’ comprehensive framework, implementation across South Asia remains inconsistent. India lacks a national policy or legislation specifically addressing internal displacement, making accurate data collection and systematic protection nearly impossible. Without comprehensive legal frameworks, government responses to displacement often remain ad hoc and inadequate.

The absence of binding obligations allows some governments to restrict humanitarian access or discriminate in assistance provision. Political considerations frequently influence who receives help, with ethnic or religious minorities sometimes excluded from government programs. In conflict zones like Kashmir and Myanmar’s border regions, security concerns compound access challenges, leaving vulnerable populations without essential services.

The role of the international community 🔗

International organizations play a complementary role in IDP protection, particularly when national capacity falls short. However, declining humanitarian funding threatens even basic assistance. For Rohingya refugees in Bangladesh, reduced international support has pushed malnutrition rates above emergency thresholds, reaching the highest levels since 2017.

Regional frameworks offer potential for enhanced protection. While the African Union adopted the Kampala Convention specifically addressing internal displacement, South Asia lacks comparable regional instruments. Bilateral cooperation on cross-border displacement issues remains limited, with political tensions often hampering coordinated responses to shared challenges.

Towards durable solutions 🔗

Addressing internal displacement requires moving beyond emergency relief toward sustainable solutions. The Guiding Principles emphasize safe return, local integration, or resettlement in another part of the country as durable outcomes. However, achieving these solutions demands addressing root causes including conflict, discrimination, climate vulnerability, and weak governance.

Solutions require strong national leadership, inclusive planning, and long-term investments to help displaced persons regain self-reliance and rebuild their lives. This includes incorporating IDPs into national development strategies and ensuring their participation in decisions affecting their futures. Without such comprehensive approaches, displacement risks becoming protracted, leaving millions in limbo for years or even decades.

What do you think? How can South Asian nations balance sovereignty concerns with the need for international assistance in protecting IDPs? What mechanisms could ensure that displaced communities meaningfully participate in shaping policies and solutions that affect their lives?

References

1. https://www.internal-displacement.org/global-report/grid2025/
2. https://www.epw.in/journal/2024/21/editorials/need-national-policy-internal-displacements.html
3. https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2024/10/myanmar-bangladesh-rohingya-community-facing-gravest-threats-since-2017/
4. https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2025/09/myanmar-rohingya-repatriation-catastrophic-under-existing-conditions-in-northern-rakhine-state/
5. https://www.ohchr.org/en/special-procedures/sr-internally-displaced-persons/international-standards
6. https://www.brookings.edu/articles/introduction-to-the-guiding-principles-on-internal-displacement-2/
7. https://www.undp.org/news/marking-27-years-guiding-principles-internal-displacement
8. https://www.refugeesinternational.org/reports-briefs/a-closing-window-how-aid-cuts-are-undermining-rohingya-possibilities/