The Kampala Convention is a global first, yet, over a decade since it came into force, Africa hosts more than half of the world's internally displaced persons (IDPs). This article explores how the Kampala Convention could mitigate internal displacement by asking which of the enforcement mechanisms in the convention would work best to protect and advance durable solutions for IDPs in Africa. The convention adopts a state obligation model and contains judicial and non-judicial enforcement mechanisms. Evaluation of these mechanisms reveals some flaws, including the unclear mandate of the Conference of States, an inoperative African Court and private actors lacking locus standi. The article argues that some amendments to the convention are necessary to foster enforcement. Literature on internal displacement in Africa from an enforcement perspective is limited, so this article makes a significant contribution.

Human rights due diligence (HRDD) has become the buzzword of much of the advocacy and work today around business and human rights.1 It is almost commonplace that companies have the responsibility to identify, prevent, mitigate and account for how they address these adverse human rights impacts as part of their ongoing HRDD processes, in line with the UNGPs.2 The assessment of human rights impacts (HRIA) is a critical step in this process.3

Over the last several decades, states have demonstrated significant political commitment towards advancing protection and assistance for internally displaced persons. A notable form in which this commitment has been reflected is in the emergence of normative standards, with the UN Guiding Principles on Internal Displacement (UNGP) as the guiding text. The fact that the UNGP framework has found expression in the landscape on internal displacement is evidenced at various levels of governance. Within the African context, the African Union Convention for the Protection and Assistance of Internally Displaced Persons in Africa (Kampala Convention) draws on pertinent normative frameworks, with the UNGP as the leading framework. While this point is often made in general terms, this article focuses on the extent to which the norm on internal displacement has diffused and expanded within the African context.

This article considers the protection of, and assistance for, internally displaced children (IDCs) in Africa. Internal displacement has become one of Africa's most pressing human rights challenges. Over the last decade, millions of persons have been internally displaced on the continent by conflict, disaster and other causes. Children are one of the most affected categories of persons, given the implications of displacement for them. Article 23(4) of the African Charter on the Rights and Welfare of the Child incorporates specific protection for IDCs. This article examines the protection of IDCs in the context of this regional framework. It argues that, while article 23(4) requires that both refugee children and IDCs should be accorded the same protection from a rights-based perspective, it also requires that the protection of IDCs should be construed with reference to the Kampala Convention, which is the most recent applicable regional regime governing internal displacement.

Arguably the least discussed root cause of internal displacement, harmful practices are a prevalent concern in many African societies. The explicit mention of harmful practices is one of the many innovations of the Kampala Convention and reinforce its forward-looking, context-specific focus on Africa. This article argues that the convention has an absolute prohibition of harmful practices. This is an important starting point from which to discuss the content of states’ obligation to set measures for preventing harmful practices. However, in the event that displacement occurs due to these practices, it is important that protection, humanitarian assistance and durable solutions are provided. This article argues that states must set measures for ensuring that non-state actors are held accountable in the event that they orchestrate harmful practices. In fostering compliance, this article argues that there is an important role for institutions beyond the state, particularly those emphasized under article 14 of the convention.

This article investigates dynamics of mobilization over environmental and human rights norms in the context of undemocratic governments. We test the suggestion in norm diffusion theories that the success of domestic struggles in this context depends on the level of internalization of norms brought about by international pressure. We find that the internalization (or lack thereof) of global norms by the Government of Sudan does not explain its recognition of environmental justice claims in this case. Furthermore, the various litigation efforts pursued by affected people outside Sudan did not influence their campaign. However, a combination of the political climate in the country and a unique political interplay between the government and a distinct group of the affected people may have led to the singular success of their campaign. We use a combination of discourse analysis, legal analysis, norm mapping, and semi-structured interviews to reach conclusions.

Given the need for legislation to protect internally displaced persons, African Heads of State and Government adopted the Convention on the Protection and Assistance of Internally Displaced Persons in Africa in Kampala in October 2009. The convention, which entered into force on 6 December 2012, is an important binding instrument on internal displacement. Article 10 of the convention requires states to prevent displacement caused by development projects, including climate-based development projects. This article examines the content of this obligation within the context of climate-based development projects.

The world is rapidly urbanizing, and so is internal displacement. However, knowledge about the specific situation of internally displaced persons (IDPs) in urban settings and how it differs from, and impacts on, their host communities is still limited, and responses continue to be inadequate. This article analyzes the particular needs of urban IDPs by taking into account how the various contexts and patterns of urban internal displacement contribute to shaping people's experience. It discusses three key challenges that humanitarian actors are faced with in developing effective responses: identifying and reaching IDPs in urban settings, addressing their urgent protection concerns, and supporting their local integration. It concludes by pointing out the need for methodological and operational guidance on how to bring together area-based approaches that account for the impact of displacement on entire urban communities, and tailored approaches addressing IDPs’ specific needs in urban settings. The need for stocktaking exercises and more effective sharing of experiences among practitioners, municipal authorities and policy-makers is also underlined.

The tradition of providing refuge to people who are fleeing and in need of protection is a long-standing one, present throughout history and in various contexts, and now embedded in international law. The New York Declaration for Refugees and Migrants, adopted by the UN General Assembly in 2016, reaffirmed international refugee protection standards and provided a model for a more comprehensive response to large-scale refugee movements, based on shared global responsibility for refugees. It represented a critical development at a time when international cooperation aimed at preventing, responding to and resolving conflicts is proving inadequate, and an increasing number of people are being internally displaced, forced across borders or left in protracted exile as a result of conflict, violence and persecution. In this interview, the UN High Commissioner for Refugees shares his thoughts on some of today's most significant forced displacement challenges, and the prospects presented by the New York Declaration.

There were estimated to be over 20 million internally displaced persons (IDPs) at the end of 1999, a number that surpasses global estimates of refugees. Displacement exposes IDPs to new hazards and accrued vulnerability. These dynamics result in greater risk for the development of illness and death. Often, access of IDPs to health care and humanitarian assistance is excluded deliberately by conflicting parties. Furthermore, the arrival of IDPs into another community or region strains local health systems, and the host population ends up sharing the sufferings of the internally displaced. Health outcomes are dismaying.

From a health perspective, the best option is to avoid human displacement. WHO contributes to the prevention of displacement by working for sustainable development. Placing health high on the political agenda helps maintain stability, and thereby, reduce the likelihood for displacement.

Primary responsibility for assisting IDPs, irrespective of the cause, rests with the national government. However, where the government is unwilling or unable to provide the necessary aid, the international humanitarian community must step in, with WHO playing a major role in the health sector.

There is consensus among the partners of the World Health Organization (WHO) that, in emergencies, the WHO must: 1) take the lead in rapid health assessment, epidemiological and nutritional surveillance, epidemic preparedness, essential drugs management, control of communicable diseases, and physical and psychosocial rehabilitation; and 2) provide guidelines and advice on nutritional requirements and rehabilitation, immunisation, medical relief items, and reproductive health.

If the vital health needs of IDPs—security, food, water, shelter, sanitation and household items—are not satisfied, the provision of health services alone cannot save lives. Community participation is essential, and community participation implies bolstering the assets and capacities of the beneficiaries.