publications

Recommendations

To the United Nations

To the Secretary-General and the U.N. Secretariat

  • The U.N. needs to prioritize and improve coordination and cooperation between its humanitarian, development, human rights and peace-keeping agencies with regard to programs for the internally displaced.  In designing such programs, it is critical that basic principles of human rights protection be made integral to any operation aimed at displaced populations. 

  • The U.N. Social and Economic Council is currently preparing recommendations to the secretary-general for improving U.N. coordination in humanitarian emergencies.  The secretary-general should take steps to ensure that the recommendations are actively implemented by U.N. agencies.

  • The representative of the U.N. secretary-general on internally displaced persons is currently preparing a body of principles, which will serve as a non-binding guide to governments and institutions.  This body of principles recapitulates in one document the existing human rights obligations to the internally displaced, clarifies the gray areas, and remedies identifiable gaps.  The secretary-general should require all U.N. agencies administering programs for the internally displaced to apply these principles in the field.

  • To the Representative of the U.N. Secretary-General on Internally Displaced Persons

  • The representative of the U.N. secretary-general on internally displaced persons should undertake a mission to Kenya to raise awareness of and attention to the plight of the internally displaced, and work with the government and the U.N. to find solutions for those who remain displaced.

  • The representative of the U.N. secretary-general on internally displaced persons should continue to work closely with UNDP, and other U.N. agencies, to suggest tangible ways that the body of principles being drafted by the representative can be incorporated into program implementation, particularly in the areas of human rights and protection.

  • To UNDP

  • UNDP should formally recognize the necessity of changing its traditional working approach in some areas to order to address the full range of issues facing the internally displaced and to better implement such programs.  In the same way that UNDP has innovatively defined its mandate to contribute in humanitarian emergency situations, it should take the next step and develop expertise in the areas of human rights and protection.  UNDP needs to be willing to make institutional changes where necessary to deal with the issues that inevitably arise with programs for the internally displaced.  UNDP should also be willing to coordinate and cooperate with other U.N. agencies that have the necessary expertise. 

  • The policies contained in UNDP’s February 1997 submission to the ECOSOC review process for improving U.N. coordination in humanitarian emergencies should be widely circulated within UNDP.  All staff members should be apprised of UNDP’s mandate responsibilities to include human rights and protection concerns. 

  • In undertaking to coordinate emergency and development programs, UNDP needs be willing to advocate on behalf of internally displaced populations and, where necessary, challenge government abuses against the displaced.  To better accomplish this protection role, UNDP should: (1) be willing to transform its traditionally close working relationship with governments in order to protect the displaced; and (2) address the inherent tensions that may arise when a resident representative, with a close working relationship with a government, is asked to serve as a resident coordinator on a program on the internally displaced which may require some criticism of government policy toward the displaced.

  • UNDP resident representatives/resident coordinators and field staff should routinely receive training in international human rights and protection standards as well as advocacy strategies for the implementation of these standards.  Relevant UNDP staff at headquarters should also be sensitized in these areas in order to ensure that they are giving the necessary support to UNDP staff in the field.   This training could perhaps be jointly managed in cooperation with other agencies.

  • UNDP should institute a data reporting procedure in its internally displaced programs as a routine matter to identify and register the displaced as well as to publicly document the cooperation of the government or controlling authority periodically.  At a minimum, findings about the situation should be shared at frequent intervals with the emergency relief coordinator of the Department of Humanitarian Affairs, the representative of the secretary-general on internally displaced persons, and the high commissioner on human rights.  Regular public reporting can deter human rights abuses by governments against the displaced, as well as ensure that human rights concerns are not subordinated to political considerations.

  • A human rights unit should be created within UNDP which can serve as a focal point within the agency to ensure that its displaced persons programs are prepared to deal with the human rights issues which may arise.  This unit should be involved in the conception of programs for the internally displaced from the outset.  This unit should also be tasked with cooperating and liaising with the U.N.’s human rights agencies.  Human rights concerns are central to finding solutions for the internally displaced.  UNDP programs for the internally displaced should monitor and advocate for government compliance with human rights guarantees.

  • UNDP should incorporate human rights and protection officers in all its programs for internally displaced populations, either from its own staff or seconded from other bodies, whose duty is to report on human rights issues, interface with the population and government or controlling bodies, and to take actions designed to prevent abuses and ensure accountability for violators.

  • UNDP should as a routine practice establish a written agreement with the government, prior to the commencement of the program, which lays down minimum standards that must be complied with by those in power as a condition for international implementation of a program for the internally displaced.  There should be no assistance without guarantees from the government or controlling authority that the U.N. mission will have free access to the displaced at all times, that the physical security and basic human rights of the displaced will be safeguarded, and that humanitarian assistance will be allowed to pass freely under U.N. control.

  • It is widely agreed that UNDP’s creation of a National Committee for Displaced Persons, which brought together representatives from the government, the donors, UNDP and the local and international NGO community, was a significantly positive contribution in Kenya.  This approach should be retained by UNDP for future programs for the internally displaced.

  • Where past human rights abuses are responsible for causing the internal displacement, UNDP should not operate its programs as if it is writing on a blank slate.  Abuses of the past must be addressed for long-term resolution, and legal and administrative sanctions for perpetrators of human rights abuses should be a priority of any program for the internally displaced.   Programs for the internally displaced should include a legal assistance component to help local NGOs and the displaced bring charges against the perpetrators of the violence.  UNDP should be willing to press governments to bring charges against those responsible for the displacement, including high-ranking government officials.

  • As a matter of priority, UNDP should cooperate and consult closely with local NGOs who are assisting the internally displaced.  Displaced persons programs should include a component that builds the capacity of these local groups to assist and protect the displaced. 

  • Successes and failures of past UNDP programs should be examined and utilized by the agency to strengthen future programs.  UNDP should set up an internal unit to review past programs, similar to the ‘Lessons Learned’ unit in the U.N.’s Department of Peace-Keeping Operations.  The findings of this examination process must be actively incorporated into programs for the internally displaced through a systematic institutional procedure.

  • UNDP should invite the representative of the U.N. secretary-general on internally displaced persons to work closely with UNDP to provide advice to UNDP to strengthen program implementation, particularly in the areas of human rights and protection.         

  • UNDP should take steps to assist those who remain displaced in Kenya.  The Kenyan government has proposed in its most recent development plan, the Social Dimensions of Development Programme, that drought, cattle rustling and ethnic violence victims be treated as a single area of program focus.  This approach may allow the government to further the myth that those displaced by the ethnic violence are just one more group affected by general poverty and crime, and allow the government to avoid its specific responsibility to voluntarily return those displaced by the ethnic clashes to their homes.  UNDP should not participate in any assistance programs for those displaced by the clashes, without taking steps to monitor and ensure that the government does not use the opportunity to further its policies of removing certain ethnic groups from their land, particularly in the Rift Valley Province.

  • To Donor Governments and International Humanitarian Organizations

  • Donor governments and international humanitarian organizations should continue to follow the situation of the displaced in Kenya closely.  Donor governments should continue to raise the issue of the internally displaced with the Kenyan government, to ensure that the government does not evade its responsibility to address past and continuing injustices against the displaced.  Donors should call on the Kenyan government to respect the freedoms of movement, association, assembly and expression; to take steps to provide assistance and protection to reintegrate those who remain displaced; to hold accountable those responsible for the attacks; and to take steps to redress persistent reports of illegal land transfers, plot redemarcations, and land sales or exchanges being effected under duress. 

  • Donors should support local NGO efforts to assist the internally displaced.  In particular, legal assistance programs should be funded to assist the displaced to bring charges against those responsible for the violence and to challenge illegal or pressured land transfers.

  • Donor governments and humanitarian groups should not fund programs for those displaced by the ethnic clashes, unless steps are taken to ensure that the government does not use the opportunity to further its policies of removing certain ethnic groups from their land, particularly in the Rift Valley Province.  The Kenyan government’s proposal, in the Social Dimensions of Development Programme, that proposes to treat drought, cattle rustling and ethnic violence victims as a single area of program focus, could present such a danger.  This approach may allow the government to further the myth that those displaced by the “ethnic” violence are just one more group affected by general poverty and crime, and allow it avoid its responsibility to voluntarily return all those displaced.

  • To the Kenyan Government

  • The government must take steps to address the plight of the tens of thousands who still remain displaced as a result of the ethnic clashes.  Additional and adequate assistance, security, and protection must be provided for as long as it takes to enable the displaced to return voluntarily and permanently to their land.  The government should concentrate on reintegration in areas where the displaced still cannot return to their land because of  threats of renewed violence, especially in the Olenguruone-Molo, Enosupukia, Mt. Elgon and Burnt Forest areas.

  • The government must stop dispersing and harassing the internally displaced and those who assist the displaced.  Displaced persons who were dispersed through threats or force by government authorities should be voluntarily returned to their place of former residence.  Where legitimate reasons for relocation exist, adequate alternative sites should be provided with advance notice.

  • Police and KANU officials who have been responsible for brutality and harassment of the displaced, particularly at Maela camp in 1994, must be disciplined for their actions.

  • The Attorney-General’s Office should set up an independent commission to inquire into the persistent reports of illegal land transfers, plot redemarcations, and land sales under duress.  In cases where displaced victims have sold their land at below market prices because of the feared or actual insecurity caused by the “ethnic” clashes, the government should create a process through which such land transfers can be reviewed.  Such transfers, may in fact, amount to constructive forced evictions.  Victims should be entitled to return to their homes wherever possible, or to receive adequate compensation if not.  This commission should also assist victims displaced as a result of the violence, where appropriate, by payment of compensation to those who have lost their land.

  • Continuing incidents and past attacks on ethnic grounds should be thoroughly investigated and charges brought where there is evidence against individuals alleged to be directly responsible for killings and destruction of property.  In all cases, the criminal law must be applied without regard for ethnic group, political party, or other status.  All allegations of the involvement of government officials in the violence should be investigated and charges brought where there is evidence sufficient to make a prima facie case of wrongdoing.   

  • The government must take steps to address the periodic incidents of violence which continue to break out and ensure that government officials are not responsible for inciting “ethnic” violence in light of the upcoming national election due to be held before March 1998.