OCHA Georgia: IDP Bulletin Issue No. 1

October 2002
Contents:

Introductory note
Global Overview of Internal Displacement
Internal Displacement in Georgia
Worldwide Programs for IDPs:

• Few Options for Madurese IDPs in West Kalimantan

Programs for IDPs in Georgia:

• New Approach to IDP Assistance Initiative; Georgia Self-Reliance Fund (GSRF)
• IDP Rehabilitation Association "Dioscuria"
• Non-governmental organization "Ordu"

Legal Protection of the Vulnerable: the Case of Older IDPs
Brief Summary of Working Groups' Meetings
IDP Statistics
Useful Links

Introductory Note

The Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) in Georgia would like to present the first issue of IDP Bulletin.

Considering the fact that at present most international organizations are downsizing their activities aimed at supporting internally displaced persons in Georgia, OCHA-Georgia has decided to enhance its advocacy and analysis role related to IDP issues and assistance programming.

The IDP Bulletin will include social, education, gender, legal, political updates pertaining to the displaced population in Georgia. The Bulletin will describe different programs and projects targeting IDPs in Georgia as well as worldwide. The Bulletin will be issued quarterly.

We, as OCHA team responsible for the preparation of the given publication, would appreciate to receive Your feedback, comments and suggestions to improve and refine the IDP Bulletin.

Global Overview of Internal Displacement

Internally displaced persons (IDPs) are persons "who have been forced or obliged to flee or leave their homes or places of habitual residence, in particular as a result of or in order to avoid the effects of armed conflict, situations of generalized violence, violations of human rights or natural or human-made disasters, and who have not crossed an internationally recognized state border" (Guiding Principles on Internal Displacement)

The global number of IDPs due solely to conflict is estimated to range between 20 and 25 million, dwarfing the estimated 14 million refugees in the world.

While the rights of refugees and the obligations of states to assist them are clearly outlined in the 1951 Refugee Convention and related protocols, no such international agreements exist for the internally displaced. Nor is there a dedicated agency to respond to their needs for protection and humanitarian assistance as there is in the case of refugees. The result can often be the neglect of the needs of a huge population of suffering people by the international community.

People who have been forced to leave their homes because of conflict are put in an extremely vulnerable situation. It is not possible to establish the exact figure, but available information shows that a large share of the world's IDPs do not find shelter in organized camps or protected areas. Many displaced are unable to leave the ongoing conflict areas and are constantly on the run. In 90 percent of the countries surveyed, IDPs were subject to direct physical attacks or threats, and that sexual assaults on women occurred in about half of the countries. IDPs in about one-third of the countries reportedly were subjected to forced labour. A study by the US General Accounting Office showed that the international response towards internal displacement is most often focused on the delivery of humanitarian assistance as a life saving measure during the initial stage of displacement, while longer-term displacement situations were given less attention. This is especially true in 'protracted' and 'frozen' conflicts.

In 2001 the Inter-Agency Standing Committee (IASC), which consists of representatives of the major UN humanitarian actors and the international NGO community, created a "Senior Inter-Agency Network on Internal Displacement". The 'Senior Network' consists of focal points from the various agencies involved in internal displacement and is chaired by a 'Special Coordinator on Internal Displacement'. The Network was mandated to assess the humanitarian response at the local level, and provide recommendations for improvement.

In 1992, the General Assembly addressed the problem of internal displacement and Dr. Francis M. Deng was appointed as the Representative of the Secretary-General on Internally Displaced Persons. The IASC designated the Emergency Relief Coordinator (ERC), the Head of OCHA, as the "reference point" for the UN response towards IDPs in 1994. Three years later, the UN Secretary General assigned additional responsibility to the ERC to ensure that the "protection and assistance" needs of IDPs were properly addressed. The lack of a binding legal framework explicitly addressing the issue of IDP protection, similar to the 1951 Refugee Convention, has in the past often been cited as a reason for the inadequate response. In 1998, at the request of the United Nations Commission on Human Rights and the General Assembly, Francis Deng in cooperation with legal experts developed and issued the "Guiding Principles on Internal Displacement". The Guiding Principles have not been signed or ratified by States and are therefore not considered binding international law. However, they restate and reflect international conventions in the fields of Human Rights Law, Humanitarian Law and Refugee Law that are applicable or appropriate for IDP protection and assistance.

Another preliminary outcome of the international debate on the UN responsibilities towards IDPs was the establishment in 2001 of a small Internal Displacement Unit within the Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) in Geneva. The Unit is staffed with personnel seconded from the major humanitarian UN agencies and the NGO community and is tasked with providing expertise, training and guidance to humanitarian agencies working in IDP crises.

Internal Displacement in Georgia

The collapse of communism and the rise of ethnic strife plunged the southern fringes of the former Soviet Union into turmoil in the early 1990s, particularly in the Caucasus where some 1.5 million people were forced from their homes in Georgia, Armenia and Azerbaijan. Although there was sporadic media coverage of the fighting, the world was largely unaware of the human suffering that followed for hundreds of thousands of refugees and internally displaced persons (IDPs) in all three republics.

However, the refugees and displaced peoples were not the only ones hurt by this turmoil. Infrastructure collapsed, and, in many areas of the Caucasus, fuel and power supplies were sporadic or non-existent. Trade and industry ground to a halt, leaving hundreds of thousands of families without jobs or income. Inflation skyrocketed and shortages were frequent. People were hungry, and the lines for government-subsidized bread grew longer by the day.

At least 350,000 people were displaced by ethnic conflicts on two fronts in Georgia, a country of 5.5 million people that was once one of the most prosperous of the Soviet republics. The first conflict began in November 1989 between the government and separatists in South Ossetia. The second - and largest - conflict erupted in August 1992 between the central government and separatists in Abkhazia.

The displacements occurred in several successive waves. Up to 350,000 of Abkhazia's estimated population of 540,000 fled the region between August 1992 and October 19931. Most of them, about 270,000 people, went to other areas of Georgia, while the remainder fled to the Russian Federation, Armenia, Greece, Turkey and other countries. The majority of those fleeing were Georgians, who comprised 47 per cent of the population of Abkhazia before the fighting - the largest single ethnic group. Ethnic Abkhaz constituted only about 18 per cent of the pre-war population, but today control Abkhazia. Other sizeable ethnic groups included Armenians (18 per cent) and Russians (about 13 per cent) with smaller numbers of Greeks, Ukrainians and others.

In South Ossetia, about 16,000 people fled to other parts of Georgia, while another 10,000 went to the neighbouring North Ossetia region of the Russian Federation. In addition, at least 20,000 people have been displaced within South Ossetia itself. The fighting also affected some 100,000 Ossetians living in Georgia proper. South Ossetian authorities estimate that as many as 60,000 Ossets fled Georgia, most of them to Russia.

Of the more than 250,000 displaced people in Georgia, approximately 70 per cent lived with host families, many of whom found it increasingly difficult to support the IDPs. The rest were housed in schools, hotels, sanatoria, hospitals and other public buildings and remain there today. Even now, after more than 10 years of displacement, very few opportunities exist for the regular employment of IDPs: many of the displaced engage in petty trade or unskilled manual labor. Jobs are more difficult for those IDPs housed in collective centers located in more isolated areas. IDPs often lack access to land to cultivate. Many children do not attend school because of the lack of money in the families.

The effect of this influx on local populations, already reeling from severe economic pressures resulting from the Soviet collapse, was dramatic. The state social security network, which formerly provided assistance to some 1.5 million people, virtually collapsed. It has yet to recover. IDPs are entitled to receive 14 GEL monthly (namely, IDPs residing in collective centers receive monthly allowance of 12 GEL, while those living in private accommodation receive 14 GEL). However, these payments are often several months in arrears causing frequent IDP discontent and protest.

UNHCR, the Russian Federation, Georgia and Abkhaz authorities signed a Quadripartite Agreement on 4 April 1994 paving the way for the return of refugees and displaced people to their homes in Abkhazia. The parties agreed that the return should begin in Gali District of Abkhazia, where the overall level of damage was much less and the security situation better than in most other parts of the war-ravaged region. An estimated 80,000 people - most of them Georgians - had fled Gali District for other parts of Georgia. The return plan assumed that some 40,000 people would return to the district. However, progress has been minimal due to a number of unresolved political issues between the Abkhaz and Georgians. In 1998, an outbreak of fighting in this area resulted in a second displacement of many of these returnees and the destruction of several rehabilitated buildings. Despite this, an estimated 40,000-50,000 IDPs have spontaneously returned since 1998. Continued insecurity and criminality limits the ability of most humanitarian organizations to support these returnees. However, UNHCR has had a school rehabilitation programme in recent years to support those who are now back in Gali District.

A tripartite peacekeeping (Georgian-Ossetian-Russian) force has been deployed in South Ossetia since June 1992 under the auspices of the Organisation for Cooperation and Security in Europe (OSCE). Repatriation to South Ossetia has also been slow, mainly due to the lack of economic opportunity and insecurity.

The situation with the displaced populations in Georgia can no longer be regarded as a humanitarian emergency, although durable solutions have yet to be implemented. This is the case throughout the Southern Caucasus where negotiations on contested regions are for the most part frozen and families and individuals remain displaced. The protracted nature of displacement in these countries has obliged national authorities to find alternatives to decreasing international humanitarian assistance, especially by strengthening the capacity of the displaced to sustain themselves. However, the depressed economic situation and evolving legal regimes prevailing in these countries limit the chances of the displaced to integrate temporarily into their host communities and maintains them in an extremely precarious economic and social situation. The very issue of integration remains a political issue with some elements of the population who fear that this might affect the eventual return of IDPs or the loss of IDP status should they attempt to settle temporarily. Others fear that IDP integration will lessen the pressure on the government to continue negotiations with the separatist leaders to resolve the territorial conflict. One of the major initiatives of the international community to more affectively deal with the long-term effects of displacement, the New Approach to IDP Assistance, was launched in 1999 to advocate for more appropriate assistance and governmental policies to support IDP self-reliance during their displacement from their homes. This initiative is more fully described in the separate article included in this newsletter.

Data taken from "Conflict in the Caucasus" by WomenAid International 2000

Worldwide Programs for IDPs:

Few Options for Madurese IDPs in West Kalimantan

West Kalimantan in Indonesia is currently home to more than 50,000 Madurese internally displaced persons from the city of Sambas and its nearby areas. The ancestral homeland of the Madurese is Madura Island. Through regular migration and transmigration, they have settled throughout all of Indonesia.

Among the causes of this IDP problem are government policies and competition among various indigenous groups for limited resources. The previous government policy of transmigration - giving people economic incentives to repopulate different areas of the country - altered the population balance in West Kalimantan, especially in cities such as Sambas and Pontianak. This has led to conflicts among the various ethnic groups, including Chinese, Malay, Madurese, and Dayak. The Dayaks were economically supplanted by Madurese transmigrants, who took many of the jobs and public positions they used to hold. The violence by Dayaks against the Madurese is rooted in the systematic marginalization of the Dayak community. Conflict between Dayaks and Madurese ethnic groups have occurred ten times over the past decade. As a result of the conflict in Sambas in 1997 and 1999, the Madurese were placed in IDP camps in and around Pontianak, the capital of West Kalimantan.

Most of the IDP camps are in deplorable conditions with bad water and sanitation. The camps in Pontianak also face hostility from the primarily Dayak and Malay population, who oppose extended stays in the IDP camps.

The IDPs in Pontianak fall into four categories: those who want to relocate to another camp, those who do not want to relocate, those who are undecided, and those who want to return to Sambas. Many have heard from other IDPs who have moved to relocation areas how difficult these sites are and will not move until they know the relocation sites are improved.

More than 13,000 Madurese IDPs countrywide are currently waiting to be relocated in and around Pontianak. They want assurance that the relocation areas will provide security; formal education for their children; potable water, sanitation, electricity; health facilities, and other public facilities (mosques), as well as economic opportunities to support themselves. Ultimately, they want the option of returning to their original homes in Sambas, north of Pontianak, in the future. The government of Indonesia, however, says that no improvements will be made to the relocation sites until the IDPs move to them.

This policy leaves the IDPs living in deplorable conditions in the camps. In addition, as a result of government decentralization, the government of Indonesia has left many of the provincial areas in a state of confusion about their roles and responsibilities.

The government of Indonesia has developed a policy that will reduce the number of IDPs in camps from 1.3 million to zero by the end of 2002. Implementation of this plan involved giving IDPs three options: localy integration with 5 million rupiah ($500) as compensation, or return or resettle in different areas with 2.5 million rupiah ($250) as compensation, or return to their place of origin with unspecified compensation.

Addressing the root causes of displacement is the only long-lasting solution to the plight of IDPs in Indonesia. This is one of the reasons the three-option plan of the Government of Indonesia will take much longer to implement.

The continued support of NGOs and aid organizations is critical. World Vision has begun a smallseeds, tools, and land preparation program to enable IDPs to farm. Other NGOs, such as Save the Children UK, Catholic Relief Services, and International Medical Corps, have programs in the relocation areas. The International Organization of Migration is planning aid to improve some of the sites.

A consortium of NGOs drafted a comprehensive development assistance plan to IDPs. The plan includes: support for agriculture, health, water, sanitation, and education. NGOs would work with the government to improve the sites and provide support for long-term assistance. Unfortunately, NGOs that are providing assistance are doing so through very limited emergency funds and private funds. Additional funding and attention to West Kalimantan is needed. Last September, President Bush promised Indonesia's president Megawati Sukarnoputri $10 million to help support the displaced. Some of that was earmarked for West Kalimantan. None of this money has apparently reached USAID or the NGOs so far.

Programs for IDPs in Georgia:

New Approach to IDP Assistance

Approximately half of the IDPs in Georgia live in overcrowded collective centers that were renovated several years ago to serve as temporary dwellings. Many others continue to live in crowded conditions with host families. Many IDPs are also unemployed and are unable to afford quality health care or education. In addition, the displaced are unable to vote in many elections. At the same time, these problems - the lack of job opportunities, non-unaffordable health care and low quality education - also affects a large number of persons in Georgia who have not been displaced. Yet a wide range of policies and programs exist, in theory if not in practice, specifically to support the displaced. These programs, however, have often done little to help displaced people restart their lives and take care of themselves in a sustainable manner, thus adding to the burden of their host communities. This combination of laws and programs that are supposed to help the displaced, but in fact can hurt them and the wider community, creates ill will between the different communities in Georgian society, and prevents Georgia from attaining its full potential. The laws and programs therefore, need to be revised to more appropriately assist the overall population, including IDPs.

The New Approach to IDP Assistance initiative, launched jointly by the Government of Georgia, the United Nations Development Program (UNDP), the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), the World Bank and the United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) in 1999, aimed to improve the lives of displaced persons in Georgia, as well as the conditions of host communities by reforming the government policy and by developing more appropriate assistance programs.

The development objective of the initiative has been and still is to substantially improve the lives of IDPs in a manner that reduces tension between IDPs and host communities. This objective shall be achieved by eliminating discrimination and violations of human rights currently suffered by IDPs, primarily through activities that increase opportunities to access their full range of rights as citizens, including equality before the law and access to quality shelter, social services, and employment opportunities. This is to be done through advocacy work and policy dialogue between the Government and the New Approach partners. Achieving the objective is expected to contribute to negotiations toward a peaceful solution of the two conflicts.

The New Approach recognizes the inviolable right of IDPs to return to their homes in safe and secure conditions. Absent these conditions, the New Approach also recognizes the right of IDPs to be treated in the same manner as all citizens in their areas of displacement. Categorization as an IDP need not result in social, political and economic marginalization, nor should it result in disproportional assistance compared to other vulnerable groups. The New Approach, therefore, favors the provision of humanitarian or other aid to IDPs only within the overall context of vulnerability in Georgia. It favors raising awareness within the government, the IDP community and society-at-large regarding possibilities to more fully engage IDPs in their present communities without prejudicing their right to return. Furthermore, the New Approach favors giving IDPs an opportunity to build skills and a level of self-reliance that will enable them to take advantage of opportunities to utilize their full range of rights as a durable solution. Such skills are usually available from development-oriented assistance rather than traditional humanitarian aid. More importantly, increased skills are capacities that IDPs will eventually be able to take home eventually and will contribute to the overall reintegration and rehabilitation at that time.

The New Approach partnership also represents a novel response to a question that has achieved a global prominence - how does the international community best address IDP needs, especially in a frozen conflict? What are the most appropriate methods of assisting IDPs when their needs resemble the needs of the non-IDPs and are often not humanitarian?

In 2000, the New Approach began its pilot phase of activity with some assessments to learn more about the conditions faced by IDPs and their hosts. These studies concerned shelter, access to social services, participation in the job market, community resources, and the law - all issues from IDPs' perspective. In addition, the International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies (IFRC) conducted a detailed study of displaced and non-displaced households to learn more about how they live, and the difficulties they face.

With the announcement of the Georgia Self Reliance Fund (GSRF) and the unexpected flurry of submissions and need to finalize internal modalities and institutional arrangements, the remainder of the planned assessments were indefinitely postponed. OCHA intends to resume these analyses in 2002-2003 to better inform overall advocacy and reform efforts. Two consultancies have already been undertaken in 2002 under the aegis of the New Approach initiative that will help the Steering Committee refine their intentions and develop a better understanding of the problems to be addressed and a way to target the remaining assistance.

Georgia Self-Reliance Fund (GSRF)

In order to determine more appropriate assistance programs that will help displaced people and host communities take care of themselves, the New Approach partners (the Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation (SDC), the United States Agency for International Development (USAID), United Nations Development Program (UNDP), United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) and the World Bank) established the Georgia Self -Reliance Fund (GSRF) to test potential projects and strategies for modalities that could be utilized at a latter stage. This was done in cooperation with the Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation (SDC) and the United States Agency for International Development (USAID). The Fund is currently capitalized by contributions from these agencies, totaling approximately US$1.3 million. The participation of additional donors is welcome.

Through a series of grants competitions, GSRF grants ranging from $25,000 to $100,000 are awarded. The Fund will award a maximum of 20 grants per year. Each grant will range from US$25,000 to US$100,000. Projects supported by the Fund should be completed within one to two years.

The first round of competition was held from October 2000 to April 2001. Out of totally received 267 proposals, three applications were selected for the final consideration. One of these projects has been rejected and one has been approved. The approved project from an Iindividual Entrepreneur and IDP, Otar Khvistani, utilizes abandoned houses in Tsalka region for IDPs to live and work on agricultural activities for income. Its implementation is underway.

The remaining project from the first round, from JSC "Orgteknika", proposes to provide housing and jobs for IDPs at a rehabilitated tea factory in Kutaisi. This project was to be considered as a pilot project for a possible loan for certain business components, however the partners have been unable to find a local bank that could provide the required services within the UN and other partner requirements. The nature of the project prevented it to be considered solely as a grant, nor was it feasible to only review the grant-eligible components. However, after being encouraged to look for alternative ways of funding business components of the proposal, the applicant secured the credit from a local bank and resubmitted his proposal as recommended by the Steering Committee. Currently the proposal is under the Steering Committee review.

The second round was announced in June 2001 and was finished in May 2002. Based on lessons learned during the first round, the eligibility criteria were modified to allow only non-governmental organizations with sufficient programming experience to participate in this round. A total of 85 proposals were received. Five applicants -- Accion Contra el Hambre (ACH), Charity Humanitarian Center "Abkhazeti" (CHCA), Counterpart International and Lazarus - were approved and started their activities during the summer of 2002. The approval of the fifth proposal, submitted by HVA International Worldwide Agricultural Development, is contingent on several preconditions to be met by the applicant. These negotiations remain underway.

In brief, the applicants selected by the Steering Committee will carry out following activities:

• ACH - to increase incomes of 140 families through the development of profitable agricultural income generation activities proposed by themselves; to strengthen the community by promoting self-reliance in management of communal installations in areas of IDP settlement and support cooperation between IDPs and local host populations; to actively explore potential larger scale replicability of the strategies pursued in the pilot and learn lessons for activities which promote self-reliance of IDPs and partnership between IDPs and local communities in areas of settlement.
  
  
• CHCA - to strengthen the participation in decision-making in IDP communities and host populations in Tskaltubo concerning key issues of social exclusion; to increase the self-reliance of the IDP population; and to support IDPs' integration within the local community.
  
  
• Counterpart International - to increase the employability of IDP families by providing on the job apprenticeships and employment support and training in skill/trade areas in order to improve young, married IDPs' income generation capacity while contributing to overall economic improvement in the community and the business sector; and
  
  
• Lazarus - to pilot a strategy of training and employing IDP women through the development of beauty salons in collective centres on the outskirts of the city of Tbilisi.

To help reform the government policy and support more appropriate assistance programs, a Presidential Commission was established and is chaired by the State Minister. The Commission is composed of Ministers, as well as technical experts, including many from the IDP community. The technical experts will help GSRF choose new programs by providing specialist comments on proposals. The experts will also help the assessments by providing access to government sources of information.

A technical support unit has been established to handle the daily management of the GSRF programme in the future. The Georgian Social Investment Fund (GSIF) has been selected to provide this technical support. The existence of this unit enables OCHA to devote more time to the advocacy, policy development and coordination of the New Approach in Georgia.

The main objective of all rounds of the GSRF remains to identify proposals that will develop and employ innovative strategies for sustainable improvement of IDPs' self-reliance and also provide opportunities for enlargement or replication of projects in future. These projects also demonstrate valuable lessons regarding IDP 'integration,' self-reliance, and policy issues for future advocacy. It is envisaged to analyse these lessons and projects more fully as they continue.

IDP Rehabilitation Association "Dioscuria"

The IDP Rehabilitation Association "Dioscuria" is a Poti based local NGO established in 2000. The main activities of the Association are related to IDP problems a