Internal Displacement: Global Overview of Trends and Developments in 2010 - Peru
|Publisher||Norwegian Refugee Council/Internal Displacement Monitoring Centre (NRC/IDMC)|
|Publication Date||23 March 2011|
|Cite as||Norwegian Refugee Council/Internal Displacement Monitoring Centre (NRC/IDMC), Internal Displacement: Global Overview of Trends and Developments in 2010 - Peru, 23 March 2011, available at: http://www.refworld.org/docid/4d932e1727.html [accessed 13 February 2016]|
|Disclaimer||This is not a UNHCR publication. UNHCR is not responsible for, nor does it necessarily endorse, its content. Any views expressed are solely those of the author or publisher and do not necessarily reflect those of UNHCR, the United Nations or its Member States.|
|Number of IDPs||About 150,000|
|Percentage of total population||About 0.5%|
|Start of current displacement situation||1980|
|Peak number of IDPs (Year)||1,000,000 (1990)|
|Causes of displacement||Armed conflict, human rights violations|
|Human development index||63|
Ten years after conflict ended between government forces and the Shining Path and Túpac Amaru Revolutionary Movement, most of the one million people internally displaced had returned to their homes or resettled by 2010. The government estimated in 2007 that 150,000 IDPs remained, mostly in urban centres including Ayacucho, Lima, Junín, Ica and Huánuco.
A law on internal displacement passed in 2004 helped to protect IDPs' rights, as it incorporated the Guiding Principles on Internal Displacement and created a division within the Ministry of Women and Social Development (MIMDES) to coordinate the response to internal displacement. This body has improved the situation of some IDPs by starting to register them for eventual reparations, and implementing some livelihoods support programmes.
However, early momentum faded and, during 2010 as in 2009, the number of people registered remained at only 5,000. There was another general registry of conflict victims, but the IDP registry remained separate.
No IDPs had received reparation by the end of 2010, and the focus on reparations for collective groups was effectively stopping individual applications. Collective reparations, both for IDPs and victims of other human rights abuses, were presented as development or anti-poverty measures rather than the realisation of fundamental rights.
There was no data in 2010 evaluating the situation of IDPs or comparing it to that of the non-displaced population. However, IDPs continued to struggle to access livelihood opportunities, education and health care.
In 2010, growth of coca plantations and associated violence posed an ongoing threat, but there were no reports of resulting displacement. Peru now closely follows Colombia as the largest coca exporter, and factions of the Shining Path have reportedly competed to control the trade. These groups conducted isolated acts of violence in 2010 and planted landmines, prompting fears among peasants of a return to conflict.