Global Overview 2011: People internally displaced by conflict and violence - Nepal
|Publisher||Norwegian Refugee Council/Internal Displacement Monitoring Centre (NRC/IDMC)|
|Publication Date||19 April 2012|
|Cite as||Norwegian Refugee Council/Internal Displacement Monitoring Centre (NRC/IDMC), Global Overview 2011: People internally displaced by conflict and violence - Nepal, 19 April 2012, available at: http://www.refworld.org/docid/4f97fb5928.html [accessed 30 May 2016]|
|Number of IDPs||About 50,000|
|Percentage of total population||About 0.2%|
|Start of current displacement situation||1996|
|Peak number of IDPs (Year)||200,000 (2005)|
|Causes of displacement||Armed conflict, generalised violence, human rights violations|
|Human development index||157|
At the end of 2011, more than five years after the government of Nepal and Maoist rebels ended their ten-year conflict, the number of people still internally displaced by the war and by inter-ethnic violence was unknown. However, most international agencies in Nepal agreed that they numbered about 50,000. Most IDPs were still living in the main cities such as Kathmandu. Some of them had managed to integrate and find jobs, but others, including in particular children and women, were struggling to find proper accommodation or access basic services. They were also exposed to discrimination, sexual exploitation and trafficking, and the children to child labour. Recognising these vulnerabilities, the government launched a national action plan in February to better address their specific needs.
The process of registering IDPs, which officially closed in mid-2011, was fraught with problems. Many IDPs were unaware of the process and failed to register in time.
Between 2008 and 2011, the Ministry of Peace and Reconstruction helped around 25,000 of the 78,000 people officially registered as IDPs to return home. However, in a depressed post-war economy, many returned IDPs had still not found a way to meet their essential needs in 2011. Many citizens in rural areas were unable to access basic services: the government lacked the institutions, resources and presence, and absenteeism was widespread among frontline staff.
The new government enacted a national IDP policy in 2007, but its implementation has been limited. In 2011, a number of activities planned by the protection cluster in support of the policy were blocked, as the government had still not adopted implementation guidelines.
In December, the government decided not to renew OHCHR's mandate, leaving UNHCR as the likely candidate to take over as protection lead.