Internal Displacement: Global Overview of Trends and Developments in 2010 - Serbia
|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 - Serbia, 23 March 2011, available at: http://www.refworld.org/docid/4d932e168.html [accessed 4 September 2015]|
|Number of IDPs||About 225,000|
|Percentage of total population||About 3.2%|
|Start of current displacement situation||1999|
|Peak number of IDPs (Year)||248,000 (2004)|
|Causes of displacement||Armed conflict, deliberate policy or practice of arbitrary displacement, generalised violence, human rights violations|
|Human development index||60|
In 2010, the International Court of Justice ruled that Kosovo's 2008 declaration of independence did not violate international law, and at the end of the year, 75 countries had recognised Kosovo as an independent nation. References in this document to "Serbia" exclude Kosovo.
In 1999, 245,000 Kosovo Serbs and Roma people were displaced into Serbia proper or within Kosovo. As of December 2010, there were still about 225,000 IDPs from Kosovo in Serbia, including an estimated 15,000 unregistered Roma people.
11 years after their displacement, a significant number of IDPs were still facing hardship and limited access to services. Many continued to endure extreme poverty, poor health and no access to schools, in informal settlements without electricity, clean water or sewerage. Roma IDPs faced particularly deep-rooted discrimination and marginalisation. IDPs without documents faced extreme difficulties getting them replaced in order to register as an IDP and access assistance and services.
A 2010 survey revealed that almost half of IDPs were in need of assistance. Only around 17,000 IDPs had returned to Kosovo, and very few since the 2008 declaration of independence.
The Serbian government initially promoted return, but it has increasingly supported local integration. It has built alternative housing for vulnerable people in collective centres, and supported livelihoods programmes for IDPs. However, its efforts have not been part of a comprehensive strategy.
International organisations and NGOs have run a variety of projects of benefit to IDPs and particularly those in marginalised groups; UNHCR has continued to support the government's response, while European and UN bodies have continued to monitor the government's progress.