A critique of the Resolution (PAP-Res. 06(VI)/06) and Recommendation (PAP-Rec. 08(VI)/06) of the Pan-African Parliament (PAP) on migration in Africa.Posted: 14 November, 2022 Filed under: Eva Abugabe | Tags: Africa, African Charter on Human and Peoples Rights, African migrants, AU Convention for the Protection and Assistance of Internally Displaced Persons, dangerous journeys, demographic distributions, governance, human rights, IDPs, international human rights instruments, International Organisation for Migration, Kampala Convention, Mediterranean Sea, migration, Pan-African Parliament, PAP, PAP-Rec. 08(VI)/06, PAP-Res. 06(VI)/06, SADC, Southern African Development Community, Sub-Saharan African countries, unapproved avenues, xenophobia 1 Comment
Author: Eva Abugabe
MPhil candidate, Centre for Human Rights, University of Pretoria
The PAP in its sixth session of the First Parliament in 2006 resolved to ending migration in Africa. Based on PAP-Rec(08(VI)06), the PAP acknowledged migration as a regional priority due to increasing refugee crisis, migrant remittances, movement of labour, the African Diaspora and brain drain, feminisation of migration, xenophobia and human trafficking. In PAP-Res (06(VI)06), the PAP furthermore demanded continuous agenda setting in its debate, regional and national collaborations in learning best practices including encouraging governments to address the challenges by observing good governance and promoting investment in economies, infrastructure and creating employment.
The article critically analyses the PAP’s resolutions and recommendations against regional and international human rights instruments. It aims to position the PAP as an active protector of human rights while making it more visible to Africans, its primary constituents. Its thrust is to also evoke deliberate interventions and broadly contribute to the actualisation of the Africa We Want Agenda, Agenda 2063 and to the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development specifically target 10.7 of Goal 10.
The right to food and housing for Internally Displaced Persons in Colombia and the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC): geographical distance does not forcibly mean different situationsPosted: 2 November, 2021 Filed under: Cristiano d'Orsi, Juan Pablo Serrano Frattali | Tags: (DRC), Africa, African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights, African supervisory bodies, basic rights, Colombia, Colombian Constitution, Colombian Housing and Habitat Law, conflict, conflict hotspots, Democratic Republic of Congo, drug-trafficking, ethnic tensions, food and housing, internal migration, internally displaced persons, Kampala Convention, national food law, natural disasters, South America, sustainable access, sustainable food systems, violence 1 Comment
Author: Cristiano d’Orsi
Senior Research Fellow and Lecturer at the South African Research Chair in International Law (SARCIL), University of Johannesburg
Author: Juan Pablo Serrano Frattali
Member of research group Social Anthropology of Motricity of the University of Granada
Colombia and the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) are the countries with the largest population of Internally Displaced Persons (IDPs) in South America and Africa, respectively, the third, and the second in the world (Syria heads the world ranking). Internal displacement in Colombia constitutes a widely recognized phenomenon, having become an essential reference point for internal migration studies. At the end of 2020, Colombia counted the highest number of IPDs in South America because of conflict and violence (4.9 million). In 2020, however, while Colombia counted 170,000 new IDPs, 106,000 of whom resulted from conflict and violence, Brazil counted 380,000 new IDPs, all due to natural disasters. Violence continued in Colombia notwithstanding Covid-19 restrictions. Many combatants with the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC) disbanded and reintegrated into society after the 2016 peace deal, but dissident factions have since emerged, and paramilitary groups continue to exercise significant territorial control. The department of Nariño, close to Ecuador, has been historically a hotspot of conflict and displacement given its strategic location on drug-trafficking routes.
Making the right to vote of IDPs a reality: Lessons from EthiopiaPosted: 8 July, 2021 Filed under: Enguday Meskele Ashine, Omotunde Enigbokan | Tags: African Convention for the Protection and Assistance of Internally Displaced Persons, displacement, EHRC, election monitoring, elections, Electoral Proclamation, Ethiopia, Ethiopian Human Rights Commission (EHRC), IDP, IDPs, Kampala Convention, legislation, national election, National Election Board of Ethiopia (NEBE), political rights, right to political participation, the right to vote 2 Comments
Authors: Enguday Meskele Ashine & Omotunde Enigbokan
Ethiopia held its national election on 21 June 2021. Internally displaced persons (IDPs) participated in the national election by casting their votes at their place of displacement for their respective constituency of origin through absentee ballot procedure. In certain areas, the government of Ethiopia took special measures such as providing logistic and security safeguard in order to enable IDPs to cast their vote.
The Ethiopian Human Rights Commission (EHRC) played a pivotal role in ensuring that IDPs participated in the national election, through engaging civic societies that advocated for the voting rights of IDPs. Furthermore, the EHRC prepared the Human Rights Agenda for Election 2021. This Agenda ‘calls upon political parties to address human rights protection of vulnerable groups including IDPs in their manifesto.’ In addition, the Commission advocated for electoral participation of IDPs by disseminating explanatory materials on IDPs and election, by conducting election monitoring focusing on IDPs’ participation in the national election and by conducting stakeholder’s discussions highlighting the significance of IDPs’ inclusion in the national election.’
COVID-19, Darfur’s food security crisis and IDPs: From ruins to ruinsPosted: 4 August, 2020 Filed under: Gursimran Kaur Bakshi | Tags: chemical attacks, children, conflict, COVID-19, crimes against humanity, Darfur, displacement, famine, Human Rights Watch, human tragedy, IDPs, internally displaced persons, International Criminal Court, Kampala Convention, Land of Killing, London Declaration, Omar Al-Bashir, pandemic, State-Sponsored Terrorist(SST), Sudan, war 1 Comment
Author: Gursimran Kaur Bakshi
Student, National University of Study and Research in Law, Ranchi, India
Darfur, a region in the west of Sudan is known as a ‘Land of Killing’. Since 2003, more than 300 000 people have been killed, and over 2.7 million have been forcibly displaced as a result of a genocide that has left the legacy of displacement and destitution. The war was initiated by the government-backed armed groups known as ‘Janjaweed’ militants in 2003, who have been accused of systematic and widespread atrocities, such as murdering and torturing of the civilian population, including raping their women and intentionally burning their villages.