Kathmandu School of Law Review

P-ISSN : 2091-2110, E-ISSN : 2773-8159, DOI : 10.46985, Publisher : Kathmandu School of Law, Nepal
Annual flagship journal of Kathmandu School of Law, Nepal

Volume 3, Issue Special, May 2013
Articles

Rights Protection Regime for Internally Displaced Women and Children: Towards the Formation of A Metaframework

PDF
  • Rathin Bandyopadhyay
    ,
  • Chandrani Das
Rathin Bandyopadhyay
University of North Bengal, Darjeeling
Bio
Chandrani Das
Department of Law, University of North Bengal
Bio

Published 2013-05-31

How to Cite

Bandyopadhyay, R., & Das, C. (2013). Rights Protection Regime for Internally Displaced Women and Children: Towards the Formation of A Metaframework. Kathmandu School of Law Review, 3(Special), 166–186. Retrieved from https://kslreview.org/index.php/kslr/article/view/1016

Abstract

In the contemporary world, defining development has been a quagmire. This paper is an effort towards understanding the dilemma of internally displaced women and children, the questions of rehabilitation, resettlement, and reparation, while in the proces s, trying to draw useful and legitimate distinctions between the economic and social rights of internally displaced women and children due to communal violence, large scale projects, and natural disaster. The study is focused on the larger issues involved in development projects, making a comparative cost benefit analysis of the development on the social and individual welfare and the long term impact thereon. The paper envisages an insight to the projects, specifically on the physical forms of development, i.e. projects which require land expropriation and call for displacement by decree. Noticeably, such catastrophic development projects cause upheaval and displacement of communities. The paper scrutinizes such projects, including Dams, Industrialization, Mining (natural resource extraction), distributive policies, and other mega infrastructural projects, besides the lop-sided Disaster Management and reconstruction programs that cause misery to the masses in case of Natural disaster, looking on to the greater policy issues related to displacement, rehabilitation and the consequences thereof, especially on the women and children.

PDF

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

  1. Charlotte Lindsey, Women Facing War (Geneva: ICRC, 2001).
  2. See para 2 of the Guiding Principles on Internal Displacement.
  3. N Geissler, ‘The International Protection of Internally Displaced Persons’ (1999) 11(3) International Journal of Refugee Law, 455.
  4. ILA, Committee on Internally Displaced Persons, Report and Draft Declaration for Consideration at the 1998 Conference, 5.
  5. Malinda M. Schmiechen, ‘Parallel Lives, Uneven Justice: An Analysis of Rights, Protection and Redress for Refugee and Internally Displaced Women in Camps’(2004) 22(473) Public Law Review, Saint Louis University 477.
  6. C Phuong, The International Protection of Internally Displaced Persons (Cambridge University Press 2004) 42.
  7. IDMC; as reported in ‘Internal Displacement- Global Overview of Trends and Developments in 2010’, 8.
  8. IDMC, Internal Displacement Global Overview of Trends and Developments in 2010 (Norwegian Refugee Council 25 March 2011).
  9. UDHR, UNGA Res 217A (III) UN Doc A/810 (1948).
  10. ICCPR, UNGA Res 2200A (XXI) UN Doc A/6316 (1966), (entered into force 23 March 1976) 999 UNTS 171.
  11. ICESCR (entered into force 3 January 1976) 999 UNTS 3.
  12. CAT, UNGA Res 39/46 UN Doc A/329/51 (1984) (entered into force 26 June 1987) 1465 UNTS 85.
  13. Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, UNGA Res 260(III) UN Doc A/810 (1948) (entered into force 12 January 1951) 78 UNTS 277.
  14. CERD, GA Res 2106(XX) UN Doc A/6014 (1965) (entered into force 4 January 1969) 660 UNTS 195, entered into force 4 January 1969.
  15. CEDAW, UNGA res 34/180 UN Doc A/34/46 (1979) (entered into force 3 September 1981) 1249 UNTS 13.
  16. CRC, UNGA Res 44/25 UN Doc A/44/49 (1989) (entered into force 2 September 1990) 1577 UNTS 3.
  17. ICCPR (n 10) art4(2).
  18. ICCPR (n 10), art 4(2).
  19. Legality of the Threat or Use of Nuclear Weapons (advisory opinion) 8 July1996; Legal Consequences of the Construction of a Wall in the Occupied Palestinian territory (advisory opinion) 9 July 2004; Armed activities on the territory of the Congo, Democratic Republic of the Congo v. Uganda, (Judgment) 19 December 2005.
  20. Malawi Association and Others v. Mauritania (2000) AHRLR 149.
  21. Case of Mapiripan Massacre v. Columbia (7 March 2005) Inter-AmCtHR (ser C) no 122.
  22. Isayeva v. Russia (24 Feb. 2005) ECtHR App No 57950/00.
  23. R Cohen, ‘The Guiding Principles on Internal Displacement: A new instrument for International Organisations and NGOs’ (August 1998) Forced Migration Review 2, 31.
  24. UN Guiding Principles on Internally Displaced Persons 1998.
  25. ‘Maoist insurgents in India: More bloody and defiant’ (Economist, 22 July 2010) <http://www.economist.com/node/16650478> accessed 27 February, 2012.
  26. ‘Reangs flee Mizoram’ The Telegraph (India 17 November 2009) <http://www.telegraphindia.com/1091117/jsp/frontpage/story_11749716.jsp#> , accessed 27 February, 2012.
  27. ‘Displaced Kashmiri Pandits seek special status’ (Indo-Asian News Service, 20 June 2010) <http://www.thaindian.com/newsportal/uncategorized/displaced-kashmiri-pandits-seek-specialstatus_ 100383428.html> accessed 26 February 2012.
  28. ‘World Bank Report’ <http://lnweb90.worldbank.org/oed/oeddoclib.nsf/DocUNIDViewForJavaSearch/1 31 Jeremy Levitt, ‘Conflict Prevention, Management, and Resolution: Africa - Regional Strategies for the Prevention of Displacement and Protection of Displaced Persons: The Cases of the OAU ECOWAS, SADC, and IGAD’ (2001) 11 Duke J Comp & Int’l Law 39, 78. The paper discusses on the responses to internal displacement in African nations, where the international community failed to extend adequate resources to protect the rights and well-being of displaced populations, a failure that has resulted in great suffering in many cases).
  29. S. Parasuraman, The Development Dilemma: Displacement in India (Hardbound edn, Macmillan 1999) 41.
  30. R.Rangachari et al., ‘Large Dams: India's Experience, in World Commission on Dams Case Study’ World Commission on Dams Country Review Paper (2000) 36 <http://www.dams.org/studies/in/> assessed 26 February 2012.2A795722EA20
  31. Vijayashri Sripati, ‘Toward Fifty Years of Constitutionalism and Fundamental Rights in India: Looking Back to See Ahead (1950-2000)’ (1998) 14 Am U Int’l L Rev, 468.
  32. It was expressed by Das J. in State of West Bengal v. Anwar Ali Sarkar AIR 1952 SC 75.
  33. A.L.Kalra V. Project and Equipment Corpn 3 SCC 316(India 1984).
  34. Olga Tellis v. Bombay Mun. Corp 2 SCR 51 (1986), 83.
  35. Ibid.
  36. Mullin v. Union Territory of Delhi 2 SCR 516 (1981), 529.
  37. Ram Prasad v. Chairman, Bombay Port Trust, AIR 1989 SC 1306.
  38. K. Ratnabali, ‘Internal Displacement of People: Absence of Law and the Urgent Need to Frame One in India’ (2004) 25 Delhi Law Review, 167.
  39. Usha Ramanathan, ‘Displaced by Development—Confronting Marginalisation and Gender Injustice’ assessed 27 February 2012.
  40. Land Acquisition Act 1894, s 23.
  41. Ibid s 24.
  42. Tekaba AO v. Sakumeren AO 5 SCC 672 (2004).
  43. Samatha v. State of Andhra Pradesh 8 SCC 191(1997).
  44. ‘Land Acquisition Private Realm Private Gain’ (8 September 2010) <http://prsindia.org/theprsblog/2010/09/08/land- acquisition-public-realm-private-gain/> accessed 26 February 2012.
  45. State of M.P v. Behru Singh et al SCC 91(2012) . F6E852567F5005D8933 > assessed 26 February 2012.