Durable solutions and the right of return for IDPs: Evolving interpretations

Abstract

This article traces the evolution of norms on durable solutions for internally displaced persons (IDPs) since the introduction of the Guiding Principles on Internal Displacement in 1998, focusing in particular on the right of return. The Guiding Principles reflect and have helped consolidate the view that the right of return pertains not only to those crossing international borders, such as refugees, but also to IDPs, and that respect for this right requires that forced migrants are able to reclaim and resume living in their former homes or places of habitual residence ('domicile return'). While the clarification and subsequent broad recognition of IDPs' right to choose domicile return as a durable solution is an important normative development that often accords with IDPs' own wishes, the article identifies a range of other aspects of, or approaches to, realizing the right of return that may also be salient for IDPs. It is suggested that narrow interpretations of the right of return as domicile return belie the complexity of the moral and political claims at stake when IDPs assert their right of return. Transposing insights from the literature on refugee repatriation, it is argued that IDPs' right of return should not be narrowly conceived in geographic or legalistic terms. Instead, it should be understood as a political process of making complex, often intertwined claims, including for redress of past wrongs, opposition to ethnic cleansing, and recognition as equal and legitimate members of the political community.